Emotion regulation and the temporal dynamics of emotions: Effects of cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression on emotional inertia

Abstract

The tendency for emotions to be predictable over time, labelled emotional inertia, has been linked to low well-being and is thought to reflect impaired emotion regulation. However, almost no studies have examined how emotion regulation relates to emotional inertia. We examined the effects of cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression on the inertia of behavioural, subjective and physiological measures of emotion. In Study 1 (N = 111), trait suppression was associated with higher inertia of negative behaviours. We replicated this finding experimentally in Study 2 (N = 186). Furthermore, in Study 2, instructed suppressors and reappraisers both showed higher inertia of positive behaviours, and reappraisers displayed higher inertia of heart rate. Neither suppression nor reappraisal were associated with the inertia of subjective feelings in either study. Thus, the effects of suppression and reappraisal on the temporal dynamics of emotions depend on the valence and emotional response component in question.

Keywords:

• Emotional inertia
• Emotion dynamics
• Emotion regulation
• Cognitive reappraisal
• Expressive suppression

This research was partly supported by KU Leuven Research Council Grants [grant number GOA/15/003] and [grant number OT/11/031] by the Interuniversity Attraction Poles programme financed by the Belgian Government [grant number IAP/P7/06], and by an FWO grant awarded to Peter Kuppens.

This research was partly supported by KU Leuven Research Council Grants [grant number GOA/15/003] and [grant number OT/11/031] by the Interuniversity Attraction Poles programme financed by the Belgian Government [grant number IAP/P7/06], and by an FWO grant awarded to Peter Kuppens.

Notes

¹ Study 1 data were collected by T.H. and D.L. Study 2 data were collected by E.B.

² For comparability with other studies using the ERQ, we report analyses based on the original 4-item suppression scale. However, all findings replicated when repeating analyses using the more reliable 3-item suppression subscale.

³ Self-conscious affect was assessed with seven items (e.g., “humiliated”, “embarrassed”, “worthless”), rated on a scale from 1 (did not feel at all) to 10 (felt very strongly), which formed a reliable scale (a = .86). Participants reported an average self-conscious affect score of 2.53 (SD = 1.53), which differed significantly from 0, t(113) = 17.73, p < .001.

⁴ Results did not differ when including ERQ scores as covariates in our main analyses.

⁵ Analyses using two-level models with observations crossed with persons at Level-1 and dyads at Level-2 (see e.g., Bolger & Shrout, 2007) also led to the same conclusions as our main analyses.

⁶ These correlations were not the main focus of the current report but are provided for descriptive purposes. Given the large number of possible comparisons, we do not report significance tests comparing the strength of correlations between groups.

⁷ We thank an anonymous reviewer for suggesting this explanation.

⁸ We repeated our main analyses in both Study 1 and Study 2 using a lag of 10 seconds and found highly similar results.

⁹ In Study 2, behavioural expressions of negative and positive emotions were assessed using binary codes (i.e., 1 = present, 0 = absent). We therefore analysed behavioural data using logistic multilevel models, in which a log-link function was added to the Level-1 equation. However, for simplicity, we only present model equations for continuous outcomes (see Models 5–8).