Is the relationship between sensory‐processing sensitivity and negative affect mediated by emotional regulation?

Figures & data

Table 1. Correlations between the HSPS and the DASS and the measures

	HSPS	DASS
		Depression	Anxiety	Stress
HSPS	(.92)	–	–	–
DASS
Depression	.31**	(.92)	–	–
Anxiety	.46**	.70**	(.85)	–
Stress	.55**	.64**	.75**	(.89)
DERS
Non Acceptance	.36**	.52**	.53**	.50**
Goals	.33**	.42**	.46**	.38**
Impulse‐control	.40**	.48**	.52**	.52**
Awareness	−.39**	.20*	.06	−.08
Strategies	.34**	.55**	.58**	.43**
Clarity	.05	.38**	.31**	.30**
DTS
Tolerance	−.33**	−.40**	−.49**	.39**
Absorption	−.27**	−.42**	−.43**	.33**
Appraisal	−.37**	−.55**	−.53**	.51**
Regulation	−.27**	−.21**	−.32**	.34**

Note. Diagonal is Cronbach's alpha. DASS‐21 = Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scales; DERS = Difficulties in Emotional Regulation; DTS = Distress Tolerance Scale; HSPS = Highly Sensitive Person Scale.

*p < .05, **p < .01.

Table 2. Relationship among the HSPS, DERS, and the DASS‐21 subscales

DERS subscale	B	Boot SE	Lower limit CI	Upper limit CI
Predicting depression
Non‐accept	.0028	.0028	−.0027	.0084
Goals	.0022	.0024	−.0018	.0080
Impulse	.0013	.0034	−.0047	.0088
Awareness	−.0068*	.0026	−.0129	−.0026
Strategies	.0069*	.0037	.0008	.0158
Clarity	.0002	.0007	−.0005	.0028
Predicting anxiety
Non‐accept	.0021	.0024	−.0024	.0072
Goals	.0019	.0021	−.0019	.0066
Impulse	.0021	.0028	−.0032	.0079
Awareness	−.0045*	.0023	−.0098	−.0006
Strategies	.0067*	.0033	.0017	.0146
Clarity	.0000	.0006	−.0019	.0009
Predicting stress
Non‐accept	.0299	.0169	−.0001	.0671
Goals	.0015	.0143	−.0274	.0300
Impulse	.0405	.0226	−.0019	.0939
Awareness	.0003	.0124	−.0233	.0268
Strategies	−.0109	.0179	−.0466	.0238
Clarity	.0029	.0057	−.0049	.0199

Note. CI = confidence interval; DERS = Difficulties in Emotional Regulation Scale; Non‐accept = non‐acceptance subscale.

*p < .05 (bootstrapped).

Table 3. Relationship among the HSPS, DTS, and the DASS‐21 depression subscale

DTS subscale	B	Boot SE	Lower limit CI	Upper limit CI
Predicting depression
Tolerance	−.0008	.0029	−.0063	.0053
Absorption	.0021	.0025	−.0020	.0080
Appraisal	.0144*	.0040	.0079	.0240
Regulation	−.0026	.0018	−.0071	.0002
Predicting anxiety
Tolerance	.0037	.0027	−.0007	.0101
Absorption	.0006	.0020	−.0030	.0054
Appraisal	.0074*	.0033	.0017	.0147
Regulation	−.0002	.0015	−.0031	.0029
Predicting stress
Tolerance	−.0005	.0182	−.0393	.0335
Absorption	−.0125	.0127	−.0440	.0081
Appraisal	.0657*	.0226	.0284	.1183
Regulation	.0094	.0112	−.0073	.0387

Note. N = 157. CI = confidence interval; DTS = Distress Tolerance Scale; SE = standard error.

*p < .05 (bootstrapped).

Table 4. DTS appraisal subscale and the DERS strategies subscale as mediators between the HSPS and the DASS‐21 depression subscale

Scale	B	Boot SE	Lower limit CI	Upper limit CI
Predicting depression
DTS appraisal	.0064*	.0030	.0014	.0130
DERS awareness	−.0064*	.0023	−.0118	−.0026
DERS strategies	.0079*	.0029	.0032	.0151
Predicting anxiety
DTS appraisal	.0037	.0025	−.0005	.0096
DERS awareness	−.0039*	.0020	−.0086	−.0007
DERS strategies	.0084*	.0028	.0038	.0150
Predicting stress
DTS appraisal	.0487*	.0198	.0171	.0945
DERS awareness	−.0064	.0119	−.0311	.0167
DERS strategies	.0127	.0147	−.0125	.0467

Note. N = 157. CI = confidence interval; DERS = Difficulties in Emotional Regulation Scale; DTS = Distress Tolerance Scale.

*p < .05.