The objectives of the present study were twofold. First, we tested a new approach to affect regulation dynamics, conceptualized as a network made up of the reciprocal influences that affect and affect regulation strategies constantly exert on each other. Second, we attempted to gain a better understanding of these dynamics by examining how they vary according to broad personality traits. To this end, we adopted an experience sampling method, involving five daily assessments over a 2‐week period. In each assessment, participants indicated their current affective experience and the way they had implemented five well‐known affect regulation strategies (i.e. appreciation, positive reappraisal, distraction, expressive suppression, and rumination) since the previous assessment. At the sample level, the network of affect regulation dynamics was characterized by positive feedback loops between positive affect and so‐called broad‐minded strategies, and between negative affect and narrow‐minded strategies. The form of this network varied according to levels of extraversion and neuroticism. Our findings are discussed in light of current knowledge about personality and affect regulation. Copyright © 2017 European Association of Personality Psychology

International audienceFeelings of positive or negative affect are not restricted to temporary states. They can also determine future affective experiences, by influencing the building of an individual’s personal resources. The present study was designed to understand the daily fluctuations in positive and negative affect more fully. To this end, we examined the involvement of a variety of affect regulation strategies in these fluctuations. The affect regulation strategies we explored included positive reappraisal, problem-focused coping, appreciation and rumination. We adopted an experience sampling method, consisting of five daily assessments over a 2-week period. As expected, within a few hours of experiencing more positive affect, participants engaged in greater positive reappraisal, problem-focused coping and appreciation. In turn, greater use of each of these three strategies was followed by more intense experiences of positive affect. We observed analogous reciprocal influences between rumination and the experience of negative affect, within the same time interval. Changes in affective experience over several hours were also directly influenced by concurrent use of these strategies. More specifically, greater positive reappraisal, problem-focused coping and appreciation accelerated the rise in positive affect that follows low feelings of positive affect, and slowed the decline in positive affect that follows high feelings. Rumination had an analogous influence on change in negative affect. The clinical implications of these findings are discussed

No abstract

Background: Self-help interventions intended to help nonclinical individuals regulate their emotions can have important social benefits (i.e., mental disorder prevention, wellbeing promotion). However, their mean effect size on wellbeing is generally low, possibly because there are considerable betweenindividual differences in the response to these interventions. The present study examined whether individuals' baseline levels of emotional wellbeing and engagement in emotion regulation strategies moderate the effects on these same variables of a 4-week self-help cognitive-behavioral intervention intended for typical adults.Methods: Data were collected from 158 nonclinical French adults (n = 95 for the control group, n = 63 for the cognitive-behavioral group) using experience sampling. Emotional wellbeing was assessed, as well as the engagement in three emotion regulation strategies (i.e., cognitive reappraisal, problem solving, and appreciation).Results: As expected, the posttest scores on some variables were significantly predicted by the interactions between the intervention and the pretest scores on these same variables. In particular, it was the participants with the most negative baseline levels (i.e., low emotional wellbeing, low engagement in appreciation) who benefitted most from the intervention. Discussion: Results are discussed in the light of current knowledge on between-individual differences in how individuals respond to interventions.

We examined age-related differences in the reactive and proactive use of affect regulation strategies. We collected data from 209 participants 13-80 years of age, using an experience sampling method. The most interesting finding was that, as hypothesized, compared with those under 20, adults 20 and over used the 2 strategies we focused on (i.e., problem solving and positive reappraisal) more intensely and in a reactive manner. By contrast, from the age of about 55 upward, adults were characterized by a more intensely proactive use of these strategies. Results are discussed in the light of age differences in motivation. (PsycINFO Database Record