The Association of Emotion Regulation Flexibility and Negative and Positive Affect in Daily Life

Abstract

In contrast to traditional classifications of emotion regulation (ER) strategies as either uniformly maladaptive or adaptive, recent theoretical models emphasize that adaptability is determined by greater ER flexibility (i.e., the ability to flexibly implement and adjust ER strategies based on the context). This study is the first to empirically test the two central perspectives of ER flexibility on affect. A sample of 384 adults (M _age=38.58 years, SD=13.82) residing predominantly in North America completed daily diaries for 14 days. We found evidence that theoretical components of ER flexibility, as defined by greater context sensitivity in the selection of ER strategies, greater ER strategy repertoire, enhanced responsivity to affective feedback, and ER-environmental covariation, were associated with adaptive affective outcomes (i.e., reduced negative affect and/or increased positive affect). This study highlights the importance of examining ER flexibility and its consequences as a critical component of ER.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42761-022-00132-7.

Keywords: Affect; Emotion regulation; Emotion regulation flexibility; Negative affect; Positive affect.

Fig. 1

Perceived controllability of the negative event moderated the association of distraction with negative affect (a), and the association of cognitive reappraisal with positive affect (b). Perceived controllability, distraction, and cognitive reappraisal were person-mean centered. For negative affect (a), the simple slopes analyses indicated that when the event was less controllable (i.e., 1 SD below the mean), higher distraction predicted lower negative affect. No other slopes were significant for negative affect. For positive affect (b), higher cognitive reappraisal predicted lower positive affect when the event was more controllable (i.e., 1 SD above the mean) or at the mean level of event controllability. Cognitive reappraisal was not significantly associated with positive affect when events were less controllable (i.e., 1 SD below the mean)

Fig. 2

Affect the day prior (t-1) moderated the association of day-to-day change in ER strategy use with negative affect at t (a) and with positive affect at t (b). Affect the day prior (t-1) and change in ER strategy use was person-mean centered. For negative affect (a), the simple slopes analysis showed that, at higher levels of t-1 negative affect (i.e., 1 SD above the mean) or at mean levels of t-1 negative affect, greater change in ER strategy use (from t-1 to t) predicted less negative affect at time t. At lower levels of t-1 negative affect (i.e., 1 SD below the mean), the association between change in ER strategy use (from t-1 to t) with negative affect was not significant. For positive affect (b), the simple slopes analysis was not significant; therefore, the Johnson-Neyman test for the regions of significance is presented to clarify the interaction. Results showed that when t-1 positive affect was below −10.86, greater change in ER strategy use (from t-1 to t) predicted higher positive affect at time t. In contrast, when t-1 positive affect was above 6.76, greater change in ER strategy use (from t-1 to t) predicted less positive affect at time t