Abstract
Purpose: Recent literature highlights that no emotion regulation strategy is universally helpful or harmful. The present study aimed to build understanding of for whom and what cognitive reappraisal is helpful, by testing the influential hypothesis that reappraisal is most helpful when there is good individual or situational capacity to apply this strategy effectively. Methods: The present study tested how eight variables theorised to be associated with the effectiveness of reappraisal moderated the link between reappraisal use and changes in depression, anxiety, loneliness, functional impairment, and wellbeing in a nationally representative sample, over three (n = 752) and twelve month (n = 512) periods. Results: Contrary to our hypothesis, we found reappraisal was most beneficial for individuals or in situations characterised by additional vulnerabilities (e.g., average or high levels of stress, neuroticism, difficulty identifying feelings, or poor self-efficacy). Results also support prior evidence that reappraisal can be more helpful for improving wellbeing than reducing mental health symptoms. Conclusions: Altogether, our findings provide new insight into the complex nature of relationships between reappraisal and psychological outcomes. A key clinical implication is that reappraisal may be particularly helpful for people with stable vulnerabilities (e.g., neuroticism).
Original language | English |
---|---|
Journal | Cognitive Therapy and Research |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2023 |