Emotion regulation monitoring in daily life: The roles of event intensity, emotion intensity, perceived regulation success and psychopathology

Emotion regulation monitoring in daily life: The roles of event intensity, emotion intensity, perceived regulation success and psychopathology | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Emotion regulation monitoring in daily life: The roles of event intensity, emotion intensity, perceived regulation success and psychopathology Xu-hua Li, Yu-ting Zhang, Xu Li, Ming Peng, Marlies Houben, Thomas Vaessen, and 1 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4962739/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Published Journal Publication published 25 Nov, 2024 Read the published version in Cognitive Therapy and Research → Version 1 posted 8 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Purpose During emotional events, people monitor the effectiveness of their emotion regulation (ER) to decide whether to keep using their current ER strategy, switch to a new strategy, or stop the regulation process. However, there is little empirical research on the monitoring phase of ER, particularly on what and how situational and individual factors influence this process. Methods We tested situational and individual factors as predictors of real-life ER monitoring decisions. 155 young adults responded to 5 prompts per day in a 7-day experience sampling protocol. At each prompt they described an emotional event, rated the intensity of event, their current emotions and perceived success in ER, and reported their decision to simply stop using their current ER strategy or to switch to a new strategy during the event. Results Multilevel modeling results showed the decision to stop using the current ER strategy was predicted by perceived success in ER after both positive and negative events, and by depressive and anxiety symptoms after positive events. The decision to switch to a new strategy was more likely when there were high negative emotions after a negative event, and less likely when there was perceived success after a positive event. Conclusions These findings suggest that situational and individual factors affect people’s decisions about how to regulate emotion. Interventions addressing excessive emotion regulation issues in response to positive events and their underlying causes may benefit individuals with depression or anxiety. emotion regulation monitoring strategy switching perceived regulation success depression anxiety Introduction Emotion Regulation (ER) refers to the process by which individuals attempt to influence their subjective emotional experiences, physiological states, and behavioral expressions by using various strategies, to adapt to a constantly changing environment (Gross, 1998 ). The extended process model of ER (Gross, 2015a ) originally proposed that ER occurs in three stages. The person experiences an emotion and determines whether to regulate it or not (identification); evaluates available strategies and chooses the most appropriate one (selection); and applies the chosen strategy (implementation). However, because the ER process is shaped by situational and individual factors and is therefore dynamic, Gross ( 2015b ) introduced a fourth stage (monitoring). In the monitoring stage, the person evaluates whether regulation is still needed, based on their current emotional state. If regulation is needed, the person then decides whether to keep using the strategy they have been using or to switch to a different strategy. On the other hand, if regulation is no longer needed, the person might stop the regulation process. Therefore, the monitoring phase operates at a higher level than the other three processes (Bartolomeo et al., 2022 ). Researchers have examined several situational and individual factors that influence the identification, selection, and implementation stages of the ER process. Situational factors are proximal and would influence the ER process from moment to moment. Examples include intensity of the emotional event, emotion intensity, and perceived success in regulating the emotion. For example, the ER process has been shown to be influenced by the intensity and valence of the emotion being regulated (Blanke et al., 2021 ; Dixon-Gordon et al., 2015 ). Individual factors, such as depressive and anxiety symptoms, are more distal but can also influence one's preferences for particular ER strategies. For example, inflexibility in the use of ER strategies has been associated with the development and maintenance of depressive and anxiety disorders (For a review, see Lincoln et al., 2022 ). In the current study we examined which and how different situational and individual factors influence the monitoring phase of the ER process in everyday life contexts. Situational factors: event intensity, emotion intensity, and perceived regulation success Event intensity The intensity of emotional events or stimuli has been identified as an important influence on ER processes (for a review, see Sheppes et al., 2015 ). During the identification process, there appears to be a greater need for regulation for events with high intensity than those with low intensity (Barrett et al., 2001 ). During the selection process, individuals are more likely to use distraction as the ER strategy after more intense negative events, but more likely to use reappraisal after less intense negative events (Shafir et al., 2016 ; Sheppes et al., 2011 ). Studies using experience sampling have shown that during the implementation process, more intense events were associated with the use of more strategies (Hiekkaranta et al., 2021 ; Lennarz et al., 2019 ). Event intensity may also impact people’s effort in using these ER strategies during ER implementation, with higher effort exerted in response to more intense events (Blanke et al., 2021 ; Shafir et al., 2016 ). Notably, there has been no research on the effect of event intensity on the monitoring phase of the ER process. Only two studies have assessed the effect of event intensity on the ER process when the event was positive. Hiekkaranta et al. ( 2021 ) used experience sampling to examine people’s ER strategies after positive events. They found that the intensity of the positive event was associated with the implementation of savoring, emotional expression, and sharing as ER strategies. In a laboratory experiment, Hay et al. ( 2015 ) asked participants to choose whether to use distraction or reappraisal when viewing emotional images of different valence (negative vs. positive) and intensity (high vs. low). Participants were more likely to choose distraction in response to high-intensity negative images than in response to high-intensity positive images. However, the choice of ER strategy did not differ for negative and positive low-intensity emotional images conditions, suggesting that both the valence and intensity of the emotional stimuli influenced the ER decision. Emotion intensity Emotion intensity—the subjective evaluation of the intensity of experienced emotions following an emotional event—is partially independent of event intensity, with only small to moderate correlations between them (Blanke et al., 2021 ). Emotion intensity influences the choice of particular strategies and the effort involved in implementing these strategies (Dixon-Gordon et al., 2015 ), with more intense emotions requiring greater effort to invest. In addition, intense emotions following regulation may indicate inadequate regulation and the need for further effort, and have therefore been found to be related to ER monitoring choices (Birk and Bonanno, 2016 ; Dorman Ilan et al., 2019 ; Murphy and Young, 2020 ). For example, Birk and Bonanno ( 2016 ) found in an experiment that the more intense the negative emotions were after an initial regulation attempt, the more often participants chose to switch to a different strategy rather than maintain the current one. The effect of emotion intensity on ER strategy choice during monitoring has not yet been studied in research outside the laboratory. Perceived success in regulating emotions Perceived success in regulating emotions refers to individuals’ subjective evaluation of whether they achieved their specific ER goals. This construct is closely associated with the ER process, as it reflects the outcome of the implemented ER strategies (for a review, see Springstein & English, 2024 ). Previous research has linked perceived regulation success to the different strategies used during the implementation stage of the ER process. For instance, studies involving either young or older adults found that individuals reported higher perceived success when using acceptance as an ER strategy compared to reappraisal (Rompilla et al., 2022 ; Troy et al., 2018 ). The perception of success in achieving ER goals after initial ER efforts has also been shown to predict decisions made during the monitoring process (Springstein and English, 2024 ). Specifically, individuals are more likely to stop the regulation process when they perceive success in their regulatory efforts, while they may be more inclined to continue using the same strategy or change to a different one if they perceive their efforts as unsuccessful (Murphy and Young, 2020 ). Individual factors: psychopathology Aberrant ER functions have long been linked with emotional disorders (for reviews, see Gross & Jazaieri, 2014 ; Sheppes et al., 2015 ), such as depression (Liu and Thompson, 2017 ) and anxiety (Decker et al., 2008 ; Mathews et al., 2014 ). For instance, higher symptoms of depression and social anxiety have been shown to be associated with fewer ER attempts, greater difficulties in selecting appropriate strategies, and lower regulation motivation (Daniel et al., 2024 ; Millgram et al., 2020 ). In addition, the habitual use of maladaptive strategies, such as rumination and suppression, along with difficulties in employing adaptive strategies, may further contribute to the maintenance and worsening of depressive and anxiety symptoms (Lincoln et al., 2022 ). Similarly, associations between the rigid and inflexible use of ER strategies and depressive and anxiety symptoms have been reported (Hiekkaranta et al., 2021 ; Tng and Yang, 2023 ). These studies on the relationship between psychopathology and ER focused on difficulties in the identification, selection, and implementation stages of the ER process. Only one study has examined the role of psychopathology symptoms in the monitoring stage of the ER process. Using an ER choice task in the laboratory, Toh and Yang ( 2024 ) found that while more intense negative stimuli were associated with a higher frequency of switching from reappraisal to distraction, the associations between depressive symptoms and strategy switching frequency were not significant. It remains unclear whether and how depressive and anxiety symptoms impact the ER monitoring process in the context of daily life. The present study The current study used the experience sampling method (ESM) to examine situational and individual factors associated with ER strategy decisions during the monitoring process. ESM is a longitudinal approach that employs repeated sampling over relatively short intervals to assess behavior, thoughts, and feelings as they occurred, thereby reducing recall bias (Myin-Germeys et al., 2018 ). Frequent sampling should capture dynamic change during the ER monitoring phase, when individuals can stop using or adjust their strategies. Because the participants provide data during their typical activities throughout the day, we can gain insights into the dynamic ER process in everyday life. Based on the extended process model of ER and extant research, we expected that the situational factors of event intensity and emotion intensity would be correlated with more strategy switching and less ER stopping, while the situational factor of perceived success in regulating emotions would be correlated with less strategy switching and more stopping. Based on extant evidence of the associations between depressive and anxiety symptoms and ER strategy selection and implementation stages, we expected that the individual factors of depressive and anxiety symptoms would be associated with more strategy switching and stopping during the monitoring phase. Methods Participants The sample size was determined based on similar ESM studies on strategy selection and ER motives (English et al., 2017 ; Ortner et al., 2022 ). One hundred and sixty-nine young adults were recruited by advertising on social media. However, seven participants did not respond to any of the ESM prompts to provide data, and seven participants responded to less than 30% of the prompts(Hiekkaranta et al., 2021 ); these 14 participants were excluded from the study. The final sample constituted 155 participants (136 women; mean age = 20.07, SD = 2.24, range 17 to 31 years). The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the ethics review board of the Central China Normal University. Written informed content was obtained from all participants. Upon completion of the study, participants were compensated financially for their time and effort. Procedure and measures The study was carried out between November and December in 2022. Participants were invited to visit the laboratory to complete baseline questionnaires, receive information about the ESM procedure, and complete practice ESM questionnaires. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, 32 of the 155 participants were unable to visit the laboratory. These participants completed an online version of the baseline questionnaires, participated in a briefing session by phone, and subsequently filled out the practice ESM questionnaires. The ESM period lasted seven consequent days. Participants were semi-randomly prompted by a beep five times each day, from 10 a.m. to 10 p.m., with an interval of at least 90 minutes between two consecutive prompts. After receiving the weblink on their smartphone, participants were asked to complete the ESM questionnaires as soon as possible told the link would expire in 30 minutes. Participants were encouraged to respond to as many of the 35 total prompts as possible, and they were reimbursed 15–25 RMB depending on their compliance with the ESM protocol. Baseline measures Symptoms of depression Depressive symptoms were assessed using the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II; Beck et al., 1996 ). The BDI-II consists of 21 items. Each item has four response options that are scored from 0 to 3. Participants select the option that best describes their feelings. For instance: "I do not feel sad" (0); "I feel sad much of the time" (1); "I feel sad all the time" (2); "I am so sad or unhappy that I can't stand it" (3). Higher total scores indicate more severe depressive symptoms. The Chinese version of the BDI-II demonstrated good reliability and validity in a sample of college students (Yang et al., 2012 ). In this study, the Cronbach's alpha of BDI-II was .90. Symptoms of anxiety Anxiety symptoms were measured using the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-Trait Scale (STAI-T; Li & Qian, 1995 ; Spielberger, 1983 ). The STAI-T has 20 items, and each item is rated on a 4-point Likert scale from 1 (not at all) to 4 (very much). Higher scores indicate more severe anxiety symptoms. In this study, the Cronbach's alpha of STAI-T was .90. ESM assessment Event intensity The measure of event intensity was based on participants’ rating of how pleasant the event was (see Myin-Germeys et al., 2001 ). Participants were first asked to briefly describe the most important event that occurred since the last prompt, and then to rate its pleasantness from − 3 (very unpleasant) to 3 (very pleasant). Based on the pleasantness ratings, events were categorized as negative (rating 0), so that a lower pleasantness rating for negative events indicated a more intense negative event, while a higher pleasantness rating for positive events indicated a more intense positive event. Emotion intensity Participants were asked "How do you feel right now?" to assess the intensity of their current emotional experience. Four items measured positive affect (PA; "happy," "relaxed," "enthusiastic," and "excited") and five items measured negative affect (NA; "anxious," "sad," "angry," "stressed," and "scared"). Each item was rated from 1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely). At each prompt, the mean rating on the four PA items was calculated as the indicator of PA intensity, and the mean rating of the five NA items was calculated as the indicator of NA intensity. Internal consistency coefficients for PA items were: within-person α = .77, ω = .80; between-person α = .91, ω = .92; for NA items were: within-person α = .78, ω = .79; between-person α = .94, ω = .94. Decisions about ER The choice to attempt ER, the type of strategy chosen, and the decision to stop regulation or switch to a new strategy were assessed by the following ESM questionnaire items. ER Identification "During the event, did you attempt to increase or decrease your emotions?" This item was scored as 0/1 (0 = No; 1 = Yes). ER strategy use ER strategies were assessed using eight items (Hiekkaranta et al., 2021 ; Li et al., 2024 ): "I avoided the situation where the event occurred" (Avoidance), "I tried to change the situation" (Situation modification), "I thought of other ways to interpret the situation" (Reappraisal), "I engaged in activities to distract myself" (Distraction), "I have thought about it a lot" (Rumination), "I accepted that it happened" (Acceptance), "I tried not to show my emotions on the outside" (Expressive suppression), and "I talked about it with somebody" (Social sharing). Each item was rated from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Internal consistency coefficients for these ER items were: within-person α = .57, ω = .62; between-person α = .84, ω = .87. ER strategy switching "Did you switch strategies because the initial one was not working?" This item was scored as 0/1 (0 = No; 1 = Yes). ER strategy stopping " Are you still trying to change your emotions?" This item was scored as 0/1 (0 = No; 1 = Yes). Perceived ER success "I was able to regulate my emotions successfully." This item was scored as 0/1 (0 = No; 1 = Yes). Data analysis Data was prepared and analyzed in IBM SPSS Version 23 for Windows, and Mplus Version 7.4. Multilevel modeling was used to account for the multilevel nature of the data. Specifically, multilevel generalized linear mixed models (GLMM) were used because the outcome variables (i.e., ER switching and ER stopping) were binary. Only questionnaires in which a need for ER was identified—specifically, those with a score of 1 on the ER identification item—were included in the final analyses, as these questionnaires contained participants' responses regarding strategy switching, cessation, and success. The situational factors of event intensity, emotion intensity and perceived regulation success, and the outcome measures of switching or stopping were level-1 variables. The individual factors of BDI-II and STAI-T scores, age, and gender were level-2 variables. First, four GLMMs were developed to assess the associations between the three situational factors and strategy switching and stopping respectively, with separate models for negative and positive events. Depressive and anxiety symptoms as individual factors were then added separately to the models to test their association with strategy switching and stopping. Age and gender (women = 0, men = 1) were entered into all the models as covariates. To control for possible between-person confounding, the level-1 continuous