An Empirical Examination of the Relationship Between Emotion Regulation and Emotional Labor

Abstract

The expression of contextually appropriate emotions in the workplace is critical to fostering effective interpersonal interactions. What constitutes an appropriate emotional expression is determined by the display rules an employee perceives. Within the emotional labor framework, the management of emotional expression at work (i.e., ensuring alignment with display rules) occurs through the engagement in two primary strategies by employees. These are known as surface acting and deep acting. Despite theoretical efforts to synthesize these strategies with the broader emotion regulation framework and its strategies of expressive suppression and cognitive reappraisal, no empirical examination of their relationship exists. The present study aimed to investigate this empirical relationship to provide clarity on the extent to which these constructs (i.e., strategies) are unique across frameworks. A second aim was to assess whether method bias could explain any overlap between these constructs. A total of 800 participants (Mage = 22.4 years, 78.8% female) who worked across a range of service industries completed measures of emotion regulation and emotional labor under two conditions designed to manipulate the presence of method bias (i.e., varying the order of item administration). Participants also completed the DASS-21, a measure of affective symptom severity. Using multigroup analysis, the results indicated that analogous latent constructs (cognitive reappraisal and deep acting; expressive suppression and surface acting) yielded significant, small-to-moderate correlations, and that correlation coefficients were invariant regardless of how items were administered. The pattern of correlations with affective symptoms also differed across constructs. Together, the limited correlations between the analogous strategies, and the differential associations with affective symptoms, suggest a relative independence between these constructs. Findings carry theoretical and practical implications across research and clinical settings.