‘It might be time to accept’. Exploring the dynamics between affect regulation strategies, anxiety and timing of regulation

The Costs and Benefits of Mindfulness and Reappraisal in Daily Life

Reappraisal and mindfulness represent two fundamentally different but interconnected ways of dealing with one's emotions: whereas reappraisal is aimed at changing one's thoughts and emotions, mindfulness is aimed at not immediately changing, but appreciating them. Despite this difference, prior research has shown that both are beneficial for one's affective well-being. However, research on the spontaneous use of reappraisal and mindfulness in daily life found that they might be differentially associated with positive and negative affect, with reappraisal and mindful attention being more strongly associated with increased positive affect and mindful acceptance with decreased negative affect. Moreover, the spontaneous use of reappraisal may be less effective than mindfulness in daily life given that it is more cognitively taxing. To compare these possibly different benefits (i.e., change in positive and negative affect) and costs (i.e., feeling depleted), we re-analyzed two experience sampling studies (N = 125 and N = 179). Regarding benefits, endorsing reappraisal and mindful attention was significantly associated with increases in positive affect, whereas endorsing mindful acceptance was significantly associated with decreases in negative affect. Regarding costs, we found that endorsing reappraisal led to more depletion and that reappraisal was selected less often than mindfulness in daily life. Our results demonstrate the importance of assessing not only the different benefits but also the costs of emotion regulation in daily life.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42761-022-00178-7.

How regulation strategies protected or worsened emotional experience during France's three lockdowns: Prepandemic versus pandemic comparisons and longitudinal approach

The COVID-19 pandemic remains hugely challenging, but its impact on emotional experience, especially over time, has often been neglected. The French Government imposed three COVID lockdowns with varying degrees of strictness that induced different types of emotional discomfort and emotion regulation. The present longitudinal study explored affect and emotion regulation strategies in each of these lockdowns, comparing samples assessed before and during the pandemic. The objective was to understand how government measures influenced subjective experience and how people adjusted their emotion regulation accordingly. The longitudinal lockdown sample comprised 164 participants (M_age = 37.60 years, SD = 12.50). Affect and emotion regulation were assessed in the first week of each of the three lockdowns (20-27 March 2020, 23-30 November 2020, and 19-26 April 2021). The 120 participants in the prepandemic (control) sample were drawn from previous studies focusing on affect and regulation strategies in natural everyday situations. Results indicated that affect deteriorated considerably, compared with prepandemic levels. Whereas activated negative affect (nervous and worried) tended to decrease, deactivated negative affect (sad and bored) increased. Regarding emotion regulation strategies, negative emotion expression was associated with more negative affect and less positive affect, while positive emotion expression and proactive behaviour were associated with a better emotional experience. A multivariate growth curve showed that in the absence of psychological support, stressful situations and repeated lockdowns do not induce people to make better emotion regulation strategy choices. As government restrictions had a negative impact on individuals' emotional experience, support programs should be implemented in future pandemics to promote emotion regulation.