Abstract

This study addresses three questions: How often and how consistently do predictors for emotion regulation choice occur in daily life? What predicts emotion regulation choice in daily life? How do predictors for emotion regulation choice interact in daily life? We examined emotion regulation goals (i.e., prohedonic and social goals), situational factors (i.e., perceived control, expected reoccurrence, and emotional intensity), and emotion regulation strategies (i.e., active coping, distraction, rumination, cognitive reappraisal, and expressive suppression) in negative emotion events. A total of 110 individuals (65% female) participated in an experience sampling study and received beeps, five times a day over the course of 9 days. We used a random intercept model to estimate our results. Emotion regulation goals and situational factors vary strongly in different events within the same person. Emotion regulation strategies, effective in changing the emotional experience, are crucial for prohedonic goals, whereas expressive suppression is important for social goals. Perceived control was positively associated with putatively adaptive strategies. Emotional intensity and expected reoccurrence were negatively associated with putatively adaptive strategies. Emotional intensity was positively associated with putatively maladaptive strategies. Emotion regulation strategies were not associated with the interaction of emotion regulation goals and situational factors. We conclude that emotion regulation goals and situational factors are extremely context-dependent, suggesting that they should be treated as states. Emotion regulation goals appear to have a functional association with strategies for prohedonic and social goals. The associations between situational factors and strategies in daily life appear to be largely different from the results found in the laboratory, emphasizing the importance of experience sampling studies.

Highlights

  • The way we regulate our emotions has important implications for our well-being (Webb et al, 2012) and our social relationships (Cameron and Overall, 2017)

  • We structure the data analysis and the results in three questions: How often and how consistently do predictors for emotion regulation choice occur in daily life? What predicts emotion regulation choice in daily life? How do predictors for emotion regulation choice interact in daily life? All analysis were performed with R Cran (R Core Team, 2015)

  • This study addressed three questions: How often and how consistently do predictors for emotion regulation choice occur in daily life? What predicts emotion regulation choice in daily life? How do predictors for emotion regulation choice interact in daily life? it complements earlier research, as it examines emotion regulation goals and situational factors in combination and captures a broader range of emotional intensities, compared to other studies (English et al, 2017; Kalokerinos et al, 2017c)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The way we regulate our emotions has important implications for our well-being (Webb et al, 2012) and our social relationships (Cameron and Overall, 2017). Emotion regulation goals (e.g., the goal of Emotion Regulation in Everyday Life feeling better) and situational factors (e.g., emotional intensity) influence the choice for or against particular emotion regulation strategies (Sheppes et al, 2011; Haines et al, 2016; Millgram et al, 2019). These phenomena were primarily investigated in the lab (e.g., Millgram et al, 2019). We want to contribute to this picture by shedding light on three questions: How often and how consistently do predictors for emotion regulation choice occur in daily life? What predicts emotion regulation choice in daily life? How do predictors for emotion regulation choice interact in daily life?

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call