SAFETYLIT WEEKLY UPDATE

We compile citations and summaries of about 400 new articles every week.
RSS Feed

HELP: Tutorials | FAQ
CONTACT US: Contact info

Search Results

Journal Article

Citation

Vujović L, Urry HL. Sci. Rep. 2018; 8(1): e5411.

Affiliation

Psychology Department, Tufts University, Medford, MA, 02155, USA.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2018, Nature Publishing Group)

DOI

10.1038/s41598-018-23654-2

PMID

29615681

Abstract

We conducted two within-subjects experiments to determine whether people use alternative emotion regulation (ER) strategies to compensate for failure of situation selection, a form of ER in which one chooses situations based on the emotions those situations afford. Participants viewed negative and neutral (Study 1, N = 58) or negative, neutral, and positive pictures (Study 2, N = 90). They indicated for each picture whether they wanted to terminate presentation (Study 1) or view it again (Study 2). We manipulated the outcome of this decision to be congruent with participants' wishes (success) or not (failure), and measured self-reported ER strategies and emotional responses. Although participants terminated negative situations more often than neutral situations (Study 1), or chose to view positive pictures more frequently than neutral, and neutral more frequently than negative (Study 2), there was little evidence of compensation in the wake of situation selection failure. Overall, we conclude that although people choose situations based on affect (i.e., attempt to end or avoid high-arousal negative situations and pursue high-arousal pleasant ones), they do not generally use the alternative ER strategies that we assessed (rumination, reappraisal, distraction) to compensate when the situations they select fail to materialize in this experimental context.


Language: en

NEW SEARCH


All SafetyLit records are available for automatic download to Zotero & Mendeley
Print