The Shape of Emotion Regulation
Trait Emotion Regulation as Density Distributions of States
Abstract
Abstract. The Density Distribution approach to personality characterizes traits using both mean levels and within-person variability of behaviors. Recent theory highlights that emotion regulation (ER) is inherently variable, and this Density Distribution approach seems particularly suitable to understand both average tendencies and dynamics of ER as person-specific characteristics. However, there is not yet empirical evidence for this suggestion. To fill this gap, we investigated the reliability of density distribution information gathered from repeated assessments of state ER (within-person mean levels and standard deviations). Specifically, we studied the reliability of ER strategy use in terms of internal consistency and short- and long-term stability within and across two waves of experience sampling (N = 153, M = 70 measurement occasions). Across both average tendencies and within-person variation, we found that individuals used different ER strategies relatively consistently. Overall, within-person ER mean levels and standard deviations were stable within and across the waves. Taken together, this suggests that the person-specific overall pattern of ER use in daily life is captured reliably using experience-sampling methodology (ESM).
References
2015). Emotion regulation flexibility. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 39, 263–278. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-014-9662-4
(2019). Mix it to fix it: Emotion regulation variability in daily life. Emotion. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000566
(2019). Thinking mindfully: How mindfulness relates to rumination and reflection in daily life. Emotion. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000659
(2013). Regulatory flexibility: An individual differences perspective on coping and emotion regulation. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 591–612. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691613504116
(2013). The regulation of negative and positive affect in daily life. Emotion, 13, 926–939. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032400
(2017). Emotion regulation strategies in daily life: Mindfulness, cognitive reappraisal and emotion suppression. Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, 46, 91–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/16506073.2016.1218926
(2019). The measurement of within-person affect variation. Emotion. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000583
(2012). Trends in ambulatory self-report: The role of momentary experience in psychosomatic medicine. Psychosomatic Medicine, 74, 327–337. https://doi.org/10.1097/PSY.0b013e3182546f18
(2018). Reliabilities of intraindividual variability indicators with autocorrelated longitudinal data: Implications for longitudinal study designs. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 53, 502–520. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2018.1457939
(1999). Intraindividual variability in affect: Reliability, validity, and personality correlates. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 662–676. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.76.4.662
(2018). Another year older, another year wiser? Emotion regulation strategy selection and flexibility across adulthood. Psychology and Aging, 33, 572–585. https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000251
(2001). Toward a structure- and process-integrated view of personality: Traits as density distributions of states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 1011–1027. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.80.6.1011
(2009). The implications of Big Five standing for the distribution of trait manifestation in behavior: Fifteen experience-sampling studies and a meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 1097–1114. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016786
(2009). In favor of the synthetic resolution to the person-situation debate. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 150–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2009.02.008
(2007). The Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire: Psychometric features and prospective relationships with depression and anxiety in adults. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 23, 141–149. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759.23.3.141
(1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of General Psychology, 2, 271–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.271
(2016). The wisdom to know the difference: Strategy-situation fit in emotion regulation in daily life is associated with well-being. Psychological Science, 27, 1651–1659. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616669086
(2006). Expanding the topography of social anxiety: An experience-sampling assessment of positive emotions, positive events, and emotion suppression. Psychological Science, 17, 120–128. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01674.x
(2011). Der Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (CERQ) Erste teststatistische Überprüfung einer deutschen Adaption
([The Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (CERQ) Psychometric evaluation of a German adaptation] . Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie und Psychotherapie: Forschung und Praxis, 40, 94–106. https://doi.org/10.1026/1616-3443/a0000792018). The relative variability index as a generic mean-corrected variability measure for bounded variables. Psychological Methods, 23, 690–707. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000153
(2008).
(The five-factor theory of personality . In O. P. JohnR. W. RobinsL. A. PervinEds., Handbook of personality: Theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 159–181). New York, NY: Guilford Press.2015). The SOEP Innovation Sample (SOEP IS). Schmollers Jahrbuch, 135, 389–399.
(2002). Belief and feeling: Evidence for an accessibility model of emotional self-report. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 934–960. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.6.934
(2009). On the relation of mean reaction time and intraindividual reaction time variability. Psychology and Aging, 24, 841–857. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017799
(2017).
(Everyday experiences in the SOEP Innovation Sample (EE-SOEP-IS): A multi-method study . In J. BritzkeJ. SchuppEds., SOEP Wave Report 2016 (pp. 69–72). Berlin, Germany: DIW Berlin.