The cost of believing emotions are uncontrollable: Youths’ beliefs about emotion predict emotion regulation and depressive symptoms.

Abstract

As humans, we have a unique capacity to reflect on our experiences, including emotions. Over time, we develop beliefs about the nature of emotions, and these beliefs are consequential, guiding how we respond to emotions and how we feel as a consequence. One fundamental belief concerns the controllability of emotions: Believing emotions are uncontrollable (entity beliefs) should reduce the likelihood of trying to control emotional experiences using effective regulation strategies like reappraisal; this, in turn, could negatively affect core indices of psychological health, including depressive symptoms. This model holds particular relevance during youth, when emotion-related beliefs first develop and stabilize and when maladaptive beliefs could contribute to emerging risk for depression. In the present investigation, a pilot diary study (N = 223, aged 21-60) demonstrated that entity beliefs were associated with using reappraisal less in everyday life, even when controlling for possible confounds (i.e., self-efficacy, pessimism, stress exposure, stress reactivity). Then, two studies examined whether entity beliefs and associated impairments in reappraisal may set youths on a maladaptive trajectory: In a cross-sectional study (N = 136, aged 14-18), youths with stronger entity beliefs experienced greater depressive symptoms, and this link was mediated by lower reappraisal. This pattern was replicated and extended in a longitudinal study (N = 227, aged 10-18), wherein youth- and parent-reported depressive symptoms were assessed 18 months after assessing beliefs. These results suggest that entity beliefs about emotion constitute a risk factor for depression that acts via reappraisal, adding to the growing literature on emotion beliefs and their consequences for self-regulation and health. (PsycINFO Database Record

Effortful Emotion Regulation as a Unique Form of Cybernetic Control

“…People who are depressed are likely to consider any goal more difficult (Gendolla, Brinkmann, & Silvestrini, 2012), but this might be particularly true with respect to emotion-regulation goals. Individuals who suffer from more depressive symptoms believe that emotions are less controllable (e.g., Ford, Lwi, Hankin, Gentzler, & Mauss, 2018; Kneeland & Dovidio, 2020). Such individuals are further likely to believe that they personally are less capable of controlling their emotions.…”

A Smart Toy Intervention to Promote Emotion Regulation in Middle Childhood: Feasibility Study

“…Finally, level 3 is assumed to emerge from repeated experience of soothing interactions over time, leading to a shift in children’s ER practices and implicit beliefs about emotion . Specifically, we hypothesize that repeated interactions with the toy will result in the establishment of more adaptive ER patterns and shift children’s implicit beliefs about the controllability of emotion [87,88], a well-known target for intervention [89-93]. As these effects are expected to arise only through ongoing long-term interactions and, thus, rely strongly on appropriation in situ, we did not expect to see any indicative data for these proposed mechanisms within this pilot study; however, these will be crucial for long-term effect of the smart toy intervention.…”

Dementia as Fixed or Malleable: Development and Validation of the Dementia Mindset Scale

“…Studies on different applications of mindset theory suggest that mindsets can have substantial effects on human functioning ranging from performance on memory tasks ( Plaks & Chasteen, 2013 ), to mental health ( Schroder et al, 2016 ), weight loss ( Burnette et al, 2017 ), academic success ( Ortiz Alvarado et al, 2019 ), and job performance ( Zingoni & Corey, 2017 ). Moreover, previous studies have linked mindsets to affective well-being and life satisfaction ( King, 2017 ), depression ( Ford et al, 2018 ), and future psychological distress ( Schroder et al, 2019 ). Specifically, holding a fixed mindset (believing that attributes are set and unchangeable) is generally more detrimental to well-being than holding a malleable mindset (believing that attributes can change and adapt; Dweck & Leggett, 1988 ; van Tongeren & Burnette, 2018 ).…”