Behaving versus thinking positively: When the benefits of cognitive reappraisal are contingent on satisfying basic psychological needs

Abstract

A contextual view of emotion regulation argues that no single strategy is inherently effective at reducing negative affect and promoting positive affect. Rather, effectiveness depends upon the person and situation. We collected daily-diary data from 186 university students (40 men, 133 women, 13 with missing data) for an average of approximately 21 days. We measured strategies that varied in terms of the extent they were likely to be integrative, i.e., allowed one to integrate difficult experience into the sense of self and meaning (e.g., mindfulness) versus non-integrative, i.e., focused on feeling more positive or less negative emotion (e.g., positive reappraisal). Multi-level modelling was used to assess whether the effectiveness of three emotion regulation strategies (cognitive reappraisal, mindfulness, expressive suppression) depends on whether a person's psychological needs (for connection, competence, and autonomy) have been met. Cognitive reappraisal was most effective (associated with less negative affect and more positive affect) for people reporting lower need satisfactions; but was far less effective for people reporting higher levels of need satisfaction in their lives. These results are discussed considering recent advances in self-determination theory and emotion regulation.