variables (i.e., event intensity and emotion intensity) were person-mean centered. The level 2 continuous variables (i.e., the BDI-II score, the STAI-T score and age) were grand mean centered (Brans et al., 2013 ). Transparency and Openness The full list of the ESM questionnaires is available at open science framework ( https://osf.io/dqt9c/?view_only=cd98fbc03f3b46bc92205a9ac782a94c ). We report how we determined our sample size, all inclusion and exclusion criteria, and all measures used in the study. Results Descriptive statistics Over the ESM period, the participants as a group responded to 75.4% of the 35 prompts, with a mean of 26.38 ( SD = 6.03). There were 4,089 valid ESM observations in total. In 43.1% of the prompts, the participant reported they had attempted to regulate emotions after an event; of this subset, 38% of the events were identified as positive, 47% were negative, and the rest were neutral. Again in this subset (43.1%) of prompts, 65.2% were cases in which the participant decided to continue regulation but to switch their ER strategy, and 75.3% were cases in which participants decided to stop regulation. Descriptive statistics and the within- and between-person correlations are shown in Table 1 . Table 1 Descriptive statistics: Between-person means (M), within-person (SDw) and between-person (SDb) standard deviations, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and between-person and within-person correlations Variable M SD w SD b ICC 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 .PA 2.44 0.73 0.61 .38 .04 .14 .23 ** .25 ** .25 ** .21 ** .38 *** .03 .24 ** 2. NA 1.76 0.55 0.57 .47 − .43 *** .29 *** .1 .15 .18 * .20 * − .18 * .28 *** − .11 3. Avoidance 3.35 1.7 0.89 .17 − .20 *** .19 *** .46 *** .50 *** .60 *** .54 *** − .13 .32 *** .27 *** 4. Situation Modification 3.86 1.48 1.05 .29 − .06 *** .09 *** .26 *** .83 *** .82 *** .63 *** .19 * .15 .47 *** 5. Reappraisal 4.3 1.42 1.05 .3 − .09 *** .12 *** .28 *** .49 *** .79 *** .67 *** .30 *** .16 * .44 *** 6. Distraction 3.78 1.45 1.07 .3 − .09 *** .12 *** .32 *** .36 *** .40 *** .63 *** .09 .18 * .45 *** 7. Rumination 4 1.46 1.06 .3 .01 .12 *** .20 *** .23 *** .26 *** .26 *** .1 .13 .46 *** 8. Acceptance 5.25 1.24 0.8 .23 .25 *** − .25 *** − .18 *** .02 − .01 − .10 *** .01 − .06 .22 ** 9. Suppression 3.79 1.49 1.01 .26 − .13 *** .04 ** .15 *** .14 *** .19 *** .15 *** − .01 .05 ** − .41 *** 10. Social sharing 4.06 1.55 1.03 .27 .13 *** − .02 .07 *** .16 *** .12 *** .15 *** .23 *** .07 *** − .3 4 *** Note . * p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001. PA: positive emotions; NA: negative emotions. Between-person correlations are shown above the diagonal; average within-person correlations are below the diagonal. Associations with ER switching For negative events, there was a significant positive association between emotion intensity and ER switching, p = .028, OR = 1.38, 95% CI = [1.04, 1.84]. With every one-unit increase in emotion intensity, the probability for an individual to switch strategy increased by 1.38. Neither event intensity nor perceived success was significantly associated with ER switching. The above results did not change when the BDI-II score was entered by itself or when the STAI-T score was entered by itself, and neither variable was significantly associated with switching. The covariates (age or gender) were not significantly associated with switching. For positive events, there was a significant negative association between perceived success and ER switching, p = .019, OR = 0.29, 95% CI = [0.10, 0.82]. This result indicates that following events in which individuals perceived their ER regulation to be successful, they were 0.29 times less likely to switch strategies than following events in which they perceived their regulations to be unsuccessful. Neither event intensity nor emotion intensity was significantly associated with switching. The above results did not change when the BDI-II and STAI-T scores were added to the model, and these variables were not significantly related to switching. The covariates (age or gender) were not significantly associated with switching. Thus, there was a key difference between the results for switching after negative and positive events. After negative events, participants with higher emotion intensity were more likely to switch ER strategies; after positive events, participants with higher perceived success were less likely to switch ER strategies. Results of tests of the negative event model and the positive event model in predicting switching are presented in Table 2 . Table 2 Associations between ER strategy switching and event intensity, emotion intensity, perceived regulation success, depression symptoms, anxiety symptoms, age, and gender, following negative and positive events respectively ER strategy switching following negative events ER strategy switching following positive events Coefficient SE p Coefficient SE p Model 1 Model 1 Intercept − .82 .18 <.001 Intercept − .59 .20 .003 Event intensity − .18 .14 .204 Event intensity − .21 .20 .295 Emotion intensity .32 .15 .028 Emotion intensity − .26 .16 0.107 Perceived regulation success − .31 .26 .237 Perceived regulation success -1.24 .53 .019 Age − .14 .08 .070 Age <.01 .10 .995 Gender − .21 .57 .711 Gender .68 .66 .303 Model 2 Model 2 Intercept − .82 .18 <.001 Intercept − .58 .20 .003 Event intensity − .18 .14 .202 Event intensity − .21 .20 .295 Emotion intensity .32 .15 .027 Emotion intensity − .26 .16 .107 Perceived regulation success − .31 .26 .237 Perceived regulation success -1.24 .53 .019 BDI-II <-.01 .02 .817 BDI-II − .01 .02 .639 Age − .14 .08 .072 Age <-.01 .10 .994 Gender − .23 .58 .690 Gender .65 .66 .324 Model 3 Model 3 Intercept − .82 .18 <.001 Intercept − .59 .20 .003 Event intensity − .18 .14 .203 Event intensity − .21 .20 .295 Emotion intensity .32 .15 .028 Emotion intensity − .26 .16 .107 Perceived regulation success − .31 .26 .238 Perceived regulation success -1.24 .53 .019 STAI-T <-.01 .02 .974 STAI-T <.01 .02 .936 Age − .14 .08 .070 Age <.01 .10 .990 Gender − .22 .57 .707 Gender .68 .66 .301 Note. SE = standard error; BDI-II: Beck Depression Inventory-II; STAI-T: State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-Trait Scale. Significant p -values bolded. Associations with ER stopping For negative events, perceived success was positively associated with stopping, p = .017, OR = 2.12, 95% CI = [1.15, 3.94]. The OR indicated that when participants perceived their regulation as successful following a negative event, they were 2.12 times more likely of stopping ER than the occasions that they perceived the regulation as unsuccessful. Neither event intensity nor emotion intensity was significantly associated with stopping. These results did not change when BDI-II and STAI-T were added to the model, and neither variable was significantly associated with stopping. The covariates of gender and age did not significantly predict stopping. For positive events, the association between perceived success and ER stopping was significant, p = .036, OR = 4.65, 95% CI = [1.11, 19.56]. When individuals perceived their ER as successful in response to a positive event, they were 4.65 times more likely of stopping ER than the occasions that they perceived the regulation as unsuccessful. Neither event intensity nor emotion intensity was significantly associated with switching. In terms of psychopathology, depression was related to a higher probability of stopping, p = .027, OR = 1.07, 95% CI = [1.01, 1.13]. With every one-unit increase in depressive symptoms, the likelihood of stopping the ER process increased by 1.07. The positive association between anxiety symptoms and ER stopping was also significant, p = .025, OR = 1.05, 95% CI = [1.01, 1.09]. With every one-unit increase in the anxiety score, the likelihood of stopping ER increased by 1.05. Age as a covariate was not significantly associated with stopping, but men were less likely than women to stop the regulatory process, p = .043, OR = 0.25, 95% CI = [0.06, 0.96]. Thus, there were two key findings with regard to stopping the ER process. First, perceived success in ER was a significant predictor of regulation stopping, after both negative and positive events. Second, the individual factors of depressive symptoms and anxiety symptoms significantly predicted stopping the ER process after positive, but not negative, events. Results of the tests of the negative event model and the positive event model in predicting ER stopping are presented in Table 3 . Table 3 Associations between ER strategy stopping and event intensity, emotion intensity, perceived regulation success, depression symptoms, anxiety symptoms, age, and gender, following negative and positive events respectively ER strategy stopping following negative events ER strategy stopping following positive events Coefficient SE p Coefficient SE p Model 1 Model 1 Intercept 1.43 .17 <.001 Intercept 1.37 .25 <.001 Event intensity − .15 .15 .341 Event intensity .36 .23 .112 Emotion intensity − .20 .16 .210 Emotion intensity .19 .16 .225 Perceived regulation success .75 .32 .017 Perceived regulation success 1.54 .73 .036 Age − .03 .08 .696 Age − .02 .11 .872 Gender .21 .47 .656 Gender -1.41 .69 .043 Model 2 Model 2 Intercept 1.43 .17 <.001 Intercept 1.36 .24 <.001 Event intensity − .14 .15 .350 Event intensity .36 .23 .116 Emotion intensity − .20 .16 .217 Emotion intensity .20 .16 .221 Perceived regulation success .76 .32 .017 Perceived regulation success 1.52 .72 .036 BDI-II <.01 .02 .867 BDI-II .06 .03 .027 Age − .03 .08 .703 Age <-.01 .11 .972 Gender .21 .49 .661 Gender -1.18 .67 .079 Model 3 Model 3 Intercept 1.44 .17 <.001 Intercept 1.36 .25 <.001 Event intensity − .15 .15 .338 Event intensity .36 .23 .116 Emotion intensity − .20 .16 .207 Emotion intensity .19 .16 .224 Perceived regulation success .75 .32 .017 Perceived regulation success 1.52 .72 .036 STAI-T .01 .02 .392 STAI-T .05 .02 .025 Age − .03 .08 .746 Age <.01 .12 .942 Gender .23 .48 .624 Gender -1.35 .66 .041 Note. SE = standard error; BDI-II: Beck Depression Inventory-II; STAI-T: State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-Trait Scale. Significant p -values bolded. Discussion Drawing from the extended process model of ER (Gross, 2015b ), we investigated the influence of various situational and individual factors on the monitoring stage of the ER process. The results showed that greater emotion intensity, and in particular the intensity of NA, was associated with a higher likelihood of strategy switching. In addition, perceived success in regulating emotions was associated with a lower likelihood of strategy switching in response to positive events, and a higher likelihood of strategy stopping in response to both negative and positive events. Depressive and anxiety symptoms were associated with an increased probability of regulatory stopping in response to positive events exclusively. Event intensity, emotion intensity and ER monitoring Emotion intensity is a key contextual factor related to the first three stages of the ER process and in the current study more intense negative emotions were found to be related to a higher likelihood of strategy switching. As we measured ER retrospectively (since the last prompt) and NA at the current prompt, higher intense negative emotions could suggest less effective regulation. Our finding is consistent with a previous laboratory study which found that more intense negative emotions after initial regulation attempts predicted more frequent strategy switching (Murphy and Young, 2020 ). In another study (Birk and Bonanno, 2016 ), the greater the corrugator activity (an electrodermal indicator of psychological stress), the more likely individuals were to switch ER strategies. Therefore, experiencing high intense negative emotions after the initial regulatory effort, which may suggest a perceived failure or ineffectiveness of the previous ER strategy, may motivate the individual to continue engaging in the regulatory process and shift to a different strategy rather than terminate regulation altogether. In contrast to the result for emotion intensity, the association between event intensity and ER monitoring (either switching or stopping) was not significant. The results on event intensity and emotion intensity are consistent with findings showing that emotion intensity was a stronger predictor of ER strategy use than event intensity was (Kuo et al., 2018 ). Together, these results suggest that intense negative emotions after the initial regulatory effort can explain why there was strategy switching in the monitoring phase of the ER process, especially when experience negative events. Perceived regulation success and ER monitoring Perceived success in regulating emotions emerged as the strongest predictor of ER monitoring decisions. Specifically, when individuals perceived they had successfully regulated their emotions during positive events, they were less likely to switch strategy. Strategy switching typically occurs when participants recognize that their current strategy is inadequate for achieving the desired emotional state (Gross, 2015a ). Conversely, when a strategy is perceived as effective, individuals are more likely to persist with it. In a previous laboratory study (Dorman Ilan et al., 2019 ), participants were instructed to downregulate high- and low-intensity negative emotions using either reappraisal or distraction. The findings revealed that participants reported higher switching frequency when their initial strategy did not match the contextual demand. Moreover, participants reported greater perceived success when they switched to a strategy that did match the contextual demand. These results suggest a close relationship between perceived regulation success and strategy switching. However, it is important to note that while the aforementioned study was conducted in a controlled laboratory environment, our research focuses on real-life scenarios. This contextual difference may explain the discrepancy in results, as our study found no significant association between perceived regulation success and strategy switching during negative events. Conversely, perceived regulation success was associated with less strategy switching exclusively for positive events. In addition, perceived regulation success was associated with a higher probability of stopping, for both negative and positive events. This is consistent with the extended ER process model, which holds that strategy stopping occurs when one perceives their ER efforts as successful in achieving goals (Gross, 2015b ). More specifically, the model assumes that during the monitoring phase, individuals dynamically monitor the gap between the current emotional state and the target emotional state, and the ER process ends when they perceive that the desired emotional state has been achieved. The intensity of emotions after regulation or the change in emotion intensity from before to after regulation have been used as indicators of successful ER, but they are both indirect and inadequate because they do not consider how the individual evaluates the ER process (Springstein and English, 2024 ). Importantly, previous research has shown inconsistency between the effects of emotion intensity and perceived success in predicting phases of the ER process that occur earlier than monitoring, namely strategy selection and implementation (Rompilla et al., 2022 ; Troy et al., 2018 ). For example, Troy et al. ( 2018 ) demonstrated that while reappraisal was rated as more effective than acceptance in reducing NA and increasing PA, young adults often report greater perceived success when implementing acceptance instead of reappraisal. Similarly, Rompilla et al. ( 2022 ) found that older adults were most inclined to use acceptance and rated it as more successful than positive reappraisal or detachment, even though acceptance did not significantly alter their emotional experience. The current study extended this research by investigating how these situational factors (including, also, event intensity) simultaneously influence ER monitoring. These findings suggest that of the situational factors we examined, perceived regulation success represents the most proximal situational determinant of the final stage of the ER process. Depression, anxiety, and ER monitoring According to the Contrast Avoidance Model (Newman and Llera, 2011 ), individuals with depression and anxiety tend to avoid situations that elicit strong positive emotions due to their heightened sensitivity to emotional discrepancies. This may explain our findings that higher depressive or anxiety symptoms are associated with a greater likelihood of stopping the regulation when experiencing positive events. Individuals with higher depressive and anxiety symptoms, due to a lower preference for PA (Vanderlind et al., 2020 ), may be more likely to stop upregulating PA in response to positive events compared to individuals with lower depressive and anxiety symptoms. Similarly, patients with depression have been shown to be less likely to choose positive stimuli over negative stimuli (Millgram et al., 2015 ; Yoon et al., 2020 ) and to view positive stimuli for shorter durations (Kellough et al., 2008). Higher anxiety symptoms were found in one study to be significantly associated with higher motivation to downregulate PA rather than upregulate PA following positive events (Carl et al., 2014 ). Thus, individuals with higher depressive or anxiety symptoms may avoid the experience of high PA and have lower motivation to increase PA when experiencing positive events. This could explain why more severe depression and anxiety are associated with ER stopping. Another possibility is that the excessive strategy stopping related to depression and anxiety starts with problems in selecting and implementing contextually appropriate ER strategies. For example, depression and anxiety have been found to be related to the use of strategies that dampen PA rather than strategies that amplify PA (Abasi et al., 2023 ). Beblo et al. ( 2012 ) found that compared to healthy volunteers, patients with depression were morely like to use suppression strategies when experiencing positive emotions. Blalock et al. ( 2016 ) found that compared to healthy controls, patients with social anxiety disorder reported less use of reappraisal to increase positive feelings. Thus, difficulties in selecting and implementing effective and active strategies to upregulate PA may lead to the high rate of stopping during ER monitoring. Lastly, these results may be related to fixed beliefs about emotion associated with depression and anxiety. Individuals who believe emotions are malleable are more likely to exert effort to influence and change their emotions (Kneeland et al., 2016 ), and they usually report higher regulatory self-efficacy (Tamir et al., 2007 ). By contrast, individuals who believe that emotional states are stable and cannot be changed may prematurely stop ER attempts (Aldao et al., 2015 ). There is evidence that more severe depressive or anxiety symptoms are associated with stronger fixed beliefs about emotion (Daniel et al., 2020 ), which may lead to reduced effort in regulating emotions and a tendency to discontinue such efforts prematurely. However, the mediating role of emotion malleability belief in the association between psychopathology symptoms and ER monitoring needs to be empirically tested. Limitations This study has several limitations. First, we recruited a healthy sample with varying levels of depressive and anxiety symptoms, limiting the generalization of the findings to clinical samples that meet the relevant diagnostic