Scholarlink

Background <p>Research suggests that emotion regulation plays a critical role in emotional resilience, however due to inconsistencies with how emotional resilience has been operationalised, the exact nature of this relationship remains relatively unexplored. We examined two hypotheses across three distinct operationalisations: outcome-based, transient, and trait-based, recognising resilience as an outcome, a transient dynamic construct, and a perceived trait, respectively. Specifically, whether (1) a greater tendency to choose reappraisal relative to distraction or (2) a greater tendency to choose reappraisal aligned with the emotion regulation asymmetry phenomenon (i.e., reappraisal for low-intensity stimuli and distraction for high-intensity stimuli), was associated with greater emotional resilience, and whether these relationships were partially accounted for by effective downregulation.</p> Methods <p>Young undergraduate adults (final <i>n</i> = 113) attended an experimental session where each measure of emotional resilience was obtained. The outcome-based was measured using a residual approach, the transient measure through the degree of emotional recovery following exposure to a standardised stressor task in the lab and the trait-based measure using the Brief Resilience Scale. In a second session, participants viewed high and low intensity images and chose between reappraisal and distraction to downregulate negative emotions elicited by these stimuli. In some trials, participants were instructed to use either strategy. The effectiveness of these downregulation attempts was measured.</p> Results <p>A greater tendency to choose reappraisal over distraction, was associated with greater transient and trait-based measures, but not with the outcome-based measure. Reappraisal aligned to the emotion regulation asymmetry phenomenon was not related to emotional resilience.</p> Conclusions <p>Our findings are consistent with theory stating that tendency to choose reappraisal over distraction may contribute to emotional resilience. However, the differential associations evident suggest different mechanisms may relate to distinct operationalisations of this construct. Critically, the cross-sectional design of the current study limits inferences of causality and directionality. Future work replicating and extending on these findings across the distinct operationalisations are warranted.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

The Role of Emotion Regulation in Distinct Measures of Emotional Resilience

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年2月18日

查看全文
  • Hannah A. Razak,
  • Colin MacLeod,
  • Daniel Rudaizky,
  • Lies Notebaert

摘要

Background

Research suggests that emotion regulation plays a critical role in emotional resilience, however due to inconsistencies with how emotional resilience has been operationalised, the exact nature of this relationship remains relatively unexplored. We examined two hypotheses across three distinct operationalisations: outcome-based, transient, and trait-based, recognising resilience as an outcome, a transient dynamic construct, and a perceived trait, respectively. Specifically, whether (1) a greater tendency to choose reappraisal relative to distraction or (2) a greater tendency to choose reappraisal aligned with the emotion regulation asymmetry phenomenon (i.e., reappraisal for low-intensity stimuli and distraction for high-intensity stimuli), was associated with greater emotional resilience, and whether these relationships were partially accounted for by effective downregulation.

Methods

Young undergraduate adults (final n = 113) attended an experimental session where each measure of emotional resilience was obtained. The outcome-based was measured using a residual approach, the transient measure through the degree of emotional recovery following exposure to a standardised stressor task in the lab and the trait-based measure using the Brief Resilience Scale. In a second session, participants viewed high and low intensity images and chose between reappraisal and distraction to downregulate negative emotions elicited by these stimuli. In some trials, participants were instructed to use either strategy. The effectiveness of these downregulation attempts was measured.

Results

A greater tendency to choose reappraisal over distraction, was associated with greater transient and trait-based measures, but not with the outcome-based measure. Reappraisal aligned to the emotion regulation asymmetry phenomenon was not related to emotional resilience.

Conclusions

Our findings are consistent with theory stating that tendency to choose reappraisal over distraction may contribute to emotional resilience. However, the differential associations evident suggest different mechanisms may relate to distinct operationalisations of this construct. Critically, the cross-sectional design of the current study limits inferences of causality and directionality. Future work replicating and extending on these findings across the distinct operationalisations are warranted.