首页> 外文学位 >Attentional deployment in emotion regulation: Should people pay attention or not?
【24h】

Attentional deployment in emotion regulation: Should people pay attention or not?

机译:注意情绪调节:人们应该注意还是不注意?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Previous research in the area of emotion regulation has shown that some antecedent-focused emotion regulation strategies are more effective at regulation emotion than response-focused strategies (e.g., Gross & John, 2003). However, most of the evidence available has compared only reappraisal (an antecedent-focused strategy) with suppression (a response-focused strategy). In this research two studies were designed in order to compare another antecedent-focused strategy, namely attentional deployment, with suppression, a response-focused strategy. Study 1 was a questionnaire-based, cross-sectional design, intended to test the hypothesis that the use of attentional deployment would predict greater experiencing of positive emotions and lesser experiencing of negative emotions, and that this strategy would also predict greater levels of subjective well-being in people who tend to use it frequently. The opposite was predicted for suppression. The results supported the majority of the hypotheses when a 12-item questionnaire was used to measure attentional deployment and suppression; however, the hypotheses were not supported when a scenario-based was used to measure these strategies. Study 2 used an Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) approach that measured the actual use of attentional deployment and suppression three times a day for 14 days. The main hypothesis of this study predicted that attentional deployment would be more effective at regulating emotions than suppression on a momentary basis. The results did not support this hypothesis, since neither attentional deployment, nor suppression predicted emotion regulation effectiveness. In addition to the main hypotheses of each study, both studies compared the independence of the use of attentional deployment and suppression. Interestingly, the 12-item questionnaire showed that the strategies were not correlated, whereas the EMA study indicated that the strategies were correlated. The limitations, future research, and the implications of the differences in the results based on the two methods used are discussed.
机译:先前在情绪调节领域的研究表明,一些先于情绪的情绪调节策略在调节情绪方面比以反应为中心的策略更有效(例如,Gross&John,2003)。但是,大多数现有证据仅将重新评估(针对先验的策略)与抑制(针对回应的策略)进行了比较。在这项研究中,设计了两项研究,目的是比较另一种以先行者为重点的策略,即注意部署和以反应为中心的抑制策略。研究1是基于问卷的横断面设计,旨在检验以下假设:注意部署的使用将预测正面情绪的更多体验,而负面情绪的较少体验,并且该策略还将预测主观健康水平更高-倾向于经常使用它的人。预计相反的情况会被抑制。当使用12个项目的问卷来测量注意部署和抑制时,结果支持了大多数假设。但是,当使用基于场景的方法来衡量这些策略时,就不支持这些假设。研究2使用了生态瞬时评估(EMA)方法,该方法在14天中每天测量3次注意部署和抑制的实际使用情况。这项研究的主要假设预测,注意调配比暂时抑制更能有效地调节情绪。该结果不支持该假设,因为注意力的部署和抑制都不能预测情绪调节的有效性。除了每个研究的主要假设外,两个研究还比较了注意部署和抑制使用的独立性。有趣的是,由12个项目组成的问卷调查表显示这些策略没有相关性,而EMA研究表明这些策略是相关的。讨论了基于两种方法的局限性,未来的研究以及结果差异的含义。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号