criteria. Second, this study was correlational in nature, which means we cannot infer causal relationships between the situational and personal factors we studied and decisions made during ER monitoring phase. Third, we did not ask the participants why they decided to stop or continue regulating; it is possible that participants would not have insight about the choices they made, but it is worth pursuing the possibility that they do. Moreover, we found that some participants reported using more than one strategy following an event but also reported no switching, and we need to further explore the simultaneous and successive use of ER strategies. Lastly, this study measured perceived regulation success but did not test the relationships between specific ER goals and monitoring decisions. Previous research found that different goals may influence an individual's strategy selection, implementation decisions, and perceived regulation success. For example, pro-hedonic goals have been found to be positively associated with antecedent-focused strategies, such as reappraisal and distraction (Eldesouky and English, 2019 ), whereas social goals were positively associated with greater use of expressive suppression (Wilms et al., 2020 ). Thus, future research can further investigate the relationship between regulation goals and ER monitoring decisions. Conclusions The current study is the first to examine the factors influencing strategy switching and stopping in the ER monitoring process in the context of daily life. The results indicated that among the situational factors we studied, perceived regulation success was the most relevant, as it influenced strategy switching and stopping in response to both negative and positive events. Higher depressive and anxiety symptoms were related to a higher likelihood of regulation stopping when responding to positive events. These findings provide new insight into the distinctive roles of situational and personal factors in the final stage of the ER process. Interventions aimed at reducing excessive ER efforts related to positive events and their underlying causes may benefit individuals suffering from depression or anxiety. Declarations Funding statement This work has been supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31700957), the MOE (Ministry of Education in China) Project of Humanities and Social Sciences (17YJC190014), the Key Laboratory of Adolescent Cyberpsychology and Behavior Central China Normal University (CCNU), Ministry of Education (2019B06), and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of Central China Normal University (CCNU24ZZ044). Author Contribution X-h.L., Y-t.Y.,and X.L. drafted the main text of the manuscript and prepared Tables 1-3. M.P., M. H., T.V., and I.M. critically revised the manuscript. All authors contributed to writing and editing of the manuscript and approved its final version. Data Availability The datasets generated during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. References Abasi, I., Shams, G., Pascual-Vera, B., Milosevic, I., Bitarafan, M., Ghanadanzadeh, S., & Talebi Moghaddam, M. (2023). Positive emotion regulation strategies as mediators in depression and generalized anxiety disorder symptoms: A transdiagnostic framework investigation. Curr Psychol , 42 , 800–807. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01392-5 Aldao, A., Sheppes, G., & Gross, J. J. (2015). Emotion regulation flexibility. Cogn Ther Res , 39 , 263–278. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-014-9662-4 Barrett, L. F., Gross, J., Christensen, T. C., & Benvenuto, M. (2001). Knowing what you’re feeling and knowing what to do about it: Mapping the relation between emotion differentiation and emotion regulation. Cognition & Emotion , 15 , 713–724. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930143000239 Bartolomeo, L. A., Raugh, I. M., & Strauss, G. P. (2022). Deconstructing emotion regulation in schizophrenia: The nature and consequences of abnormalities in monitoring dynamics. Schizophrenia Research , 240 , 135–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2021.12.043 Beblo, T., Fernando, S., Klocke, S., Griepenstroh, J., Aschenbrenner, S., & Driessen, M. (2012). Increased suppression of negative and positive emotions in major depression. Journal of Affective Disorders , 141 , 474–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2012.03.019 Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., Ball, R., & Ranieri, W. F. (1996). Comparison of Beck Depression Inventories-IA and-II in psychiatric outpatients. Journal of Personality Assessment , 67 , 588–597. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa6703_13 Birk, J. L., & Bonanno, G. A. (2016). When to throw the switch: The adaptiveness of modifying emotion regulation strategies based on affective and physiological feedback. Emotion , 16 , 657–670. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000157 Blalock, D. V., Kashdan, T. B., & Farmer, A. S. (2016). Trait and daily emotion regulation in social anxiety disorder. Cogn Ther Res , 40 , 416–425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-015-9739-8 Blanke, E. S., Bellingtier, J. A., Riediger, M., & Brose, A. (2021). When and how to regulate: Everyday emotion-regulation strategy use and stressor intensity. Affec Sci , 3 , 81–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42761-021-00087-1 Brans, K., Koval, P., Verduyn, P., Lim, Y. L., & Kuppens, P. (2013). The regulation of negative and positive affect in daily life. Emotion , 13 , 926–939. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032400 Carl, J. R., Fairholme, C. P., Gallagher, M. W., Thompson-Hollands, J., & Barlow, D. H. (2014). The Effects of Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms on Daily Positive Emotion Regulation. Journal Of Psychopathological And Behavioral Assessment , 36 , 224–236. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-013-9387-9 Daniel, K. E., Goodman, F. R., Beltzer, M. L., Daros, A. R., Boukhechba, M., Barnes, L. E., & Teachman, B. A. (2020). Emotion malleability beliefs and emotion experience and regulation in the daily lives of people with high trait social anxiety. Cogn Ther Res , 44 , 1186–1198. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-020-10139-8 Daniel, K. E., Southward, M. W., & Teachman, B. A. (2024). Investigating psychiatric symptoms as predictors of the reasons people do not regulate their emotions in daily life. Emotion , 24 , 241–254. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001260 Decker, M. L., Turk, C. L., Hess, B., & Murray, C. E. (2008). Emotion regulation among individuals classified with and without generalized anxiety disorder. Journal of Anxiety Disorders , 22 , 485–494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2007.04.002 Dixon-Gordon, K. L., Aldao, A., & De Los Reyes, A. (2015). Emotion regulation in context: Examining the spontaneous use of strategies across emotional intensity and type of emotion. Personality and Individual Differences , 86 , 271–276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.06.011 Dorman Ilan, S., Shafir, R., Birk, J. L., Bonanno, G. A., & Sheppes, G. (2019). Monitoring in emotion regulation: behavioral decisions and neural consequences. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience , 14 , 1273–1283. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsaa001 Eldesouky, L., & English, T. (2019). Individual differences in emotion regulation goals: Does personality predict the reasons why people regulate their emotions? Journal of Personality , 87 , 750–766. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12430 English, T., Lee, I. A., John, O. P., & Gross, J. J. (2017). Emotion regulation strategy selection in daily life: The role of social context and goals. Motiv Emot , 41 , 230–242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-016-9597-z Gross, J. J. (2015a). Emotion regulation: Current status and future prospects. Psychological Inquiry , 26 , 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2014.940781 Gross, J. J. (2015b). The extended process model of emotion regulation: Elaborations, applications, and future directions. Psychological Inquiry , 26 , 130–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2015.989751 Gross, J. J. (1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of General Psychology , 2 , 271–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.271 Gross, J. J., & Jazaieri, H. (2014). Emotion, emotion regulation, and psychopathology: An affective science perspective. Clinical Psychological Science , 2 , 387–401. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167702614536164 Hay, A. C., Sheppes, G., Gross, J. J., & Gruber, J. (2015). Choosing how to feel: Emotion regulation choice in bipolar disorder. Emotion , 15 , 139–145. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000024 Hiekkaranta, A. P., Kirtley, O. J., Lafit, G., Decoster, J., Derom, C., De Hert, M., Gülöksüz, S., Jacobs, N., Menne-Lothmann, C., Rutten, B. P. F., Thiery, E., Van Os, J., Van Winkel, R., Wichers, M., & Myin-Germeys, I. (2021). Emotion regulation in response to daily negative and positive events in youth: The role of event intensity and psychopathology. Behaviour Research and Therapy , 144 , 103916. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2021.103916 Kneeland, E. T., Dovidio, J. F., Joormann, J., & Clark, M. S. (2016). Emotion malleability beliefs, emotion regulation, and psychopathology: Integrating affective and clinical science. Clinical Psychology Review , 45 , 81–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2016.03.008 Kuo, J. R., Fitzpatrick, S., Krantz, L. H., & Zeifman, R. J. (2018). How do you choose and how well does it work? the selection and effectiveness of emotion regulation strategies and their relationship with borderline personality disorder feature severity. Cognition and Emotion , 32 , 632–640. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2017.1330254 Lennarz, H. K., Hollenstein, T., Lichtwarck-Aschoff, A., Kuntsche, E., & Granic, I. (2019). Emotion regulation in action: Use, selection, and success of emotion regulation in adolescents’ daily lives. International Journal of Behavioral Development , 43 , 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025418755540 Li, W., & Qian, M. (1995). Revision of the norm of state trait anxiety scale in Chinese college students. Acta Sci Nat Univ Pekin , 31 (1), 108–112. https://doi.org/10.13209/j.0479-8023.1995.014 Li, X., Zhang, Y., Li, X., Wang, Y., Peng, M., & Myin-Germeys, I. (2024). Abnormalities in emotion regulation are associated with negative, but not positive or disorganized schizotypy: An experience sampling study. Schizophrenia Research . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2024.06.018 Lincoln, T. M., Schulze, L., & Renneberg, B. (2022). The role of emotion regulation in the characterization, development and treatment of psychopathology. Nat Rev Psychol , 1 , 272–286. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-022-00040-4 Liu, D. Y., & Thompson, R. J. (2017). Selection and implementation of emotion regulation strategies in major depressive disorder: An integrative review. Clinical Psychology Review , 57 , 183–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2017.07.004 Mathews, B. L., Kerns, K. A., & Ciesla, J. A. (2014). Specificity of emotion regulation difficulties related to anxiety in early adolescence. Journal of Adolescence , 37 , 1089–1097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2014.08.002 Millgram, Y., Huppert, J. D., & Tamir, M. (2020). Emotion goals in psychopathology: A new perspective on dysfunctional emotion regulation. Current Directions In Psychological Science , 29 , 242–247. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721420917713 Millgram, Y., Joormann, J., Huppert, J. D., & Tamir, M. (2015). Sad as a matter of choice? Emotion-regulation goals in depression. Psychological Science , 26 , 1216–1228. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615583295 Murphy, J. W., & Young, M. A. (2020). Monitoring processes in extended emotion regulation. Cognition and Emotion , 34 , 1059–1067. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2020.1722614 Myin-Germeys, I., Kasanova, Z., Vaessen, T., Vachon, H., Kirtley, O., Viechtbauer, W., & Reininghaus, U. (2018). Experience sampling methodology in mental health research: new insights and technical developments. World Psychiatry , 17 , 123–132. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20513 Myin-Germeys, I., Van Os, J., Schwartz, J. E., Stone, A. A., & Delespaul, P. A. (2001). Emotional reactivity to daily life stress in psychosis. Archives Of General Psychiatry , 58 , 1137. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.58.12.1137 Newman, M. G., & Llera, S. J. (2011). A novel theory of experiential avoidance in generalized anxiety disorder: A review and synthesis of research supporting a contrast avoidance model of worry. Clinical Psychology Review , 31 , 371–382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2011.01.008 Ortner, C. N. M., Chadwick, L., & Pennekamp, P. (2022). Do motives matter? Short- and long-term motives as predictors of emotion regulation in everyday life. Emotion , 22 , 1625–1638. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000989 Rompilla, D. B., Hittner, E. F., Stephens, J. E., Mauss, I., & Haase, C. M. (2022). Emotion regulation in the face of loss: How detachment, positive reappraisal, and acceptance shape experiences, physiology, and perceptions in late life. Emotion , 22 , 1417–1434. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000932 Shafir, R., Thiruchselvam, R., Suri, G., Gross, J. J., & Sheppes, G. (2016). Neural processing of emotional-intensity predicts emotion regulation choice. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience , 11 , 1863–1871. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsw114 Sheppes, G., Scheibe, S., Suri, G., & Gross, J. J. (2011). Emotion-regulation choice. Psychological Science , 22 , 1391–1396. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611418350 Sheppes, G., Suri, G., & Gross, J. J. (2015). Emotion regulation and psychopathology. Annu Rev Clin Psychol , 11 , 379–405. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032814-112739 Spielberger, C. D. (1983). Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory: STAI (Form Y) . Consulting Psychologists, Palo Alto. Springstein, T., & English, T. (2024). Distinguishing emotion regulation success in daily life from maladaptive regulation and dysregulation. Pers Soc Psychol Rev , 28 , 209–224. https://doi.org/10.1177/10888683231199140 Tamir, M., John, O. P., Srivastava, S., & Gross, J. J. (2007). Implicit theories of emotion: Affective and social outcomes across a major life transition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 92 , 731–744. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.4.731 Tng, G. Y. Q., & Yang, H. (2023). Social anxiety and emotion regulation flexibility: a daily diary approach. Cognition and Emotion , 38 , 199–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2023.2279176 Toh, W. X., & Yang, H. (2024). To switch or not to switch? Individual differences in executive function and emotion regulation flexibility. Emotion , 24 , 52–66. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001250 Troy, A. S., Shallcross, A. J., Brunner, A., Friedman, R., & Jones, M. C. (2018). Cognitive reappraisal and acceptance: Effects on emotion, physiology, and perceived cognitive costs. Emotion , 18 , 58–74. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000371 Vanderlind, W. M., Millgram, Y., Baskin-Sommers, A. R., Clark, M. S., & Joormann, J. (2020). Understanding positive emotion deficits in depression: From emotion preferences to emotion regulation. Clinical Psychology Review , 76 , 101826. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2020.101826 Wilms, R., Lanwehr, R., & Kastenmüller, A. (2020). Emotion Regulation in Everyday Life: The Role of Goals and Situational Factors. Frontiers In Psychology , 11 , 877. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00877 Yang, W. H., Wu, D. J., & Peng, F. (2012). Application of Chinese Version of Beck Depression Inventory-II to Chinese first-year college students. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology , 20 (6), 762–764. Yoon, S., Verona, E., Schlauch, R., Schneider, S., & Rottenberg, J. (2020). Why do depressed people prefer sad music? Emotion , 20 , 613–624. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000573 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Published Journal Publication published 25 Nov, 2024 Read the published version in Cognitive Therapy and Research → Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 03 Oct, 2024 Reviews received at journal 06 Sep, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 28 Aug, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 28 Aug, 2024 Reviewers invited by journal 26 Aug, 2024 Editor assigned by journal 25 Aug, 2024 Submission checks completed at journal 25 Aug, 2024 First submitted to journal 23 Aug, 2024 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-4962739","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":350487561,"identity":"8082c77b-cffd-49a3-947a-88ed961ab42c","order_by":0,"name":"Xu-hua Li","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Key Laboratory of Adolescent Cyberpsychology and Behavior (CCNU), Ministry of Education","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Xu-hua","middleName":"","lastName":"Li","suffix":""},{"id":350487562,"identity":"3de48364-e74b-4d50-87ef-a4bc99bd5627","order_by":1,"name":"Yu-ting Zhang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Key Laboratory of Adolescent Cyberpsychology and Behavior (CCNU), Ministry of Education","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Yu-ting","middleName":"","lastName":"Zhang","suffix":""},{"id":350487563,"identity":"fe78bec3-36e9-4ad1-9ff7-cf0cee02d76b","order_by":2,"name":"Xu Li","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Key Laboratory of Adolescent Cyberpsychology and Behavior (CCNU), Ministry of Education","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Xu","middleName":"","lastName":"Li","suffix":""},{"id":350487564,"identity":"dd254a77-ede6-4734-9bbd-cfe9bd8abd14","order_by":3,"name":"Ming Peng","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Key Laboratory of Adolescent Cyberpsychology and Behavior (CCNU), Ministry of Education","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ming","middleName":"","lastName":"Peng","suffix":""},{"id":350487565,"identity":"7403a48c-8331-4470-945a-ae7dc4aa7254","order_by":4,"name":"Marlies Houben","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Center for Contextual Psychiatry, Psychiatry Research Group, Department of Neurosciences,KU Leuven","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Marlies","middleName":"","lastName":"Houben","suffix":""},{"id":350487566,"identity":"68ab5584-4ffb-4fab-8df0-7b0ce4ab9782","order_by":5,"name":"Thomas Vaessen","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Center for Contextual Psychiatry, Psychiatry Research Group, Department of Neurosciences,KU Leuven","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Thomas","middleName":"","lastName":"Vaessen","suffix":""},{"id":350487567,"identity":"80a86408-16a4-4e0d-a7c5-f91fe824be51","order_by":6,"name":"Inez Myin-Germeys","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Center for Contextual Psychiatry, Psychiatry Research Group, Department of Neurosciences,KU Leuven","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Inez","middleName":"","lastName":"Myin-Germeys","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-08-23 08:36:16","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4962739/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4962739/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[{"content":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-024-10547-0","type":"published","date":"2024-11-25T15:58:09+00:00"}],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":70388960,"identity":"f848cce3-649b-40e1-8ef3-78456656347c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-12-02 17:27:54","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1121231,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4962739/v1/d0724745-cb61-4503-baa5-77e1a7276f9f.