探索大学生五种具体情绪调节策略使用习惯和选择偏好的关系以及特质焦虑的作用机制。研究1采用问卷法和行为实验法分别考察五种策略的使用习惯和选择偏好及其分离效应;研究2考察特质焦虑对五种策略使用习惯和选择偏好间的分离效应的影响。结果发现：大学生只在表情宣泄使用习惯和选择偏好间呈显著负相关,不出现分离效应。特质焦虑不影响认知重评、表达抑制、接受、注意分散使用习惯和选择偏好间的分离效应,但会影响表情宣泄在两者间的分离效应。
Abstract
Adopting questionnaires to measure college students' usage of reappraisal and suppression, acceptance, venting, distraction, and through the behavior experiment method to evaluate college students' strategy choice preference, this study aims to investigate the separation effect between usage and choice preference of the five emotion regulation strategies among college students, as well as the influence of trait anxiety on the separation effect.
In study 1, a series of questionnaires corresponding to these five emotional regulation strategies were used to investigate their usage, and the GNAT paradigm was used to measure their choice preferences. A total of seventy-five college students were randomly selected. After eliminating invalid participants whose accuracy were less than 75% in the GNAT task, a total of sixty-seven valid data were obtained. The analysis of the final valid data included the analysis of the characteristics of the five emotion regulation strategies in the usage and choice preference, as well as the relationship between them. In Study 2, participants completed the Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-trait) and were ranked from high to low based on their scores on the STAI-trait. The subjects who scored in the top 27% were identified as the high trait anxiety group and the bottom 27% were the low trait anxiety group. Focusing on the correlation between the usage and choice preference of five emotion regulation strategies, the influence of trait anxiety on the correlation between the two groups was emphatically investigated.
The results showed that: there were significant differences in the usage and choice preference of the five emotion regulation strategies among college students. Specifically, in the usage of strategies, the frequency of reappraisal and distraction was significantly higher than that of suppression, acceptance and venting, and there was no significant difference between reappraisal and distraction, nor between suppression, acceptance, and venting. In terms of strategy choice preference, the choice preference degree of suppression and acceptance was significantly superior to reappraisal and venting, and distraction was also significantly superior to reappraisal. There was no significant correlation between the usage and choice preference of reappraisal, suppression, acceptance, and distraction, showing a separation effect. However, there was a significant and negative correlation between the usage and choice preference of venting, showing no separation effect. Further analysis showed that the usage of venting had a significant regression coefficient on its choice preference. Trait anxiety did not affect the separation effect between usage and choice preference of reappraisal, suppression, acceptance, and distraction, but affected the separation effect between usage and choice preference of venting. To be specific, with the increase of trait anxiety level, the negative correlation between the usage and choice preference of venting decreases.
The present study revealed the usage and choice preference of reappraisal, suppression, acceptance, and distraction were separated, and trait anxiety did not affect their separation effect. However, trait anxiety affected the separation effect between usage and choice preference of venting, that is, students with high trait anxiety have a separation effect, while students with low trait anxiety have no separation effect.
关键词
特质焦虑 /
情绪调节策略使用习惯 /
情绪调节策略选择偏好 /
GNAT
Key words
trait anxiety /
emotion regulation strategies usage /
emotion regulation strategies choice preference /
GNAT
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
参考文献
[1] 曹静, 吉阳, 祝卓宏. (2013). 接纳与行动问卷第二版中文版测评大学生的信效度. 中国心理卫生杂志, 27(11), 873-877.
[2] 陈瑞君. (2015). 乐观偏差的内隐效应——Go/No-go联想任务的再证明. 西南大学学报(社会科学版), 41(4), 119-124.
[3] 邓欣媚, 桑标. (2011). 青少年日常情绪调节问卷的编制. 心理与行为研究, 9(3), 168-175.
[4] 杜幼红, 连天星, 马伟娜. (2020). 刺激强度对小学儿童情绪调节策略选择的影响. 杭州师范大学学报(自然科学版), 19(1), 35-40.
[5] 黄敏儿, 郭德俊. (2002). 原因调节与反应调节的情绪变化过程. 心理学报, 34(4), 371-380.
