评估日常生活中的情绪多元调节:谁使用它,何时使用,效果如何?

IF 2.1 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY
Ilana Ladis, Emma R. Toner, Alexander R. Daros, Katharine E. Daniel, Mehdi Boukhechba, Philip I. Chow, Laura E. Barnes, Bethany A. Teachman, Brett Q. Ford
{"title":"评估日常生活中的情绪多元调节:谁使用它,何时使用,效果如何?","authors":"Ilana Ladis,&nbsp;Emma R. Toner,&nbsp;Alexander R. Daros,&nbsp;Katharine E. Daniel,&nbsp;Mehdi Boukhechba,&nbsp;Philip I. Chow,&nbsp;Laura E. Barnes,&nbsp;Bethany A. Teachman,&nbsp;Brett Q. Ford","doi":"10.1007/s42761-022-00166-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Most research on emotion regulation has focused on understanding individual emotion regulation strategies. Preliminary research, however, suggests that people often use several strategies to regulate their emotions in a given emotional scenario (polyregulation). The present research examined who uses polyregulation, when polyregulation is used, and how effective polyregulation is when it is used. College students (<i>N</i> = 128; 65.6% female; 54.7% White) completed an in-person lab visit followed by a 2-week ecological momentary assessment protocol with six randomly timed survey prompts per day for up 2 weeks. At baseline, participants completed measures assessing past-week depression symptoms, social anxiety-related traits, and trait emotion dysregulation. During each randomly timed prompt, participants reported up to eight strategies used to change their thoughts or feelings, negative and positive affect, motivation to change emotions, their social context, and how well they felt they were managing their emotions. In pre-registered analyses examining the 1,423 survey responses collected, polyregulation was more likely when participants were feeling more intensely negative and when their motivation to change their emotions was stronger. Neither sex, psychopathology-related symptoms and traits, social context, nor subjective effectiveness was associated with polyregulation, and state affect did not moderate these associations. This study helps address a key gap in the literature by assessing emotion polyregulation in daily life.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":72119,"journal":{"name":"Affective science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s42761-022-00166-x.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing Emotion Polyregulation in Daily Life: Who Uses It, When Is It Used, and How Effective Is It?\",\"authors\":\"Ilana Ladis,&nbsp;Emma R. Toner,&nbsp;Alexander R. Daros,&nbsp;Katharine E. Daniel,&nbsp;Mehdi Boukhechba,&nbsp;Philip I. Chow,&nbsp;Laura E. Barnes,&nbsp;Bethany A. Teachman,&nbsp;Brett Q. Ford\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s42761-022-00166-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Most research on emotion regulation has focused on understanding individual emotion regulation strategies. Preliminary research, however, suggests that people often use several strategies to regulate their emotions in a given emotional scenario (polyregulation). The present research examined who uses polyregulation, when polyregulation is used, and how effective polyregulation is when it is used. College students (<i>N</i> = 128; 65.6% female; 54.7% White) completed an in-person lab visit followed by a 2-week ecological momentary assessment protocol with six randomly timed survey prompts per day for up 2 weeks. At baseline, participants completed measures assessing past-week depression symptoms, social anxiety-related traits, and trait emotion dysregulation. During each randomly timed prompt, participants reported up to eight strategies used to change their thoughts or feelings, negative and positive affect, motivation to change emotions, their social context, and how well they felt they were managing their emotions. In pre-registered analyses examining the 1,423 survey responses collected, polyregulation was more likely when participants were feeling more intensely negative and when their motivation to change their emotions was stronger. Neither sex, psychopathology-related symptoms and traits, social context, nor subjective effectiveness was associated with polyregulation, and state affect did not moderate these associations. This study helps address a key gap in the literature by assessing emotion polyregulation in daily life.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72119,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Affective science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s42761-022-00166-x.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Affective science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42761-022-00166-x\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Affective science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42761-022-00166-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

大多数关于情绪调节的研究都集中在理解个体的情绪调节策略上。然而,初步研究表明,在特定的情绪场景中,人们经常使用几种策略来调节自己的情绪(多元调节)。本研究考察了谁使用多元调节,何时使用多元调节以及使用多元调节时的有效性。大学生(N = 128;女性65.6%;54.7%的白人)完成了一次亲自实验室访问,随后进行了为期2周的生态瞬时评估方案,每天6次随机定时的调查提示,持续2周。在基线时,参与者完成了评估过去一周抑郁症状、社交焦虑相关特征和特质情绪失调的测量。在每个随机时间的提示中,参与者报告了多达八种用于改变想法或感受的策略、消极和积极的影响、改变情绪的动机、他们的社会背景,以及他们觉得自己在管理情绪方面有多好。在对收集到的1423份调查回复进行的预先注册分析中,当参与者感到更强烈的负面情绪时,以及当他们改变情绪的动机更强时,多元调节更有可能发生。性别、精神病理学相关症状和特征、社会背景和主观有效性都与多元调节无关,而状态影响并不能缓和这些关联。这项研究通过评估日常生活中的情绪多元调节,有助于填补文献中的一个关键空白。补充信息:在线版本包含补充材料,请访问10.1007/s42761-022-00166-x。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessing Emotion Polyregulation in Daily Life: Who Uses It, When Is It Used, and How Effective Is It?

Most research on emotion regulation has focused on understanding individual emotion regulation strategies. Preliminary research, however, suggests that people often use several strategies to regulate their emotions in a given emotional scenario (polyregulation). The present research examined who uses polyregulation, when polyregulation is used, and how effective polyregulation is when it is used. College students (N = 128; 65.6% female; 54.7% White) completed an in-person lab visit followed by a 2-week ecological momentary assessment protocol with six randomly timed survey prompts per day for up 2 weeks. At baseline, participants completed measures assessing past-week depression symptoms, social anxiety-related traits, and trait emotion dysregulation. During each randomly timed prompt, participants reported up to eight strategies used to change their thoughts or feelings, negative and positive affect, motivation to change emotions, their social context, and how well they felt they were managing their emotions. In pre-registered analyses examining the 1,423 survey responses collected, polyregulation was more likely when participants were feeling more intensely negative and when their motivation to change their emotions was stronger. Neither sex, psychopathology-related symptoms and traits, social context, nor subjective effectiveness was associated with polyregulation, and state affect did not moderate these associations. This study helps address a key gap in the literature by assessing emotion polyregulation 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
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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