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Emotion regulation monitoring in daily life: The roles of event intensity, emotion intensity, perceived regulation success and psychopathology","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eEmotion Regulation (ER) refers to the process by which individuals attempt to influence their subjective emotional experiences, physiological states, and behavioral expressions by using various strategies, to adapt to a constantly changing environment (Gross, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1998\u003c/span\u003e). The extended process model of ER (Gross, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015a\u003c/span\u003e) originally proposed that ER occurs in three stages. The person experiences an emotion and determines whether to regulate it or not (identification); evaluates available strategies and chooses the most appropriate one (selection); and applies the chosen strategy (implementation). However, because the ER process is shaped by situational and individual factors and is therefore dynamic, Gross (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015b\u003c/span\u003e) introduced a fourth stage (monitoring). In the monitoring stage, the person evaluates whether regulation is still needed, based on their current emotional state. If regulation is needed, the person then decides whether to keep using the strategy they have been using or to switch to a different strategy. On the other hand, if regulation is no longer needed, the person might stop the regulation process. Therefore, the monitoring phase operates at a higher level than the other three processes (Bartolomeo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearchers have examined several situational and individual factors that influence the identification, selection, and implementation stages of the ER process. Situational factors are proximal and would influence the ER process from moment to moment. Examples include intensity of the emotional event, emotion intensity, and perceived success in regulating the emotion. For example, the ER process has been shown to be influenced by the intensity and valence of the emotion being regulated (Blanke et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Dixon-Gordon et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Individual factors, such as depressive and anxiety symptoms, are more distal but can also influence one's preferences for particular ER strategies. For example, inflexibility in the use of ER strategies has been associated with the development and maintenance of depressive and anxiety disorders (For a review, see Lincoln et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). In the current study we examined which and how different situational and individual factors influence the monitoring phase of the ER process in everyday life contexts.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec2\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eSituational factors: event intensity, emotion intensity, and perceived regulation success\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eEvent intensity\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe intensity of emotional events or stimuli has been identified as an important influence on ER processes (for a review, see Sheppes et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). During the identification process, there appears to be a greater need for regulation for events with high intensity than those with low intensity (Barrett et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e). During the selection process, individuals are more likely to use distraction as the ER strategy after more intense negative events, but more likely to use reappraisal after less intense negative events (Shafir et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Sheppes et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). Studies using experience sampling have shown that during the implementation process, more intense events were associated with the use of more strategies (Hiekkaranta et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Lennarz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Event intensity may also impact people\u0026rsquo;s effort in using these ER strategies during ER implementation, with higher effort exerted in response to more intense events (Blanke et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Shafir et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). Notably, there has been no research on the effect of event intensity on the monitoring phase of the ER process.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOnly two studies have assessed the effect of event intensity on the ER process when the event was positive. Hiekkaranta et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) used experience sampling to examine people\u0026rsquo;s ER strategies after positive events. They found that the intensity of the positive event was associated with the implementation of savoring, emotional expression, and sharing as ER strategies. In a laboratory experiment, Hay et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e) asked participants to choose whether to use distraction or reappraisal when viewing emotional images of different valence (negative vs. positive) and intensity (high vs. low). Participants were more likely to choose distraction in response to high-intensity negative images than in response to high-intensity positive images. However, the choice of ER strategy did not differ for negative and positive low-intensity emotional images conditions, suggesting that both the valence and intensity of the emotional stimuli influenced the ER decision.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eEmotion intensity\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmotion intensity\u0026mdash;the subjective evaluation of the intensity of experienced emotions following an emotional event\u0026mdash;is partially independent of event intensity, with only small to moderate correlations between them (Blanke et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Emotion intensity influences the choice of particular strategies and the effort involved in implementing these strategies (Dixon-Gordon et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e), with more intense emotions requiring greater effort to invest. In addition, intense emotions following regulation may indicate inadequate regulation and the need for further effort, and have therefore been found to be related to ER monitoring choices (Birk and Bonanno, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Dorman Ilan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Murphy and Young, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). For example, Birk and Bonanno (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) found in an experiment that the more intense the negative emotions were after an initial regulation attempt, the more often participants chose to switch to a different strategy rather than maintain the current one. The effect of emotion intensity on ER strategy choice during monitoring has not yet been studied in research outside the laboratory.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003ePerceived success in regulating emotions\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived success in regulating emotions refers to individuals\u0026rsquo; subjective evaluation of whether they achieved their specific ER goals. This construct is closely associated with the ER process, as it reflects the outcome of the implemented ER strategies (for a review, see Springstein \u0026amp; English, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Previous research has linked perceived regulation success to the different strategies used during the implementation stage of the ER process. For instance, studies involving either young or older adults found that individuals reported higher perceived success when using acceptance as an ER strategy compared to reappraisal (Rompilla et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Troy et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe perception of success in achieving ER goals after initial ER efforts has also been shown to predict decisions made during the monitoring process (Springstein and English, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Specifically, individuals are more likely to stop the regulation process when they perceive success in their regulatory efforts, while they may be more inclined to continue using the same strategy or change to a different one if they perceive their efforts as unsuccessful (Murphy and Young, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eIndividual factors: psychopathology\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAberrant ER functions have long been linked with emotional disorders (for reviews, see Gross \u0026amp; Jazaieri, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Sheppes et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e), such as depression (Liu and Thompson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e) and anxiety (Decker et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e; Mathews et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). For instance, higher symptoms of depression and social anxiety have been shown to be associated with fewer ER attempts, greater difficulties in selecting appropriate strategies, and lower regulation motivation (Daniel et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Millgram et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). In addition, the habitual use of maladaptive strategies, such as rumination and suppression, along with difficulties in employing adaptive strategies, may further contribute to the maintenance and worsening of depressive and anxiety symptoms (Lincoln et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Similarly, associations between the rigid and inflexible use of ER strategies and depressive and anxiety symptoms have been reported (Hiekkaranta et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Tng and Yang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese studies on the relationship between psychopathology and ER focused on difficulties in the identification, selection, and implementation stages of the ER process. Only one study has examined the role of psychopathology symptoms in the monitoring stage of the ER process. Using an ER choice task in the laboratory, Toh and Yang (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) found that while more intense negative stimuli were associated with a higher frequency of switching from reappraisal to distraction, the associations between depressive symptoms and strategy switching frequency were not significant. It remains unclear whether and how depressive and anxiety symptoms impact the ER monitoring process in the context of daily life.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eThe present study\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe current study used the experience sampling method (ESM) to examine situational and individual factors associated with ER strategy decisions during the monitoring process. ESM is a longitudinal approach that employs repeated sampling over relatively short intervals to assess behavior, thoughts, and feelings as they occurred, thereby reducing recall bias (Myin-Germeys et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Frequent sampling should capture dynamic change during the ER monitoring phase, when individuals can stop using or adjust their strategies. Because the participants provide data during their typical activities throughout the day, we can gain insights into the dynamic ER process in everyday life. Based on the extended process model of ER and extant research, we expected that the situational factors of event intensity and emotion intensity would be correlated with more strategy switching and less ER stopping, while the situational factor of perceived success in regulating emotions would be correlated with less strategy switching and more stopping. Based on extant evidence of the associations between depressive and anxiety symptoms and ER strategy selection and implementation stages, we expected that the individual factors of depressive and anxiety symptoms would be associated with more strategy switching and stopping during the monitoring phase.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e "},{"header":"Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eParticipants\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe sample size was determined based on similar ESM studies on strategy selection and ER motives (English et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Ortner et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). One hundred and sixty-nine young adults were recruited by advertising on social media. However, seven participants did not respond to any of the ESM prompts to provide data, and seven participants responded to less than 30% of the prompts(Hiekkaranta et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e); these 14 participants were excluded from the study. The final sample constituted 155 participants (136 women; \u003cem\u003emean age\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;20.07, \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.24, range 17 to 31 years). The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the ethics review board of the Central China Normal University. Written informed content was obtained from all participants. Upon completion of the study, participants were compensated financially for their time and effort.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eProcedure and measures\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study was carried out between November and December in 2022. Participants were invited to visit the laboratory to complete baseline questionnaires, receive information about the ESM procedure, and complete practice ESM questionnaires. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, 32 of the 155 participants were unable to visit the laboratory. These participants completed an online version of the baseline questionnaires, participated in a briefing session by phone, and subsequently filled out the practice ESM questionnaires.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe ESM period lasted seven consequent days. Participants were semi-randomly prompted by a beep five times each day, from 10 a.m. to 10 p.m., with an interval of at least 90 minutes between two consecutive prompts. After receiving the weblink on their smartphone, participants were asked to complete the ESM questionnaires as soon as possible told the link would expire in 30 minutes. Participants were encouraged to respond to as many of the 35 total prompts as possible, and they were reimbursed 15\u0026ndash;25 RMB depending on their compliance with the ESM protocol.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eBaseline measures\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eSymptoms of depression\u003c/b\u003e Depressive symptoms were assessed using the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II; Beck et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1996\u003c/span\u003e). The BDI-II consists of 21 items. Each item has four response options that are scored from 0 to 3. Participants select the option that best describes their feelings. For instance: \"I do not feel sad\" (0); \"I feel sad much of the time\" (1); \"I feel sad all the time\" (2); \"I am so sad or unhappy that I can't stand it\" (3). Higher total scores indicate more severe depressive symptoms. The Chinese version of the BDI-II demonstrated good reliability and validity in a sample of college students (Yang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). In this study, the Cronbach's alpha of BDI-II was .90.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eSymptoms of anxiety\u003c/b\u003e Anxiety symptoms were measured using the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-Trait Scale (STAI-T; Li \u0026amp; Qian, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1995\u003c/span\u003e; Spielberger, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1983\u003c/span\u003e). The STAI-T has 20 items, and each item is rated on a 4-point Likert scale from 1 (not at all) to 4 (very much). Higher scores indicate more severe anxiety symptoms. In this study, the Cronbach's alpha of STAI-T was .90.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eESM assessment\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eEvent intensity\u003c/b\u003e The measure of event intensity was based on participants\u0026rsquo; rating of how pleasant the event was (see Myin-Germeys et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e). Participants were first asked to briefly describe the most important event that occurred since the last prompt, and then to rate its pleasantness from \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;3 (very unpleasant) to 3 (very pleasant). Based on the pleasantness ratings, events were categorized as negative (rating\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0), neutral (rating 0), or positive (rating\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0), so that a lower pleasantness rating for negative events indicated a more intense negative event, while a higher pleasantness rating for positive events indicated a more intense positive event.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eEmotion intensity\u003c/b\u003e Participants were asked \"How do you feel right now?\" to assess the intensity of their current emotional experience. Four items measured positive affect (PA; \"happy,\" \"relaxed,\" \"enthusiastic,\" and \"excited\") and five items measured negative affect (NA; \"anxious,\" \"sad,\" \"angry,\" \"stressed,\" and \"scared\"). Each item was rated from 1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely). At each prompt, the mean rating on the four PA items was calculated as the indicator of PA intensity, and the mean rating of the five NA items was calculated as the indicator of NA intensity. Internal consistency coefficients for PA items were: within-person \u003cem\u003eα\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.77, \u003cem\u003eω\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.80; between-person \u003cem\u003eα\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.91, \u003cem\u003eω\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.92; for NA items were: within-person \u003cem\u003eα\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.78, \u003cem\u003eω\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.79; between-person \u003cem\u003eα\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.94, \u003cem\u003eω\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.94.