[6] 劳小琳. (2020). 初中生亲子依恋、情绪调节策略、心理资本与校园霸凌的关系及现状研究 (硕士学位论文). 广西民族大学,南宁.
[7] 李金德. (2015). 心理与教育元分析中相关系数的合并. 心理学探新, 35(3), 244-250.
[8] 李娜, 马伟娜. (2011). 习惯性情绪调节策略的研究概述. 健康研究, 31(5), 344-348.
[9] 刘红豆. (2018). 大学生的性别角色态度与择偶偏好及其关系研究 (硕士学位论文). 四川师范大学,成都.
[10] 刘俊升, 桑标. (2009). 情绪调节内隐态度对个体情绪调节的影响. 心理科学, 32(3), 571-574.
[11] 闵洋璐. (2016). 大学生情绪调节策略选择偏向——认知重评与注意分散的比较 (硕士学位论文). 南京师范大学.
[12] 桑标, 赛李阳, 潘婷婷, 刘影, 张少华, 马明伟. (2018). 不同情绪刺激强度下的情绪调节策略选择. 中国临床心理学杂志, 26(1), 52-55.
[13] 沈渔村. (1988). 精神病学 . 人民卫生出版社..
[14] 施国春, 张丽华, 范会勇. (2017). 攻击性和自尊关系的元分析. 心理科学进展, 25(8), 1274-1288.
[15] 王聪. (2019). 准入职教师的情绪调节态度、策略与能力研究 (硕士学位论文). 曲阜师范大学.
[16] 王珂, 张顺民, 冯廷勇. (2017). 预期想象影响延迟折扣的内在机制: 情绪的作用——高、低冲动特质的分离效应. 西南大学学报(自然科学版), 39(4), 151-157.
[17] 王力, 柳恒超, 李中权, 杜卫. (2007). 情绪调节问卷中文版的信效度研究. 中国健康心理学杂志, 15(6), 503-505.
[18] 王黎明. (2020). 大学生垃圾分类内隐态度的认知和情感分离效应 (硕士学位论文). 浙江理工大学,杭州.
[19] 王昀瓒. (2020). 负性刺激下女性大学生的情绪调节策略选择与效果研究 (硕士学位论文). 浙江师范大学,金华.
[20] 汪祚军, 李纾. (2008). 行为决策中出现的分离效应. 心理科学进展, 16(4), 513-517.
[21] 夏莹. (2021). 社交焦虑大学生情绪调节内隐态度及策略选择偏好研究 (硕士学位论文). 江西师范大学,南昌.
[22] 辛潇洋, 李瑛, 毕研玲, 晏碧华. (2019). 一种齐当别思想下的量子决策模型: 对囚徒困境中的分离效应的解释. 心理学报, 51(6), 724-733.
[23] 许世梅, 任志洪, 张灵聪. (2019). 硕士研究生内隐专业认同及其与外显专业认同的分离效应. 心理研究, 12(6), 564-569, 576.
[24] 袁加锦, 张祎程, 陈圣栋, 罗利, 茹怡珊. (2021). 中国情绪调节词语库的初步编制与试用. 心理学报, 53(5), 445-455.
[25] 张三菊. (2011). 认知重评与表达抑制对特质焦虑大学生情绪反应的影响及训练研究 (硕士学位论文). 电子科技大学, 成都.
[26] 张少华, 桑标, 江凯, 潘婷婷, 刘影. (2021). 社交焦虑大学生情绪调节灵活性: 情绪内容对策略选择和使用的影响. 心理科学, 44(3), 633-641.
[27] 张少华, 桑标, 刘影. (2020). 大学生日常情绪调节问卷的编制及其信效度检验. 中国临床心理学杂志, 28(3), 471-476.
[28] 张鑫. (2016). 焦虑大学生情绪调节内隐态度的特点、对情绪调节的影响及干预研究 (硕士学位论文). 曲阜师范大学.
[29] 朱艳新. (2009). 大学生情绪调节策略的结构、特点及有效性研究 (博士学位论文). 辽宁师范大学,大连.
[30] Baer M. M., Spitzen T. L., Richmond J. R., Tull M. T., & Gratz K. L. (2022). Associations of interpersonal and intrapersonal emotion regulation strategies to suicidal ideation and suicide attempts. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 24, 1-9.
