ABSTRACT
Ambivalence, the simultaneous experience of positivity and negativity, is a conflicting, uncomfortable, arousing state but is a necessary catalyst for behavior change. We sought to examine whether feelings of ambivalence can be reduced using instructed emotion regulation of positive and negative affect, the components of subjective ambivalence. Event-related brain potentials (ERPs) were collected while participants played 3 blocks of mixed gambles, in which each trial involved losing or winning the lesser or greater of 2 amounts. In the 1st block participants responded naturally, and in the 2nd and 3rd blocks they were instructed to focus on either the positive or negative aspects of the outcome. Disappointing wins (e.g., winning $5 instead of winning $12) and relieving losses (losing $5 instead of losing $12) reliably elicited ambivalence; focusing on either the negative or positive aspects of the outcome reduced ambivalence as well as the magnitude of the late positive potential (LPP), indicating successful regulation. Both self-reported affect and ERPs indicated that emotional responses to losses were more difficult to regulate than responses to wins, consistent with a negativity bias in affective processing. Results are interpreted in the framework of theories of affect, and implications for changing behavioral motivation to support healthy behaviors are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
Subject(s)
Emotional Regulation/ethics , Emotions/physiology , Female , Humans , MaleABSTRACT
The Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ; Gross & John, 2003) assesses two emotion regulation (ER) strategies: cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression. Researchers have used the ERQ in cross-national studies, such as with participants in Hong Kong. There is inconsistency in psychometric equivalence data for the ERQ in Chinese among adults, and prior research in Hong Kong contradicted the ERQ's original factor structure (Matsumoto et al., 2008). The present study examined the factor structure, reliability and validity of a translated Traditional Chinese-ERQ and the English-ERQ with Hong Kong college students. Results revealed that both versions replicated the original two-factor structure of the ERQ (Gross & John, 2003). Evidence of the measure's convergent, discriminant and predictive validity was obtained as well. Implications for cross-cultural scale validation particularly with Hong Kong Chinese students are discussed.
Subject(s)
Emotional Regulation/ethics , Psychometrics/methods , Adult , Asian People , China , Female , Hong Kong , Humans , Male , Multilingualism , Reproducibility of Results , Students , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young AdultABSTRACT
Research has examined various cognitive processes underlying ethical decision-making, and has recently begun to focus on the differential effects of specific emotions. The present study examines three self-focused moral emotions and their influence on ethical decision-making: guilt, shame, and embarrassment. Given the potential of these discrete emotions to exert positive or negative effects in decision-making contexts, we also examined their effects on ethical decisions after a cognitive reappraisal emotion regulation intervention. Participants in the study were presented with an ethical scenario and were induced, or not induced, to feel guilt, shame, or embarrassment, and were asked to reappraise, or not reappraise, the situation giving rise to those emotions. Responses to questions about the ethical case were evaluated for the quality of ethical sensemaking, perceptions of moral intensity, and decision ethicality. Findings indicate that guilt, shame, and embarrassment are associated with different sensemaking processes and metacognitive reasoning strategies, and resulted in different perceptions of moral intensity. Additionally, cognitive reappraisal had a negative impact on each of these factors. Implications of these findings for ethical decision-making research are discussed.