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eDecisions about ER\u003c/b\u003e The choice to attempt ER, the type of strategy chosen, and the decision to stop regulation or switch to a new strategy were assessed by the following ESM questionnaire items.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eER Identification\u003c/b\u003e \"During the event, did you attempt to increase or decrease your emotions?\" This item was scored as 0/1 (0\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;No; 1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Yes).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eER strategy use\u003c/b\u003e ER strategies were assessed using eight items (Hiekkaranta et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Li et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e): \"I avoided the situation where the event occurred\" (Avoidance), \"I tried to change the situation\" (Situation modification), \"I thought of other ways to interpret the situation\" (Reappraisal), \"I engaged in activities to distract myself\" (Distraction), \"I have thought about it a lot\" (Rumination), \"I accepted that it happened\" (Acceptance), \"I tried not to show my emotions on the outside\" (Expressive suppression), and \"I talked about it with somebody\" (Social sharing). Each item was rated from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Internal consistency coefficients for these ER items were: within-person \u003cem\u003eα\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.57, \u003cem\u003eω\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.62; between-person \u003cem\u003eα\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.84, \u003cem\u003eω\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.87.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eER strategy switching\u003c/b\u003e \"Did you switch strategies because the initial one was not working?\" This item was scored as 0/1 (0\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;No; 1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Yes).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eER strategy stopping\u003c/b\u003e \" Are you still trying to change your emotions?\" This item was scored as 0/1 (0\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;No; 1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Yes).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003ePerceived ER success\u003c/b\u003e \"I was able to regulate my emotions successfully.\" This item was scored as 0/1 (0\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;No; 1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Yes).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eData analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eData was prepared and analyzed in IBM SPSS Version 23 for Windows, and Mplus Version 7.4. Multilevel modeling was used to account for the multilevel nature of the data. Specifically, multilevel generalized linear mixed models (GLMM) were used because the outcome variables (i.e., ER switching and ER stopping) were binary. Only questionnaires in which a need for ER was identified\u0026mdash;specifically, those with a score of 1 on the ER identification item\u0026mdash;were included in the final analyses, as these questionnaires contained participants' responses regarding strategy switching, cessation, and success.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe situational factors of event intensity, emotion intensity and perceived regulation success, and the outcome measures of switching or stopping were level-1 variables. The individual factors of BDI-II and STAI-T scores, age, and gender were level-2 variables. First, four GLMMs were developed to assess the associations between the three situational factors and strategy switching and stopping respectively, with separate models for negative and positive events. Depressive and anxiety symptoms as individual factors were then added separately to the models to test their association with strategy switching and stopping. Age and gender (women\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0, men\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1) were entered into all the models as covariates. To control for possible between-person confounding, the level-1 continuous variables (i.e., event intensity and emotion intensity) were person-mean centered. The level 2 continuous variables (i.e., the BDI-II score, the STAI-T score and age) were grand mean centered (Brans et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eTransparency and Openness\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe full list of the ESM questionnaires is available at open science framework (\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://osf.io/dqt9c/?view_only=cd98fbc03f3b46bc92205a9ac782a94c\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://osf.io/dqt9c/?view_only=cd98fbc03f3b46bc92205a9ac782a94c\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e). We report how we determined our sample size, all inclusion and exclusion criteria, and all measures used in the study.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eDescriptive statistics\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eOver the ESM period, the participants as a group responded to 75.4% of the 35 prompts, with a mean of 26.38 (\u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;6.03). There were 4,089 valid ESM observations in total. In 43.1% of the prompts, the participant reported they had attempted to regulate emotions after an event; of this subset, 38% of the events were identified as positive, 47% were negative, and the rest were neutral. Again in this subset (43.1%) of prompts, 65.2% were cases in which the participant decided to continue regulation but to switch their ER strategy, and 75.3% were cases in which participants decided to stop regulation. Descriptive statistics and the within- and between-person correlations are shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescriptive statistics: Between-person means (M), within-person (SDw) and between-person (SDb) standard deviations, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and between-person and within-person correlations\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"16\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c10\" colnum=\"10\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c11\" colnum=\"11\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c12\" colnum=\"12\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c13\" colnum=\"13\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c14\" colnum=\"14\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c15\" colnum=\"15\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c16\" colnum=\"16\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003ew\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eb\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eICC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c16\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1 .PA\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.44\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.73\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.61\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.38\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.23\u003c/b\u003e**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.25\u003c/b\u003e**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.25\u003c/b\u003e**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.21\u003c/b\u003e**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.38\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c16\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.24\u003c/b\u003e**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2. NA\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.76\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.55\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.57\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.47\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.43\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.29\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.18\u003c/b\u003e*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.20\u003c/b\u003e*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.18\u003c/b\u003e*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.28\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c16\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3. Avoidance\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.35\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.89\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.20\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.19\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.46\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.50\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.60\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.54\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.32\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c16\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.27\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4. Situation Modification\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.86\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.48\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.06\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.09\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.26\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.83\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.82\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.63\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.19\u003c/b\u003e*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c16\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.47\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5. Reappraisal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.42\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.09\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.12\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.28\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.49\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.79\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.67\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.30\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.16\u003c/b\u003e*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c16\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.44\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6. Distraction\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.78\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.45\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.09\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.12\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.32\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.36\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.40\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.63\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.09\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.18\u003c/b\u003e*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c16\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.45\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7. Rumination\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.46\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.06\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.12\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.20\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.23\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.26\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.26\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c16\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.46\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8. Acceptance\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.25\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.25\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.18\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.10\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.06\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c16\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.22\u003c/b\u003e**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9. Suppression\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.79\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.49\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.13\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.04\u003c/b\u003e**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.15\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.14\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.19\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.15\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.05\u003c/b\u003e**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c16\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.41\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10. Social sharing\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.06\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.55\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.13\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.07\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.16\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.12\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.15\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.23\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.07\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.3\u003cb\u003e4\u003c/b\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c16\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"16\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote\u003c/em\u003e. * \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05; ** \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.01; ***\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001. PA: positive emotions; NA: negative emotions. Between-person correlations are shown above the diagonal; average within-person correlations are below the diagonal.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eAssociations with ER switching\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor negative events, there was a significant positive association between emotion intensity and ER switching, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.028, \u003cem\u003eOR\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.38, 95% CI = [1.04, 1.84]. With every one-unit increase in emotion intensity, the probability for an individual to switch strategy increased by 1.38. Neither event intensity nor perceived success was significantly associated with ER switching. The above results did not change when the BDI-II score was entered by itself or when the STAI-T score was entered by itself, and neither variable was significantly associated with switching. The covariates (age or gender) were not significantly associated with switching.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor positive events, there was a significant negative association between perceived success and ER switching, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.019, \u003cem\u003eOR\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.29, 95% CI = [0.10, 0.82]. This result indicates that following events in which individuals perceived their ER regulation to be successful, they were 0.29 times less likely to switch strategies than following events in which they perceived their regulations to be unsuccessful. Neither event intensity nor emotion intensity was significantly associated with switching. The above results did not change when the BDI-II and STAI-T scores were added to the model, and these variables were not significantly related to switching. The covariates (age or gender) were not significantly associated with switching.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThus, there was a key difference between the results for switching after negative and positive events. After negative events, participants with higher emotion intensity were more likely to switch ER strategies; after positive events, participants with higher perceived success were less likely to switch ER strategies. Results of tests of the negative event model and the positive event model in predicting switching are presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAssociations between ER strategy switching and event intensity, emotion intensity, perceived regulation success, depression symptoms, anxiety symptoms, age, and gender, following negative and positive events respectively\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"9\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eER strategy switching following negative events\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eER strategy switching following positive events\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCoefficient\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSE\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCoefficient\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSE\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eModel 1\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eModel 1\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntercept\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.82\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026lt;.001\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntercept\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.59\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.003\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvent intensity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.204\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvent intensity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.295\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmotion intensity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.32\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.028\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmotion intensity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.107\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived regulation success\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.31\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.237\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived regulation success\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.53\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.019\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.070\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.995\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.57\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.711\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.303\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eModel 2\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eModel 2\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntercept\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.82\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026lt;.001\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntercept\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.58\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.003\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvent intensity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.202\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvent intensity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.295\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmotion intensity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.32\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.027\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmotion intensity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.107\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived regulation success\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.31\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.237\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived regulation success\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.53\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.019\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBDI-II\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;-.