Abstract
Implementation intention (IMP) has recently been highlighted as an effective emotion regulatory strategy. Most studies examining the effectiveness of IMPs to regulate emotion have relied on self-report measures of emotional change. In two studies we employed electrodermal activity (EDA) and heart rate (HR) in addition to arousal ratings (AR) to assess the impact of an IMP on emotional responses. In Study 1, 60 participants viewed neutral and two types of negative pictures (weapon vs. non-weapon) under the IMP “If I see a weapon, then I will stay calm and relaxed!” or no self-regulatory instructions (Control). In Study 2, additionally to the Control and IMP conditions, participants completed the picture rating task either under goal intention (GI) to stay calm and relaxed or warning instructions highlighting that some pictures contain weapons. In both studies, participants showed lower EDA, reduced HR deceleration and lower AR to the weapon pictures compared to the non-weapon pictures. In Study 2, the IMP was associated with lower EDA compared to the GI condition for the weapon pictures, but not compared to the weapon pictures in the Warning condition. ARs were lower for IMP compared to GI and Warning conditions for the weapon pictures.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes
1 We tested whether viewing of the weapon and non-weapon pictures in the Control condition resulted in increased EDA and in a greater HR deceleration compared to the neutral pictures. The analysis revealed a significant increase in EDA during the weapon (M = 0.02, SD = 0.12), t(29) = 4.28, p = .0001, d = 1.18 and non-weapon (M = 0.03, SD = 0.20), t(29) = 2.82, p = .01, d = 0.89 compared to neutral (M = –0.11, SD = 0.10) pictures. No significant difference was established in EDA in response to the weapon and non-weapon pictures, t < 1. Similarly, suggesting increased orienting to negative information (Bradley, Citation2009; Bradley & Lang, 2000), HR significantly decreased during the weapon (M = –0.05, SD = 0.11), t(29) = –2985, p = .006, d = 0.99 and non-weapon (M = –0.03, SD = 0.11), t(29) = –2.171, p = .038, d = 0.80 pictures compared to the Neutral (M = 0.05, SD = 0.09) pictures. We found no significant difference in HR reactivity between the weapon (M = –0.05, SD = 0.11) and non-weapon (M = –0.03, SD = 0.11) pictures, t(29) = 1.022, p = .315, d = 0.18. These results confirm that the negative pictures produced a greater increase in EDA and a greater HR deceleration than the neutral pictures.
2 In the original study, which was conducted as a part of Azbel-Jackson’s doctoral thesis, an additional Observer Mental Imagery condition was included, the results of which are not reported in the manuscript.
3 Baseline corrected mean z-scores across the weapon, non-weapon and neutral picture trials revealed a significant increase in EDA during the weapon (M = 0.03, SD = 0.09), t(19) = 3.651, p = .002, d = 1.17 and non-weapon (M = 0.03, SD = 0.14), t(19) = 3.63, p = .002, d = 0.88, compared to neutral (M = –0.07, SD = 0.08) pictures with no significant difference in EDA between the non-weapon and the weapon pictures, t < 1 (). Similarly, suggesting increased orienting to negative information (e.g., Bradley, Citation2009), HR significantly decreased during the weapon (M = –0.05, SD = 0.10), t(19) = –3.11, p = .006, d = 1.27 and non-weapon (M = –0.06, SD = 0.09), t(19) = –3.62, p = .002, d = 1.49 picture trials compared to the neutral (M = 0.06, SD = 0.07), with no significant difference in HR between the weapon and non-weapon pictures, t(19) = 1.02, p = .32, d = 0.11. These results confirm that the negative pictures produced a greater increase in EDA and a greater HR deceleration than the neutral pictures, together with a comparable intensity of physiological responses to the weapon and non-weapon unpleasant pictures.