[31] Cho S., White K. H., Yang Y., & Soto J. A. (2019). The role of trait anxiety in the selection of emotion regulation strategies and subsequent effectiveness. Personality and Individual Differences, 147, 326-331.
[32] Deng X. M., An S., & Cheng C. (2019). Cultural differences in the implicit and explicit attitudes toward emotion regulation. Personality and Individual Differences, 149, 220-222.
[33] Donker M. H., Erisman M. C., van Gog T., & Mainhard T. (2020). Teachers’ emotional exhaustion: Associations with their typical use of and implicit attitudes toward emotion regulation strategies. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 867.
[34] Eldesouky, L., & English, T. (2018). Another year older, another year wiser? emotion regulation strategy selection and flexibility across adulthood. Psychology and Aging, 33(4), 572-585.
[35] Eldesouky, L., & Gross, J. J. (2019). Emotion regulation goals: An individual difference perspective. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 13(9), Article e12493.
[36] Elkjær E., Mikkelsen M. B., & O'Toole M. S. (2022). Emotion regulation patterns: Capturing variability and flexibility in emotion regulation in an experience sampling study. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 63(4), 297-307.
[37] Faul F., Erdfelder E., Lang A. G., & Buchner A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175-191.
[38] Ford B. Q., Gross J. J., & Gruber J. (2019). Broadening our field of view: The role of emotion polyregulation. Emotion Review, 11(3), 197-208.
[39] Gross, J. J. (1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of General Psychology, 2(3), 271-299.
[40] Gross, J. J. (2015a). Emotion regulation: Current status and future prospects. Psychological Inquiry, 26(1), 1-26.
[41] Gross, J. J. (2015b). The extended process model of emotion regulation: Elaborations, applications, and future directions. Psychological Inquiry, 26(1), 130-137.
[42] Gross, J. J., & John, O. P. (2003). Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: Implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 348-362.
[43] Hayes S. C., Strosahl K., Wilson K. G., Bissett R. T., Pistorello J., Toarmino D., & McCurry S. M. (2004). Measuring experiential avoidance: A preliminary test of a working model. The Psychological Record, 54(4), 553-578.
[44] Lischetzke T., Schemer L., In-Albon T., Karbach J., Könen T., & Glombiewski J. A. (2022). Coping under a COVID-19 lockdown: Patterns of daily coping and individual differences in coping repertoires. Anxiety, Stress and Coping, 35(1), 25-43.
[45] McRae, K., & Gross, J. J. (2020). Emotion regulation. Emotion, 20(1), 1-9.
[46] Milyavsky M., Webber D., Fernandez J. R., Kruglanski A. W., Goldenberg A., Suri G., & Gross J. J. (2019). To reappraise or not to reappraise? Emotion regulation choice and cognitive energetics. Emotion, 19(6), 964-981.
[47] Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2001). The Go/No-Go association task. Social Cognition, 19(6), 625-666.
[48] O’Toole M. S., Zachariae R., & Mennin D. S. (2017). Social anxiety and emotion regulation flexibility: Considering emotion intensity and type as contextual factors. Anxiety, Stress and Coping, 30(6), 716-724.
[49] Pan D. N., Wang Y., & Li X. B. (2019). Strategy bias in the emotion regulation of high trait anxiety individuals: An investigation of underlying neural signatures using ERPs. Neuropsychology, 33(1), 111-122.
[50] Parlamis, J. D. (2012). Venting as emotion regulation. International Journal of Conflict Management, 23(1), 77-96.
[51] Sheppes, G., & Levin, Z. (2013). Emotion regulation choice: Selecting between cognitive regulation strategies to control emotion. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 179.
[52] Spielberger, C. D. (1966). Anxiety and behavior. Elsevier.
[53] Wilms R., Lanwehr R., & Kastenmüller A. (2020). Emotion regulation in everyday life: The role of goals and situational factors. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 877.
[54] Zysberg, L., & Raz, S. (2019). Emotional intelligence and emotion regulation in self-induced emotional states: Physiological evidence. Personality and Individual Differences, 139, 202-207.
基金
*本研究得到2021年度浙江省哲学社会科学规划课题（21NDQN209YB）和2021年度浙江省教育厅一般科研项目（Y202147464）的资助
PDF(1326 KB)
