不仅是情绪调节,还有认知一项经验取样研究,测试日常生活中生态解释偏差和情绪调节策略的使用与瞬间情绪状态之间的关系

IF 4.2 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Teresa Boemo , Oscar Martín-Garcia , Ana Mar Pacheco-Romero , Ivan Blanco , Ginette Lafit , Inez Myin-Germeys , Alvaro Sanchez-Lopez
{"title":"不仅是情绪调节,还有认知一项经验取样研究,测试日常生活中生态解释偏差和情绪调节策略的使用与瞬间情绪状态之间的关系","authors":"Teresa Boemo ,&nbsp;Oscar Martín-Garcia ,&nbsp;Ana Mar Pacheco-Romero ,&nbsp;Ivan Blanco ,&nbsp;Ginette Lafit ,&nbsp;Inez Myin-Germeys ,&nbsp;Alvaro Sanchez-Lopez","doi":"10.1016/j.brat.2024.104550","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Current research is moving from studying cognitive biases and maladaptive emotion regulation (ER) as relatively stable phenomena contributing to affective disturbances, adopting ecological methodologies, such as Experience Sampling Methods (ESM). However, there is still limited ESM evidence on the interactions between stress and ER strategies’ use, and negative interpretation biases, regarding their relations with momentary affective states. In this study, we used a new ESM design to disentangle the contextual, regulatory and cognitive processes implicated in daily affective experiences.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>A sample of 103 participants completed an ESM study (3 times a day for 10 days) that included self-reports of momentary affect, stress intensity, ER strategies’ use and a cognitive task measuring momentary negative interpretation biases.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Multilevel analyses supported significant interactions of both rumination and worry with stress intensity, to account for momentary higher negative and lower positive affect levels. Furthermore, higher state negative interpretation bias levels uniquely predicted both higher negative and lower positive momentary affect levels.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This study implemented a novel online cognitive task within an ESM procedure, which helped to disentangle how contextual ER strategies’ use and momentary cognitive biases uniquely relate to affective experiences in daily life.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48457,"journal":{"name":"Behaviour Research and Therapy","volume":"177 ","pages":"Article 104550"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Not just emotion regulation, but cognition: An experience sampling study testing the relations of ecological interpretation biases and use of emotion regulation strategies with momentary affective states during daily life functioning\",\"authors\":\"Teresa Boemo ,&nbsp;Oscar Martín-Garcia ,&nbsp;Ana Mar Pacheco-Romero ,&nbsp;Ivan Blanco ,&nbsp;Ginette Lafit ,&nbsp;Inez Myin-Germeys ,&nbsp;Alvaro Sanchez-Lopez\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.brat.2024.104550\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Current research is moving from studying cognitive biases and maladaptive emotion regulation (ER) as relatively stable phenomena contributing to affective disturbances, adopting ecological methodologies, such as Experience Sampling Methods (ESM). However, there is still limited ESM evidence on the interactions between stress and ER strategies’ use, and negative interpretation biases, regarding their relations with momentary affective states. In this study, we used a new ESM design to disentangle the contextual, regulatory and cognitive processes implicated in daily affective experiences.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>A sample of 103 participants completed an ESM study (3 times a day for 10 days) that included self-reports of momentary affect, stress intensity, ER strategies’ use and a cognitive task measuring momentary negative interpretation biases.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Multilevel analyses supported significant interactions of both rumination and worry with stress intensity, to account for momentary higher negative and lower positive affect levels. Furthermore, higher state negative interpretation bias levels uniquely predicted both higher negative and lower positive momentary affect levels.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This study implemented a novel online cognitive task within an ESM procedure, which helped to disentangle how contextual ER strategies’ use and momentary cognitive biases uniquely relate to affective experiences in daily life.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48457,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Behaviour Research and Therapy\",\"volume\":\"177 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104550\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Behaviour Research and Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0005796724000779\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behaviour Research and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0005796724000779","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景目前的研究正从将认知偏差和不良情绪调节(ER)作为导致情绪紊乱的相对稳定的现象来研究,转向采用生态学方法,如经验取样法(ESM)。然而,关于压力和情绪调节策略的使用之间的相互作用,以及负面解释偏差与瞬间情绪状态之间的关系,ESM 的证据仍然有限。在这项研究中,我们采用了一种新的 ESM 设计,以厘清日常情感体验中的情境、调节和认知过程。方法:103 名参与者完成了一项 ESM 研究(每天 3 次,持续 10 天),其中包括对瞬间情感、压力强度、ER 策略使用情况的自我报告,以及一项测量瞬间负面解释偏差的认知任务。结果:多重分析支持反刍和担忧与压力强度之间的显著交互作用,以解释瞬间较高的负面和较低的正面情感水平。此外,较高的状态消极解释偏差水平可以独特地预测较高的消极和较低的瞬间积极情绪水平。结论本研究在ESM程序中实施了一项新颖的在线认知任务,有助于厘清情境性应急反应策略的使用和瞬间认知偏差如何与日常生活中的情绪体验独特地联系在一起。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Not just emotion regulation, but cognition: An experience sampling study testing the relations of ecological interpretation biases and use of emotion regulation strategies with momentary affective states during daily life functioning

Background

Current research is moving from studying cognitive biases and maladaptive emotion regulation (ER) as relatively stable phenomena contributing to affective disturbances, adopting ecological methodologies, such as Experience Sampling Methods (ESM). However, there is still limited ESM evidence on the interactions between stress and ER strategies’ use, and negative interpretation biases, regarding their relations with momentary affective states. In this study, we used a new ESM design to disentangle the contextual, regulatory and cognitive processes implicated in daily affective experiences.

Method

A sample of 103 participants completed an ESM study (3 times a day for 10 days) that included self-reports of momentary affect, stress intensity, ER strategies’ use and a cognitive task measuring momentary negative interpretation biases.

Results

Multilevel analyses supported significant interactions of both rumination and worry with stress intensity, to account for momentary higher negative and lower positive affect levels. Furthermore, higher state negative interpretation bias levels uniquely predicted both higher negative and lower positive momentary affect levels.

Conclusion

This study implemented a novel online cognitive task within an ESM procedure, which helped to disentangle how contextual ER strategies’ use and momentary cognitive biases uniquely relate to affective experiences in daily life.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Behaviour Research and Therapy
Behaviour Research and Therapy PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
7.30%
发文量
148
期刊介绍: The major focus of Behaviour Research and Therapy is an experimental psychopathology approach to understanding emotional and behavioral disorders and their prevention and treatment, using cognitive, behavioral, and psychophysiological (including neural) methods and models. This includes laboratory-based experimental studies with healthy, at risk and subclinical individuals that inform clinical application as well as studies with clinically severe samples. The following types of submissions are encouraged: theoretical reviews of mechanisms that contribute to psychopathology and that offer new treatment targets; tests of novel, mechanistically focused psychological interventions, especially ones that include theory-driven or experimentally-derived predictors, moderators and mediators; and innovations in dissemination and implementation of evidence-based practices into clinical practice in psychology and associated fields, especially those that target underlying mechanisms or focus on novel approaches to treatment delivery. In addition to traditional psychological disorders, the scope of the journal includes behavioural medicine (e.g., chronic pain). The journal will not consider manuscripts dealing primarily with measurement, psychometric analyses, and personality assessment.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信