Sequential effects of reappraisal and rumination on anger during recall of an anger-provoking event

In everyday life, people often combine strategies to regulate their emotions. However, to date, most research has investigated emotion regulation strategies as if they occur independently from one another. The current study aims to better understand the sequential interplay between strategies by investigating how reappraisal and rumination interact to affect anger experience. After participants (N = 156) recalled a recent anger-provoking event, they were instructed to either a) reappraise the event twice, b) reappraise the event, and then ruminate about the event, c) ruminate about the event, and then reappraise the event, or d) ruminate twice about the event. The effects of the first strategy used replicated a large body of research: reappraisal was associated with a decrease in anger, but rumination was associated with no change in anger. There was a small interactive effect of the combination of the two strategies, such that those who ruminated and then reappraised showed a larger decrease in anger than those who reappraised and then ruminated. There were no other differences between groups. This suggests that the second strategy does have an effect over and beyond the first strategy, but this effect is small in size, highlighting the importance of the initial emotion regulation strategy used

Ready for the Worst? Negative Affect in Anticipation of a Stressor Does Not Protect Against Affective Reactivity.

Lay wisdom suggests feeling negative while awaiting an upcoming stressor - anticipatory negative affect - shields against the blow of the subsequent stressor. However, evidence is mixed, with different lines of research and theory indirectly suggesting that anticipatory negative affect is helpful, harmful, or has no effect on emotional outcomes. In two studies, we aimed to reconcile these competing views by examining the affective trajectory across hours, days, and months, separating affective reactivity and recovery. In Study 1, first-year students (N=101) completed 9 days of experience sampling (10 surveys/day) as they received their first-semester exam grades, and a follow-up survey 5 months later. In Study 2, participants (N=73) completed 2 days of experience sampling (60 surveys/day) before and after a Trier Social Stress Test. We investigated the association between anticipatory negative affect and the subsequent affective trajectory, investigating (1) reactivity immediately after the stressor, (2) recovery across hours (Study 2) and days (Study 1), and (3) recovery after 5 months (Study 1). Across the two studies, feeling more negative in anticipation of a stressor was either associated with increased negative affective reactivity, or unassociated with affective outcomes. These results run counter to the idea that being affectively ready for the worst has psychological benefits, suggesting that instead, anticipatory negative affect can come with affective costs

Assessing Validity and Bias of Within- Person Variability in Affect and Personality

Within-person variability in affect (e.g., Neuroticism) and personality have been linked to well-being. These are measured either by asking people to report how variable they are or to give multiple reports on the construct and calculating a within-person standard deviation adjusted for confounding by the person-level mean. The two measures are weakly correlated with one another and the links of variability with well-being depend on which measure researchers use. Recent research suggests that people’s repeated ratings may be biased by response styles. In a 7-day study (N = 399) with up to five measurements per day, we confirmed that the measures of variability lacked sufficient convergent validity to be used interchangeably. We found only 1 significant correlation (of 10) between variability in repeated ratings of affect or personality and variability in repeated ratings of a theoretically unrelated construct (i.e., features of images). There was very little evidence supporting the response styles hypothesis

The association between the selection and effectiveness of emotion regulation strategies and psychopathological features:A daily life study

Emotion dysregulation is central to psychopathological conditions, including borderline personality disorder (BPD) and depression. However, the nature of emotion-regulation (ER) difficulties in the daily life of people with BPD or depressive features is still unclear. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to disentangle two different ER subprocesses in daily life, (a) selection of ER strategies and (b) the effectiveness of implementing strategies, in terms of their associations with subsequent emotional experience. We analyzed data from a three-wave, longitudinal, experience-sampling study of young adults with varying levels of psychopathological features (N = 202). BPD features were uniquely linked to the use but not altered effectiveness of several putatively adaptive and maladaptive ER strategies. Depressive features were uniquely associated with the use of putatively maladaptive strategies. These findings suggest that ER deficits in people with more BPD or depressive features may be primarily located in strategy selection rather than the implementation of those strategies

The intersection of goals to experience and express emotion

Experience and expression are orthogonal emotion dimensions: we do not always show what we feel, nor do we always feel what we show. However, the experience and expression dimensions of emotion are rarely considered simultaneously. We propose a model outlining the intersection of goals for emotion experience and expression. We suggest that these goals may be aligned (e.g., feeling and showing) or misaligned (e.g., feeling but not showing). Our model posits these states can be separated into goals to (a) experience and express, (b) experience but not express, (c) express but not experience, or (d) neither experience nor express positive and negative emotion. We contend that considering intersections between experience and expression goals will advance understanding of emotion regulation choice and success

Suppress for success? Exploring the contexts in which expressing positive emotion can have social costs

Researchers and lay people alike have tended to focus on social benefits of expressing positive emotion and, as a result, tend to overlook potential social costs. In this paper, we consider limits to the idea that expressing positive emotion is universally beneficial and review literature demonstrating that, in some contexts, expressing positive emotion can have social costs. Building on our own and others' work in this space, we outline three sociocontextual factors that influence the social success of positive emotion expression: To avoid potential costs, we suggest that positive emotion should generally be expressed in the right situation, by (and to) the right person, and in the right way. Where positive emotion expression may incur social costs, we propose people can effectively down-regulate positive emotion through use of expressive suppression, and review literature demonstrating that there can be social benefits to down-regulating positive emotion. This review advances theorising on the importance of considering context when seeking to understand socially successful emotion expression and regulation

When temporary employees are perceived as threatening: antecedents and consequences

Purpose - The purpose of this research is to examine the causes and consequences of permanent employees' perceptions that temporary employees are a threat to their job security

Stereotype Threat and Perceptions of Family-Friendly Policies among Female Employees

In their efforts to recruit and retain female employees, organizations often attempt to make their workplaces “family-friendly.” Yet there is little research on how women view family-friendly policies, particularly women who experience gender-based stereotype threat, or the concern of being viewed through the lens of gender stereotypes at work. Pilot research with female managers (N D 169) showed that women who experienced stereotype threat perceived more negative career consequences for utilizing familyfriendly policies. We then conducted two studies to further probe this relationship. Study 1 replicated the relationship between stereotype threat and the perceived consequences of utilizing family-friendly policies among women who recently returned to work after the birth of a child (N D 65). In Study 2 (N D 473), female employees who reported feelings of stereotype threat perceived more negative consequences of utilizing family-friendly policies, but they also reported greater intentions to use these policies. Our findings suggest that female employees are susceptible to stereotype threat, which in turn is associated with more negative views of family-friendly policies. Thus, the mere provision of such policies may not create the kind of family-friendly workplaces that organizations are attempting to provide

Stereotype threat and perceptions of family-friendly policies among female employees

In their efforts to recruit and retain female employees, organizations often attempt to make their workplaces “family-friendly.” Yet there is little research on how women view family-friendly policies, particularly women who experience gender-based stereotype threat, or the concern of being viewed through the lens of gender stereotypes at work. Pilot research with female managers (N = 169) showed that women who experienced stereotype threat perceived more negative career consequences for utilizing family-friendly policies. We then conducted two studies to further probe this relationship. Study 1 replicated the relationship between stereotype threat and the perceived consequences of utilizing family-friendly policies among women who recently returned to work after the birth of a child (N = 65). In Study 2 (N = 473), female employees who reported feelings of stereotype threat perceived more negative consequences of utilizing family-friendly policies, but they also reported greater intentions to use these policies. Our findings suggest that female employees are susceptible to stereotype threat, which in turn is associated with more negative views of family-friendly policies. Thus, the mere provision of such policies may not create the kind of family-friendly workplaces that organizations are attempting to provide