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.817\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBDI-II\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.639\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.072\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;-.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.994\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.58\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.690\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.65\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.324\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eModel 3\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eModel 3\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntercept\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.82\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026lt;.001\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntercept\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.59\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.003\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvent intensity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.203\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvent intensity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.295\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmotion intensity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.32\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.028\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmotion intensity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.107\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived regulation success\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.31\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.238\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived regulation success\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.53\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.019\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSTAI-T\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;-.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.974\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSTAI-T\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.936\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.070\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.990\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.57\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.707\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.301\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"9\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote. SE\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;standard error; BDI-II: Beck Depression Inventory-II; STAI-T: State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-Trait Scale. Significant \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e-values bolded.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eAssociations with ER stopping\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor negative events, perceived success was positively associated with stopping, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.017, \u003cem\u003eOR\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.12, 95% CI = [1.15, 3.94]. The \u003cem\u003eOR\u003c/em\u003e indicated that when participants perceived their regulation as successful following a negative event, they were 2.12 times more likely of stopping ER than the occasions that they perceived the regulation as unsuccessful. Neither event intensity nor emotion intensity was significantly associated with stopping. These results did not change when BDI-II and STAI-T were added to the model, and neither variable was significantly associated with stopping. The covariates of gender and age did not significantly predict stopping.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor positive events, the association between perceived success and ER stopping was significant, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.036, \u003cem\u003eOR\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.65, 95% CI = [1.11, 19.56]. When individuals perceived their ER as successful in response to a positive event, they were 4.65 times more likely of stopping ER than the occasions that they perceived the regulation as unsuccessful. Neither event intensity nor emotion intensity was significantly associated with switching. In terms of psychopathology, depression was related to a higher probability of stopping, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.027, \u003cem\u003eOR\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.07, 95% CI = [1.01, 1.13]. With every one-unit increase in depressive symptoms, the likelihood of stopping the ER process increased by 1.07. The positive association between anxiety symptoms and ER stopping was also significant, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.025, \u003cem\u003eOR\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.05, 95% CI = [1.01, 1.09]. With every one-unit increase in the anxiety score, the likelihood of stopping ER increased by 1.05. Age as a covariate was not significantly associated with stopping, but men were less likely than women to stop the regulatory process, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.043, \u003cem\u003eOR\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.25, 95% CI = [0.06, 0.96].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThus, there were two key findings with regard to stopping the ER process. First, perceived success in ER was a significant predictor of regulation stopping, after both negative and positive events. Second, the individual factors of depressive symptoms and anxiety symptoms significantly predicted stopping the ER process after positive, but not negative, events. Results of the tests of the negative event model and the positive event model in predicting ER stopping are presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAssociations between ER strategy stopping and event intensity, emotion intensity, perceived regulation success, depression symptoms, anxiety symptoms, age, and gender, following negative and positive events respectively\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"9\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eER strategy stopping following negative events\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eER strategy stopping following positive events\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCoefficient\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSE\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCoefficient\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSE\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eModel 1\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eModel 1\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntercept\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.43\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026lt;.001\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntercept\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.37\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026lt;.001\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvent intensity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.341\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvent intensity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.36\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.112\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmotion intensity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.210\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmotion intensity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.225\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived regulation success\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.75\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.32\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.017\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived regulation success\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.54\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.73\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.036\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.696\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.872\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.47\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.656\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.41\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.69\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.043\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eModel 2\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eModel 2\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntercept\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.43\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026lt;.001\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntercept\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.36\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026lt;.001\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvent intensity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.350\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvent intensity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.36\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.116\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmotion intensity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.217\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmotion intensity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.221\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived regulation success\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.76\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.32\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.017\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived regulation success\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.52\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.036\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBDI-II\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.867\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBDI-II\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.06\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.027\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.703\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;-.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.972\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.49\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.661\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.079\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eModel 3\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eModel 3\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntercept\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.44\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026lt;.001\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntercept\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.36\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026lt;.001\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvent intensity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.338\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvent intensity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.36\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.116\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmotion intensity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.207\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmotion intensity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.224\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived regulation success\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.75\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.32\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.017\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived regulation success\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.52\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.036\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSTAI-T\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.392\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSTAI-T\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.025\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.746\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.942\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.48\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.624\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.35\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.041\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"9\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote. SE\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;standard error; BDI-II: Beck Depression Inventory-II; STAI-T: State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-Trait Scale. Significant \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e-values bolded.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eDrawing from the extended process model of ER (Gross, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015b\u003c/span\u003e), we investigated the influence of various situational and individual factors on the monitoring stage of the ER process. The results showed that greater emotion intensity, and in particular the intensity of NA, was associated with a higher likelihood of strategy switching. In addition, perceived success in regulating emotions was associated with a lower likelihood of strategy switching in response to positive events, and a higher likelihood of strategy stopping in response to both negative and positive events. Depressive and anxiety symptoms were associated with an increased probability of regulatory stopping in response to positive events exclusively.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec20\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eEvent intensity, emotion intensity and ER monitoring\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmotion intensity is a key contextual factor related to the first three stages of the ER process and in the current study more intense negative emotions were found to be related to a higher likelihood of strategy switching. As we measured ER retrospectively (since the last prompt) and NA at the current prompt, higher intense negative emotions could suggest less effective regulation. Our finding is consistent with a previous laboratory study which found that more intense negative emotions after initial regulation attempts predicted more frequent strategy switching (Murphy and Young, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). In another study (Birk and Bonanno, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e), the greater the corrugator activity (an electrodermal indicator of psychological stress), the more likely individuals were to switch ER strategies. Therefore, experiencing high intense negative emotions after the initial regulatory effort, which may suggest a perceived failure or ineffectiveness of the previous ER strategy, may motivate the individual to continue engaging in the regulatory process and shift to a different strategy rather than terminate regulation altogether.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn contrast to the result for emotion intensity, the association between event intensity and ER monitoring (either switching or stopping) was not significant. The results on event intensity and emotion intensity are consistent with findings showing that emotion intensity was a stronger predictor of ER strategy use than event intensity was (Kuo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Together, these results suggest that intense negative emotions after the initial regulatory effort can explain why there was strategy switching in the monitoring phase of the ER process, especially when experience negative events.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec21\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003ePerceived regulation success and ER monitoring\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived success in regulating emotions emerged as the strongest predictor of ER monitoring decisions. Specifically, when individuals perceived they had successfully regulated their emotions during positive events, they were less likely to switch strategy. Strategy switching typically occurs when participants recognize that their current strategy is inadequate for achieving the desired emotional state (Gross, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015a\u003c/span\u003e). Conversely, when a strategy is perceived as effective, individuals are more likely to persist with it. In a previous laboratory study (Dorman Ilan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e), participants were instructed to downregulate high- and low-intensity negative emotions using either reappraisal or distraction. The findings revealed that participants reported higher switching frequency when their initial strategy did not match the contextual demand. Moreover, participants reported greater perceived success when they switched to a strategy that did match the contextual demand. These results suggest a close relationship between perceived regulation success and strategy switching. However, it is important to note that while the aforementioned study was conducted in a controlled laboratory environment, our research focuses on real-life scenarios. This contextual difference may explain the discrepancy in results, as our study found no significant association between perceived regulation success and strategy switching during negative events. Conversely, perceived regulation success was associated with less strategy switching exclusively for positive events.