Search

When confronted with unwanted negative emotions, individuals use a variety of cognitive strategies for regulating these emotions. The brain mechanisms underlying these emotion regulation strategies have not been fully characterized, and it is not yet clear whether these mechanisms vary as a function of emotion intensity. To address these issues, 30 community participants (17 females, 13 males, M age = 24.3 years) completed a picture-viewing emotion regulation task with neutral viewing, reacting to negative stimuli, cognitive reappraisal, attentional deployment, and self-distancing conditions. Brain and behavioral data were simultaneously collected in a 3T GE MRI scanner. Findings indicated that prefrontal regions were engaged by all three regulation strategies, but reappraisal showed the least amount of increase in activity as a function of intensity. Overall, these results suggest that there are both brain and behavioral effects of intensity and that intensity is useful for probing strategy-specific effects and the relationships between the strategies. Furthermore, while these three strategies showed significant overlap, there also were specific strategy-intensity interactions, such as frontoparietal control regions being preferentially activated by reappraisal and self-distancing. Conversely, self-referential and attentional regions were preferentially recruited by self-distancing and distraction as intensity increased. Overall, these findings are consistent with the notion that there is a continuum of cognitive emotion regulation along which all three of these strategies lie.

Is Facebook usage bad for mental health? Existing studies provide mixed results, and direct evidence for neural underlying moderators is lacking. We suggest that being able to filter social-network information from accessing working memory is essential to preserve limited cognitive resources to pursue relevant goals. Accordingly, among individuals with impaired neural social-network filtering ability, enhanced social-network usage would be associated with negative mental health. Specifically, participants performed a novel electrophysiological paradigm that isolates neural Facebook filtering ability. Participants' actual Facebook behavior and anxious symptomatology were assessed. Confirming evidence showed that enhanced Facebook usage was associated with anxious symptoms among individuals with impaired neural Facebook filtering ability. Although less robust and tentative, additional suggestive evidence indicated that this specific Facebook filtering impairment was not better explained by a general filtering deficit. These results involving a neural social-network filtering moderator, may help understand for whom increased online social-network usage is associated with negative mental health.

Common wisdom suggests that knowledge is power. The present investigation tested the boundary conditions of this quote by asking how knowledge, in the form of anticipatory information regarding future emotional events, can be maladaptive for certain forms of subsequent coping. Therefore, Study 1 tested our hypothesis that anticipatory information selectively conflicts with and impairs subsequent emotion regulation that involves disengagement from processing emotional information (distraction). Importantly, utilizing event-related potentials enabled tracking the temporal neural processing stages underlying this selective regulatory impairment. Study 2 provided an important behavioral extension by exploring individuals' knowledge regarding the influence of anticipatory information on subsequent regulation and the experiential consequences of this knowledge. Results of Study 1 confirmed that anticipatory information amplified initial attention toward emotional stimuli, selectively conflicting with continuous efforts to disengage attention via distraction (enhanced sustained late positive potentials amplitudes). Converging evidence demonstrated that even prior to regulation, receiving anticipatory information when expecting to distract produced a strong conflict (enhanced stimulus preceding negativity amplitudes). Moreover, results of Study 2 showed that individuals adequately chose to refrain from anticipatory information when expecting to distract, with suggestive evidence for resultant decreased negative experience. Counter to our prediction, anticipatory information did not facilitate subsequent regulation that involves engaging with emotional information processing (reappraisal). Nonetheless, individuals strongly preferred to receive anticipatory information when about to reappraise. Taken together, these findings suggest that knowledge is not power when it comes to disengagement coping, but individuals seem to recognize this maladaptive link and adjust their information-seeking behavior accordingly. (PsycINFO Database Record, ((c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).)

Emotional-intensity is a core characteristic of affective events that strongly determines how individuals choose to regulate their emotions. Our conceptual framework suggests that in high emotional-intensity situations, individuals prefer to disengage attention using distraction, which can more effectively block highly potent emotional information, as compared with engagement reappraisal, which is preferred in low emotional-intensity. However, existing supporting evidence remains indirect because prior intensity categorization of emotional stimuli was based on subjective measures that are potentially biased and only represent the endpoint of emotional-intensity processing. Accordingly, this study provides the first direct evidence for the role of online emotional-intensity processing in predicting behavioral regulatory-choices. Utilizing the high temporal resolution of event-related potentials, we evaluated online neural processing of stimuli's emotional-intensity (late positive potential, LPP) prior to regulatory-choices between distraction and reappraisal. Results showed that enhanced neural processing of intensity (enhanced LPP amplitudes) uniquely predicted (above subjective measures of intensity) increased tendency to subsequently choose distraction over reappraisal. Additionally, regulatory-choices led to adaptive consequences, demonstrated in finding that actual implementation of distraction relative to reappraisal-choice resulted in stronger attenuation of LPPs and self-reported arousal., (© The Author (2016). Published by Oxford University Press. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

A growing body of literature suggests that sleep and emotions are closely linked, and that the relationship between these two domains is complex and bidirectional. This review synthesizes some of the most current empirical findings with regard to the effects of sleep (with an emphasis on sleep deprivation) on subsequent emotional state, and the effects of emotions on subsequent sleep. Furthermore, we review a selection of possible mechanisms underlying some of these associations. Finally, suggestions are made for future research as part of the effort to develop a more comprehensive theory for this emerging field., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Distraction and reappraisal are two widely used forms of emotion regulation. The process model of emotion regulation (Gross, 1998) holds that they differ (1) in when they act on the emotion-generative process, and (2) in their impact on subsequent responses to regulated stimuli. We tested these two predictions by measuring electrocortical responses to neutral and emotional images during two phases. In the regulation phase, images were watched or regulated using distraction or reappraisal. During the re-exposure phase, the same images were passively watched. As predicted, during regulation, distraction reduced the late positive potential (LPP) earlier than reappraisal. Upon re-exposure, images with a distraction (but not reappraisal) history elicited a larger LPP than images with an attend history. This pattern of results suggests that distraction and reappraisal intervene at separate stages during emotion generation, a feature which may have distinct consequences that extend beyond the regulatory episode., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)