Re-appraising stressors from a distance: effects of linguistic distancing on cognitive appraisals and emotional responses to interpersonal conflict

Figures & data

Table 1. The means and standard deviation of NA, PA and appraisals across baseline (T0), recall (T1) and manipulation (T2) phases.

Measures	Distanced (n = 181)			Immersed (n = 174)			Total (n = 355)
	T0	T1	T2	T0	T1	T2	T0	T1	T2
Negative affect	1.72 (0.96)	2.44 (0.96)	2.35 (1.06)	1.74 (0.96)	2.58 (0.97)	2.51 (1.10)	1.73 (0.96)	2.51 (0.97)	2.43 (1.08)
Positive affect	3.29 (1.34)	1.95 (1.18)	2.18 (1.28)	3.32 (1.36)	1.88 (1.15)	1.90 (1.15)	3.31 (1.35)	1.92 (1.17)	2.04 (1.23)
Motivational relevance		5.52 (1.47)	5.57 (1.45)		5.45 (1.42)	5.53 (1.45)		5.49 (1.44)	5.55 (1.45)
Motivational congruence		2.80 (1.62)	3.17 (1.88)		2.86 (1.65)	2.76 (1.61)		2.83 (1.63)	2.97 (1.76)
Other responsibility		5.49 (1.57)	5.33 (1.62)		5.39 (1.65)	5.36 (1.68)		5.44 (1.61)	5.34 (1.65)
Self responsibility		3.17 (1.89)	3.34 (1.89)		3.17 (1.81)	3.42 (1.87)		3.17 (1.85)	3.38 (1.88)
Problem coping potential		3.45 (2.05)	3.59 (2.00)		3.15 (1.93)	3.45 (2.12)		3.30 (1.99)	3.52 (2.06)
Emotion coping potential		5.17 (1.50)	5.16 (1.68)		4.95 (1.48)	4.91 (1.60)		5.06 (1.49)	5.04 (1.64)
Future expectancy		2.92 (1.97)	2.88 (2.05)		2.66 (1.87)	2.46 (1.86)		2.79 (1.92)	2.67 (1.97)

Note: FPPs = First-person pronouns; For NA at T1 and all appraisals at T2, the distanced group n = 180 and the total n = 354 due to missing data.

Figure 1. Changes in positive affect and motivational congruence appraisals amongst distanced and immersed participants from recall (T1) to manipulation (T2). Note: Error bars represent standard errors.

Data availability statement

The data and analysis code supporting the findings of this study are openly available on the Open Science Framework at https://osf.io/7amsv/.