"Think of the situation in a positive light": A look at cognitive reappraisal, affective reactivity and health☆.

RATIONALE: How individuals regulate their emotions is critical for maintaining health and well-being. For example, reframing a stressful situation in a positive light, a form of cognitive reappraisal, is beneficial for both physical and mental health as well as subjective well-being. However, it is currently unclear why this relationship exists. One potential mechanism could be how one emotionally reacts to stressors in daily life, termed affective reactivity. OBJECTIVE: The current study examined longitudinal associations that spanned 20 years between cognitive reappraisal and health outcomes and subjective well-being and if affective reactivity mediated this relationship. METHODS: Participants completed waves 1-3 of the Midlife in the United States (MIDUS) Survey series and were asked various questions about their general health and well-being. Each wave was approximately 10 years apart. A subset of participants from MIDUS II completed the National Study of Daily Experiences (NSDE II), an 8-day daily diary asking about their everyday experiences. The final sample consisted of 1814 participants. RESULTS: Results found that cognitive reappraisal was significantly associated with future health and well-being outcomes, and negative affective reactivity significantly mediated this relationship. Those who engaged more in cognitive reappraisal tended to be less affectively reactive to stressful events 10 years later, leading to having better health and well-being outcomes 20 years later. CONCLUSION: Findings from this study could better inform stress and well-being interventions by strengthening cognitive reappraisal strategies to target reducing affective reactivity to stressors which should then benefit long-term health and well-being.

Discrimination and health: The mediating role of daily stress processes.

OBJECTIVE: Exposure to discrimination is consistently linked with worse physical and mental health outcomes. One potential reason is that discriminatory experiences shape the way people interpret and affectively react to daily stressful events which in turn impacts health. The current study examined the role of these two daily psychological stress processes as a pathway linking the longitudinal association between perceived discrimination and health outcomes. METHOD: Participants in the National Study of Daily Experiences (NSDE), a subset of the Midlife in the United States (MIDUS) study, were followed over three waves spanning 20 years (N = 1,315). Perceptions of lifetime and everyday discrimination were measured by questionnaire at Wave 1; daily assessments of stress, threat appraisals, and negative affect were assessed through 8 days of daily dairies at Wave 2; measures of physical health (chronic conditions, functional limitations, and self-rated physical health) and mental health (depression, anxiety, and self-rated mental health) were assessed at Wave 3. Each wave of data was collected 9-10 years apart. RESULTS: Lifetime and everyday discrimination were associated with worse physical and mental health outcomes 20 years later. Daily threat appraisals and negative affective reactivity to daily stressors mediated the effect of discrimination on physical and mental health. CONCLUSION: Daily psychological stress processes are a potential mechanism by which exposure to unfair treatment relates to health. Findings underscore the insidious nature of unfair treatment and demonstrate how such experiences may be particularly consequential for daily stress processes and later physical and mental health outcomes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Assessing the Relationship Between Implicit and Explicit Evaluations of Fruit and Vegetable Consumption by Cancer Survivors.

BACKGROUND: Currently, little is known about the implicit evaluations that cancer survivors have for health behaviors, such as eating fruits and vegetables. Understanding both the implicit and explicit evaluations of fruit and vegetable consumption among cancer survivors may aid future interventions for changing motivations and intentions in this higher risk population. METHODS: A cross-sectional study at a university cancer center assessed explicit and implicit evaluations of fruit and vegetable consumption among 122 cancer survivors. The explicit evaluations regarding fruit and vegetable consumption were self-report data. To obtain implicit evaluations, participants completed an implicit evaluation task, the Affect Misattribution Paradigm. Moderating variables of time since first cancer treatment and if participants had a prior cancer occurrence were also self-reported. RESULTS: Simple correlations found no significant association between the implicit and explicit evaluations of fruit and vegetable consumption. Moderation regression analyses showed that the implicit and explicit evaluations became negatively associated as time since first treatment increased and when participants had a prior cancer occurrence. CONCLUSION: The results support the view that implicit and explicit measures of fruit and vegetable consumption diverge for cancer survivors, consistent to implicit and explicit evaluations in other domains and samples. Further, the association between these evaluations differed depending on time since first treatment and if they have been treated for a prior cancer occurrence. By knowing more about implicit and explicit positive evaluations, and their moderators, it may be possible for interventionists to alter cancer survivors' motivation and intention to eat fruits and vegetables.