PofoliaShared via Pofolia

Psychological Bulletin· 2012Q1· Review

Dealing with feeling: A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of strategies derived from the process model of emotion regulation.

Thomas L. Webb, Eleanor Miles, Paschal Sheeran

Short summary

Cognitive change strategies, particularly perspective-taking (d+=0.45) and reappraising the emotional stimulus (d+=0.36), are most effective for emotion regulation, while attentional deployment strategies like distraction (d+=0.27) show moderate success, according to a meta-analysis of 306 studies.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • Cognitive change strategies, especially perspective-taking (d+=0.45) and reappraising the stimulus (d+=0.36), are most effective for emotion regulation.
  • Attentional deployment strategies like distraction (d+=0.27) are moderately effective, while others like concentration are not (d+=-0.26).
  • Response modulation is less effective overall (d+=0.16), with emotion expression suppression (d+=0.32) being effective, but experience suppression not (d+=-0.04).
  • Effectiveness varies significantly based on the specific type of strategy used within broader categories.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

The present meta-analysis investigated the effectiveness of strategies derived from the process model of emotion regulation in modifying emotional outcomes as indexed by experiential, behavioral, and physiological measures. A systematic search of the literature identified 306 experimental comparisons of different emotion regulation (ER) strategies. ER instructions were coded according to a new taxonomy, and meta-analysis was used to evaluate the effectiveness of each strategy across studies. The findings revealed differences in effectiveness between ER processes: Attentional deployment had no effect on emotional outcomes (d(+) = 0.00), response modulation had a small effect (d(+) = 0.16), and cognitive change had a small-to-medium effect (d(+) = 0.36). There were also important within-process differences. We identified 7 types of attentional deployment, 4 types of cognitive change, and 4 types of response modulation, and these distinctions had a substantial influence on effectiveness. Whereas distraction was an effective way to regulate emotions (d(+) = 0.27), concentration was not (d(+) = -0.26). Similarly, suppressing the expression of emotion proved effective (d(+) = 0.32), but suppressing the experience of emotion or suppressing thoughts of the emotion-eliciting event did not (d(+) = -0.04 and -0.12, respectively). Finally, reappraising the emotional response proved less effective (d(+) = 0.23) than reappraising the emotional stimulus (d(+) = 0.36) or using perspective taking (d(+) = 0.45). The review also identified several moderators of strategy effectiveness including factors related to the (a) to-be-regulated emotion, (b) frequency of use and intended purpose of the ER strategy, (c) study design, and (d) study characteristics.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Psychological Bulletin, 2012 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

Experimental and Cognitive PsychologyPsychology