Abstract
To regulate others' emotions effectively we must learn about the efficacy of our regulation attempts. Deciding whether we made someone else feel better involves a causal judgment about the effect of our intervention on their emotional state. The current study examined whether, like other causal judgments, beliefs about emotion regulation efficacy are disproportionately affected by base rates. In two experiments, we showed that participants' perceived efficacy at helping a target regulate their emotions was more influenced by the target's average emotion levels than the relative effect of regulating versus not regulating the target's emotion. This led participants to conclude that they were helpful both when they were not (Experiment 1) and even when they made the target feel worse (Experiment 2). These findings suggest that our beliefs about the effectiveness of other-directed emotion regulation are notably biased by the average level of emotion expressed by the regulation target. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