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn addition, perceived regulation success was associated with a higher probability of stopping, for both negative and positive events. This is consistent with the extended ER process model, which holds that strategy stopping occurs when one perceives their ER efforts as successful in achieving goals (Gross, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015b\u003c/span\u003e). More specifically, the model assumes that during the monitoring phase, individuals dynamically monitor the gap between the current emotional state and the target emotional state, and the ER process ends when they perceive that the desired emotional state has been achieved. The intensity of emotions after regulation or the change in emotion intensity from before to after regulation have been used as indicators of successful ER, but they are both indirect and inadequate because they do not consider how the individual evaluates the ER process (Springstein and English, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Importantly, previous research has shown inconsistency between the effects of emotion intensity and perceived success in predicting phases of the ER process that occur earlier than monitoring, namely strategy selection and implementation (Rompilla et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Troy et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). For example, Troy et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e) demonstrated that while reappraisal was rated as more effective than acceptance in reducing NA and increasing PA, young adults often report greater perceived success when implementing acceptance instead of reappraisal. Similarly, Rompilla et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) found that older adults were most inclined to use acceptance and rated it as more successful than positive reappraisal or detachment, even though acceptance did not significantly alter their emotional experience. The current study extended this research by investigating how these situational factors (including, also, event intensity) simultaneously influence ER monitoring. These findings suggest that of the situational factors we examined, perceived regulation success represents the most proximal situational determinant of the final stage of the ER process.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec22\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eDepression, anxiety, and ER monitoring\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccording to the Contrast Avoidance Model (Newman and Llera, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e), individuals with depression and anxiety tend to avoid situations that elicit strong positive emotions due to their heightened sensitivity to emotional discrepancies. This may explain our findings that higher depressive or anxiety symptoms are associated with a greater likelihood of stopping the regulation when experiencing positive events. Individuals with higher depressive and anxiety symptoms, due to a lower preference for PA (Vanderlind et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), may be more likely to stop upregulating PA in response to positive events compared to individuals with lower depressive and anxiety symptoms. Similarly, patients with depression have been shown to be less likely to choose positive stimuli over negative stimuli (Millgram et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Yoon et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) and to view positive stimuli for shorter durations (Kellough et al., 2008). Higher anxiety symptoms were found in one study to be significantly associated with higher motivation to downregulate PA rather than upregulate PA following positive events (Carl et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). Thus, individuals with higher depressive or anxiety symptoms may avoid the experience of high PA and have lower motivation to increase PA when experiencing positive events. This could explain why more severe depression and anxiety are associated with ER stopping.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnother possibility is that the excessive strategy stopping related to depression and anxiety starts with problems in selecting and implementing contextually appropriate ER strategies. For example, depression and anxiety have been found to be related to the use of strategies that dampen PA rather than strategies that amplify PA (Abasi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Beblo et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e) found that compared to healthy volunteers, patients with depression were morely like to use suppression strategies when experiencing positive emotions. Blalock et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) found that compared to healthy controls, patients with social anxiety disorder reported less use of reappraisal to increase positive feelings. Thus, difficulties in selecting and implementing effective and active strategies to upregulate PA may lead to the high rate of stopping during ER monitoring.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLastly, these results may be related to fixed beliefs about emotion associated with depression and anxiety. Individuals who believe emotions are malleable are more likely to exert effort to influence and change their emotions (Kneeland et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e), and they usually report higher regulatory self-efficacy (Tamir et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e). By contrast, individuals who believe that emotional states are stable and cannot be changed may prematurely stop ER attempts (Aldao et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). There is evidence that more severe depressive or anxiety symptoms are associated with stronger fixed beliefs about emotion (Daniel et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), which may lead to reduced effort in regulating emotions and a tendency to discontinue such efforts prematurely. However, the mediating role of emotion malleability belief in the association between psychopathology symptoms and ER monitoring needs to be empirically tested.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec23\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eLimitations\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study has several limitations. First, we recruited a healthy sample with varying levels of depressive and anxiety symptoms, limiting the generalization of the findings to clinical samples that meet the relevant diagnostic criteria. Second, this study was correlational in nature, which means we cannot infer causal relationships between the situational and personal factors we studied and decisions made during ER monitoring phase. Third, we did not ask the participants why they decided to stop or continue regulating; it is possible that participants would not have insight about the choices they made, but it is worth pursuing the possibility that they do. Moreover, we found that some participants reported using more than one strategy following an event but also reported no switching, and we need to further explore the simultaneous and successive use of ER strategies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLastly, this study measured perceived regulation success but did not test the relationships between specific ER goals and monitoring decisions. Previous research found that different goals may influence an individual's strategy selection, implementation decisions, and perceived regulation success. For example, pro-hedonic goals have been found to be positively associated with antecedent-focused strategies, such as reappraisal and distraction (Eldesouky and English, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e), whereas social goals were positively associated with greater use of expressive suppression (Wilms et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Thus, future research can further investigate the relationship between regulation goals and ER monitoring decisions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe current study is the first to examine the factors influencing strategy switching and stopping in the ER monitoring process in the context of daily life. The results indicated that among the situational factors we studied, perceived regulation success was the most relevant, as it influenced strategy switching and stopping in response to both negative and positive events. Higher depressive and anxiety symptoms were related to a higher likelihood of regulation stopping when responding to positive events. These findings provide new insight into the distinctive roles of situational and personal factors in the final stage of the ER process. Interventions aimed at reducing excessive ER efforts related to positive events and their underlying causes may benefit individuals suffering from depression or anxiety.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003ch2\u003eFunding statement\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis work has been supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31700957), the MOE (Ministry of Education in China) Project of Humanities and Social Sciences (17YJC190014), the Key Laboratory of Adolescent Cyberpsychology and Behavior Central China Normal University (CCNU), Ministry of Education (2019B06), and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of Central China Normal University (CCNU24ZZ044).\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eX-h.L., Y-t.Y.,and X.L. drafted the main text of the manuscript and prepared Tables 1-3. M.P., M. H., T.V., and I.M. critically revised the manuscript. All authors contributed to writing and editing of the manuscript and approved its final version.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Availability\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe datasets generated during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbasi, I., Shams, G., Pascual-Vera, B., Milosevic, I., Bitarafan, M., Ghanadanzadeh, S., \u0026amp; Talebi Moghaddam, M. (2023). Positive emotion regulation strategies as mediators in depression and generalized anxiety disorder symptoms: A transdiagnostic framework investigation. \u003cem\u003eCurr Psychol\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e42\u003c/em\u003e, 800\u0026ndash;807. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01392-5\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s12144-021-01392-5\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAldao, A., Sheppes, G., \u0026amp; Gross, J. J. (2015). Emotion regulation flexibility. \u003cem\u003eCogn Ther Res\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e39\u003c/em\u003e, 263\u0026ndash;278. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-014-9662-4\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10608-014-9662-4\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBarrett, L. F., Gross, J., Christensen, T. C., \u0026amp; Benvenuto, M. (2001). Knowing what you\u0026rsquo;re feeling and knowing what to do about it: Mapping the relation between emotion differentiation and emotion regulation. \u003cem\u003eCognition \u0026amp; Emotion\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e, 713\u0026ndash;724. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/02699930143000239\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/02699930143000239\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBartolomeo, L. A., Raugh, I. M., \u0026amp; Strauss, G. P. (2022). Deconstructing emotion regulation in schizophrenia: The nature and consequences of abnormalities in monitoring dynamics. \u003cem\u003eSchizophrenia Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e240\u003c/em\u003e, 135\u0026ndash;142. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2021.12.043\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.schres.2021.12.043\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBeblo, T., Fernando, S., Klocke, S., Griepenstroh, J., Aschenbrenner, S., \u0026amp; Driessen, M. (2012). Increased suppression of negative and positive emotions in major depression. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Affective Disorders\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e141\u003c/em\u003e, 474\u0026ndash;479. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2012.03.019\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jad.2012.03.019\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBeck, A. T., Steer, R. A., Ball, R., \u0026amp; Ranieri, W. F. (1996). Comparison of Beck Depression Inventories-IA and-II in psychiatric outpatients. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Personality Assessment\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e67\u003c/em\u003e, 588\u0026ndash;597. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa6703_13\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1207/s15327752jpa6703_13\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBirk, J. L., \u0026amp; Bonanno, G. A. (2016). When to throw the switch: The adaptiveness of modifying emotion regulation strategies based on affective and physiological feedback. \u003cem\u003eEmotion\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e, 657\u0026ndash;670. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000157\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/emo0000157\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBlalock, D. V., Kashdan, T. B., \u0026amp; Farmer, A. S. (2016). Trait and daily emotion regulation in social anxiety disorder. \u003cem\u003eCogn Ther Res\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e40\u003c/em\u003e, 416\u0026ndash;425. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-015-9739-8\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10608-015-9739-8\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBlanke, E. S., Bellingtier, J. A., Riediger, M., \u0026amp; Brose, A. (2021). When and how to regulate: Everyday emotion-regulation strategy use and stressor intensity. \u003cem\u003eAffec Sci\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e3\u003c/em\u003e, 81\u0026ndash;92. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s42761-021-00087-1\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s42761-021-00087-1\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBrans, K., Koval, P., Verduyn, P., Lim, Y. L., \u0026amp; Kuppens, P. (2013). The regulation of negative and positive affect in daily life. \u003cem\u003eEmotion\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e13\u003c/em\u003e, 926\u0026ndash;939. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/a0032400\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/a0032400\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCarl, J. R., Fairholme, C. P., Gallagher, M. W., Thompson-Hollands, J., \u0026amp; Barlow, D. H. (2014). The Effects of Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms on Daily Positive Emotion Regulation. \u003cem\u003eJournal Of Psychopathological And Behavioral Assessment\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e36\u003c/em\u003e, 224\u0026ndash;236. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-013-9387-9\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10862-013-9387-9\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDaniel, K. E., Goodman, F. R., Beltzer, M. L., Daros, A. R., Boukhechba, M., Barnes, L. E., \u0026amp; Teachman, B. A. (2020). Emotion malleability beliefs and emotion experience and regulation in the daily lives of people with high trait social anxiety. \u003cem\u003eCogn Ther Res\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e44\u003c/em\u003e, 1186\u0026ndash;1198. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-020-10139-8\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10608-020-10139-8\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDaniel, K. E., Southward, M. W., \u0026amp; Teachman, B. A. (2024). Investigating psychiatric symptoms as predictors of the reasons people do not regulate their emotions in daily life. \u003cem\u003eEmotion\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e24\u003c/em\u003e, 241\u0026ndash;254. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001260\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/emo0001260\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDecker, M. L., Turk, C. L., Hess, B., \u0026amp; Murray, C. E. (2008). Emotion regulation among individuals classified with and without generalized anxiety disorder. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Anxiety Disorders\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e22\u003c/em\u003e, 485\u0026ndash;494. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2007.04.002\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.janxdis.2007.04.002\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDixon-Gordon, K. L., Aldao, A., \u0026amp; De Los Reyes, A. (2015). Emotion regulation in context: Examining the spontaneous use of strategies across emotional intensity and type of emotion. \u003cem\u003ePersonality and Individual Differences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e86\u003c/em\u003e, 271\u0026ndash;276. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.06.011\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.paid.2015.06.011\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDorman Ilan, S., Shafir, R., Birk, J. L., Bonanno, G. A., \u0026amp; Sheppes, G. (2019). Monitoring in emotion regulation: behavioral decisions and neural consequences. \u003cem\u003eSocial Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e, 1273\u0026ndash;1283. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsaa001\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1093/scan/nsaa001\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEldesouky, L., \u0026amp; English, T. (2019). Individual differences in emotion regulation goals: Does personality predict the reasons why people regulate their emotions? \u003cem\u003eJournal of Personality\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e87\u003c/em\u003e, 750\u0026ndash;766. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12430\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/jopy.12430\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEnglish, T., Lee, I. A., John, O. P., \u0026amp; Gross, J. J. (2017). Emotion regulation strategy selection in daily life: The role of social context and goals. \u003cem\u003eMotiv Emot\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e41\u003c/em\u003e, 230\u0026ndash;242. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-016-9597-z\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11031-016-9597-z\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGross, J. J. (2015a). Emotion regulation: Current status and future prospects. \u003cem\u003ePsychological Inquiry\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e26\u003c/em\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;26. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2014.940781\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/1047840X.2014.940781\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGross, J. J. (2015b). The extended process model of emotion regulation: Elaborations, applications, and future directions. \u003cem\u003ePsychological Inquiry\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e26\u003c/em\u003e, 130\u0026ndash;137. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2015.989751\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/1047840X.2015.989751\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGross, J. J. (1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. \u003cem\u003eReview of General Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e, 271\u0026ndash;299. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.271\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.271\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGross, J. J., \u0026amp; Jazaieri, H. (2014). Emotion, emotion regulation, and psychopathology: An affective science perspective. \u003cem\u003eClinical Psychological Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e, 387\u0026ndash;401. