Abstract

To examine the effectiveness of various affect regulation strategies and categories of affect regulation strategies, a meta-analysis was conducted. Results generally indicate that reappraisal (d=0.65) and distraction (d=0.46 for all studies; d=0.95 for studies with a negative or no affect induction) are the most effective regulation/repair strategies, producing the largest hedonic shift in affect. The effectiveness of different categories of regulation/repair strategies depended on the valence of the preceding affect induction. Results also indicate that stronger affect inductions and the use of bivariate affect measures will provide a richer understanding of affect regulation. Additionally, not all specific strategies or categories of strategies have been researched and the impact of individual differences on affect regulation has received relatively little attention. Finally, results indicate that control conditions in affect regulation research may not provide a valid point for comparison, as they facilitate effective affect repair.

Keywords

Affect (linguistics)PsychologyAffect regulationDistractionValence (chemistry)Emotional regulationSocial psychologyCognitive psychologyDevelopmental psychologyCommunication

Affiliated Institutions

Related Publications

Publication Info

Year
2008
Type
article
Volume
23
Issue
6
Pages
1181-1220
Citations
276
Access
Closed

Social Impact

Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions

Citation Metrics

276
OpenAlex
20
Influential
183
CrossRef

Cite This

Adam A. Augustine, Scott H. Hemenover (2008). On the relative effectiveness of affect regulation strategies: A meta-analysis. Cognition & Emotion , 23 (6) , 1181-1220. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930802396556

Identifiers

DOI
10.1080/02699930802396556

Data Quality

Data completeness: 77%