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/2167702614536164\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/2167702614536164\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHay, A. C., Sheppes, G., Gross, J. J., \u0026amp; Gruber, J. (2015). Choosing how to feel: Emotion regulation choice in bipolar disorder. \u003cem\u003eEmotion\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e, 139\u0026ndash;145. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000024\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/emo0000024\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHiekkaranta, A. P., Kirtley, O. J., Lafit, G., Decoster, J., Derom, C., De Hert, M., G\u0026uuml;l\u0026ouml;ks\u0026uuml;z, S., Jacobs, N., Menne-Lothmann, C., Rutten, B. P. F., Thiery, E., Van Os, J., Van Winkel, R., Wichers, M., \u0026amp; Myin-Germeys, I. (2021). Emotion regulation in response to daily negative and positive events in youth: The role of event intensity and psychopathology. \u003cem\u003eBehaviour Research and Therapy\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e144\u003c/em\u003e, 103916. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2021.103916\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.brat.2021.103916\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKneeland, E. T., Dovidio, J. F., Joormann, J., \u0026amp; Clark, M. S. (2016). Emotion malleability beliefs, emotion regulation, and psychopathology: Integrating affective and clinical science. \u003cem\u003eClinical Psychology Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e45\u003c/em\u003e, 81\u0026ndash;88. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2016.03.008\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.cpr.2016.03.008\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKuo, J. R., Fitzpatrick, S., Krantz, L. H., \u0026amp; Zeifman, R. J. (2018). How do you choose and how well does it work? the selection and effectiveness of emotion regulation strategies and their relationship with borderline personality disorder feature severity. \u003cem\u003eCognition and Emotion\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e32\u003c/em\u003e, 632\u0026ndash;640. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2017.1330254\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/02699931.2017.1330254\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLennarz, H. K., Hollenstein, T., Lichtwarck-Aschoff, A., Kuntsche, E., \u0026amp; Granic, I. (2019). Emotion regulation in action: Use, selection, and success of emotion regulation in adolescents\u0026rsquo; daily lives. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Behavioral Development\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e43\u003c/em\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;11. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0165025418755540\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0165025418755540\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLi, W., \u0026amp; Qian, M. (1995). Revision of the norm of state trait anxiety scale in Chinese college students. \u003cem\u003eActa Sci Nat Univ Pekin\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e31\u003c/em\u003e(1), 108\u0026ndash;112. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.13209/j.0479-8023.1995.014\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.13209/j.0479-8023.1995.014\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLi, X., Zhang, Y., Li, X., Wang, Y., Peng, M., \u0026amp; Myin-Germeys, I. (2024). Abnormalities in emotion regulation are associated with negative, but not positive or disorganized schizotypy: An experience sampling study. \u003cem\u003eSchizophrenia Research\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2024.06.018\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.schres.2024.06.018\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLincoln, T. M., Schulze, L., \u0026amp; Renneberg, B. (2022). The role of emotion regulation in the characterization, development and treatment of psychopathology. \u003cem\u003eNat Rev Psychol\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e1\u003c/em\u003e, 272\u0026ndash;286. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-022-00040-4\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/s44159-022-00040-4\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLiu, D. Y., \u0026amp; Thompson, R. J. (2017). Selection and implementation of emotion regulation strategies in major depressive disorder: An integrative review. \u003cem\u003eClinical Psychology Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e57\u003c/em\u003e, 183\u0026ndash;194. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2017.07.004\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.cpr.2017.07.004\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMathews, B. L., Kerns, K. A., \u0026amp; Ciesla, J. A. (2014). Specificity of emotion regulation difficulties related to anxiety in early adolescence. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Adolescence\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e37\u003c/em\u003e, 1089\u0026ndash;1097. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2014.08.002\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.adolescence.2014.08.002\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMillgram, Y., Huppert, J. D., \u0026amp; Tamir, M. (2020). Emotion goals in psychopathology: A new perspective on dysfunctional emotion regulation. \u003cem\u003eCurrent Directions In Psychological Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e29\u003c/em\u003e, 242\u0026ndash;247. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0963721420917713\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0963721420917713\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMillgram, Y., Joormann, J., Huppert, J. D., \u0026amp; Tamir, M. (2015). Sad as a matter of choice? Emotion-regulation goals in depression. \u003cem\u003ePsychological Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e26\u003c/em\u003e, 1216\u0026ndash;1228. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615583295\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0956797615583295\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMurphy, J. W., \u0026amp; Young, M. A. (2020). Monitoring processes in extended emotion regulation. \u003cem\u003eCognition and Emotion\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e34\u003c/em\u003e, 1059\u0026ndash;1067. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2020.1722614\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/02699931.2020.1722614\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMyin-Germeys, I., Kasanova, Z., Vaessen, T., Vachon, H., Kirtley, O., Viechtbauer, W., \u0026amp; Reininghaus, U. (2018). Experience sampling methodology in mental health research: new insights and technical developments. \u003cem\u003eWorld Psychiatry\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e17\u003c/em\u003e, 123\u0026ndash;132. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20513\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/wps.20513\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMyin-Germeys, I., Van Os, J., Schwartz, J. E., Stone, A. A., \u0026amp; Delespaul, P. A. (2001). Emotional reactivity to daily life stress in psychosis. \u003cem\u003eArchives Of General Psychiatry\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e58\u003c/em\u003e, 1137. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.58.12.1137\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1001/archpsyc.58.12.1137\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNewman, M. G., \u0026amp; Llera, S. J. (2011). A novel theory of experiential avoidance in generalized anxiety disorder: A review and synthesis of research supporting a contrast avoidance model of worry. \u003cem\u003eClinical Psychology Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e31\u003c/em\u003e, 371\u0026ndash;382. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2011.01.008\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.cpr.2011.01.008\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOrtner, C. N. M., Chadwick, L., \u0026amp; Pennekamp, P. (2022). Do motives matter? Short- and long-term motives as predictors of emotion regulation in everyday life. \u003cem\u003eEmotion\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e22\u003c/em\u003e, 1625\u0026ndash;1638. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000989\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/emo0000989\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRompilla, D. B., Hittner, E. F., Stephens, J. E., Mauss, I., \u0026amp; Haase, C. M. (2022). Emotion regulation in the face of loss: How detachment, positive reappraisal, and acceptance shape experiences, physiology, and perceptions in late life. \u003cem\u003eEmotion\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e22\u003c/em\u003e, 1417\u0026ndash;1434. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000932\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/emo0000932\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShafir, R., Thiruchselvam, R., Suri, G., Gross, J. J., \u0026amp; Sheppes, G. (2016). Neural processing of emotional-intensity predicts emotion regulation choice. \u003cem\u003eSocial Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e, 1863\u0026ndash;1871. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsw114\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1093/scan/nsw114\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSheppes, G., Scheibe, S., Suri, G., \u0026amp; Gross, J. J. (2011). Emotion-regulation choice. \u003cem\u003ePsychological Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e22\u003c/em\u003e, 1391\u0026ndash;1396. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611418350\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0956797611418350\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSheppes, G., Suri, G., \u0026amp; Gross, J. J. (2015). Emotion regulation and psychopathology. \u003cem\u003eAnnu Rev Clin Psychol\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e, 379\u0026ndash;405. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032814-112739\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032814-112739\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSpielberger, C. D. (1983). \u003cem\u003eManual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory: STAI (Form Y)\u003c/em\u003e. Consulting Psychologists, Palo Alto.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSpringstein, T., \u0026amp; English, T. (2024). Distinguishing emotion regulation success in daily life from maladaptive regulation and dysregulation. \u003cem\u003ePers Soc Psychol Rev\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e28\u003c/em\u003e, 209\u0026ndash;224. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/10888683231199140\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/10888683231199140\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTamir, M., John, O. P., Srivastava, S., \u0026amp; Gross, J. J. (2007). Implicit theories of emotion: Affective and social outcomes across a major life transition. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Personality and Social Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e92\u003c/em\u003e, 731\u0026ndash;744. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.4.731\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0022-3514.92.4.731\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTng, G. Y. Q., \u0026amp; Yang, H. (2023). Social anxiety and emotion regulation flexibility: a daily diary approach. \u003cem\u003eCognition and Emotion\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e38\u003c/em\u003e, 199\u0026ndash;216. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2023.2279176\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/02699931.2023.2279176\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eToh, W. X., \u0026amp; Yang, H. (2024). To switch or not to switch? Individual differences in executive function and emotion regulation flexibility. \u003cem\u003eEmotion\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e24\u003c/em\u003e, 52\u0026ndash;66. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001250\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/emo0001250\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTroy, A. S., Shallcross, A. J., Brunner, A., Friedman, R., \u0026amp; Jones, M. C. (2018). Cognitive reappraisal and acceptance: Effects on emotion, physiology, and perceived cognitive costs. \u003cem\u003eEmotion\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e, 58\u0026ndash;74. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000371\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/emo0000371\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVanderlind, W. M., Millgram, Y., Baskin-Sommers, A. R., Clark, M. S., \u0026amp; Joormann, J. (2020). Understanding positive emotion deficits in depression: From emotion preferences to emotion regulation. \u003cem\u003eClinical Psychology Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e76\u003c/em\u003e, 101826. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2020.101826\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.cpr.2020.101826\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWilms, R., Lanwehr, R., \u0026amp; Kastenm\u0026uuml;ller, A. (2020). Emotion Regulation in Everyday Life: The Role of Goals and Situational Factors. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers In Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e, 877. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00877\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00877\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYang, W. H., Wu, D. J., \u0026amp; Peng, F. (2012). Application of Chinese Version of Beck Depression Inventory-II to Chinese first-year college students. \u003cem\u003eChinese Journal of Clinical Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e(6), 762\u0026ndash;764.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYoon, S., Verona, E., Schlauch, R., Schneider, S., \u0026amp; Rottenberg, J. (2020). Why do depressed people prefer sad music? \u003cem\u003eEmotion\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e, 613\u0026ndash;624. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000573\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/emo0000573\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"cognitive-therapy-and-research","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"cotr","sideBox":"Learn more about [Cognitive Therapy and Research](http://link.springer.com/journal/10608)","snPcode":"10608","submissionUrl":"https://www.editorialmanager.com/cotr/default.aspx","title":"Cognitive Therapy and Research","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false},"keywords":"emotion regulation monitoring, strategy switching, perceived regulation success, depression, anxiety","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4962739/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4962739/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003ch2\u003ePurpose\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eDuring emotional events, people monitor the effectiveness of their emotion regulation (ER) to decide whether to keep using their current ER strategy, switch to a new strategy, or stop the regulation process. However, there is little empirical research on the monitoring phase of ER, particularly on what and how situational and individual factors influence this process.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eMethods\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe tested situational and individual factors as predictors of real-life ER monitoring decisions. 155 young adults responded to 5 prompts per day in a 7-day experience sampling protocol. At each prompt they described an emotional event, rated the intensity of event, their current emotions and perceived success in ER, and reported their decision to simply stop using their current ER strategy or to switch to a new strategy during the event.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eResults\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eMultilevel modeling results showed the decision to stop using the current ER strategy was predicted by perceived success in ER after both positive and negative events, and by depressive and anxiety symptoms after positive events. The decision to switch to a new strategy was more likely when there were high negative emotions after a negative event, and less likely when there was perceived success after a positive event.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eConclusions\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese findings suggest that situational and individual factors affect people\u0026rsquo;s decisions about how to regulate emotion. Interventions addressing excessive emotion regulation issues in response to positive events and their underlying causes may benefit individuals with depression or anxiety.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Emotion regulation monitoring in daily life: The roles of event intensity, emotion intensity, perceived regulation success and psychopathology","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-09-25 13:23:34","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4962739/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2024-10-03T07:36:08+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2024-09-06T10:57:12+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"85977990155327708917192158650574345797","date":"2024-08-28T23:28:11+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"68329465382353890567870780446935039901","date":"2024-08-28T06:38:48+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2024-08-26T06:01:20+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2024-08-26T02:50:52+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2024-08-26T02:50:12+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Cognitive Therapy and Research","date":"2024-08-23T08:34:54+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"cognitive-therapy-and-research","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"cotr","sideBox":"Learn more about [Cognitive Therapy and Research](http://link.springer.com/journal/10608)","snPcode":"10608","submissionUrl":"https://www.editorialmanager.com/cotr/default.aspx","title":"Cognitive Therapy and Research","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"374079ec-bdd7-451e-85de-6dcd95e1f7af","owner":[],"postedDate":"September 25th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"published-in-journal","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2024-12-02T17:23:08+00:00","versionOfRecord":{"articleIdentity":"rs-4962739","link":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-024-10547-0","journal":{"identity":"cognitive-therapy-and-research","isVorOnly":false,"title":"Cognitive Therapy and Research"},"publishedOn":"2024-11-25 15:58:09","publishedOnDateReadable":"November 25th, 2024"},"versionCreatedAt":"2024-09-25 13:23:34","video":"","vorDoi":"10.1007/s10608-024-10547-0","vorDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-024-10547-0","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-4962739","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-4962739","identity":"rs-4962739","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"qtupq5eGEP_6zYnWcrvyt","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}