认知重评对谁有帮助?对什么有帮助?前瞻性研究

IF 2.8 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Cognitive Therapy and Research Pub Date : 2023-09-15 DOI:10.1007/s10608-023-10407-3
Amy Dawel, Paige Mewton, Amelia Gulliver, Louise M. Farrer, Alison L. Calear, Eryn Newman, Nicolas Cherbuin
{"title":"认知重评对谁有帮助?对什么有帮助?前瞻性研究","authors":"Amy Dawel, Paige Mewton, Amelia Gulliver, Louise M. Farrer, Alison L. Calear, Eryn Newman, Nicolas Cherbuin","doi":"10.1007/s10608-023-10407-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Purpose Recent literature highlights that no emotion regulation strategy is universally helpful or harmful. The present study aimed to build understanding of for whom and what cognitive reappraisal is helpful, by testing the influential hypothesis that reappraisal is most helpful when there is good individual or situational capacity to apply this strategy effectively. Methods The present study tested how eight variables theorised to be associated with the effectiveness of reappraisal moderated the link between reappraisal use and changes in depression, anxiety, loneliness, functional impairment, and wellbeing in a nationally representative sample, over three ( n = 752) and twelve month ( n = 512) periods. Results Contrary to our hypothesis, we found reappraisal was most beneficial for individuals or in situations characterised by additional vulnerabilities (e.g., average or high levels of stress, neuroticism, difficulty identifying feelings, or poor self-efficacy). Results also support prior evidence that reappraisal can be more helpful for improving wellbeing than reducing mental health symptoms. Conclusions Altogether, our findings provide new insight into the complex nature of relationships between reappraisal and psychological outcomes. A key clinical implication is that reappraisal may be particularly helpful for people with stable vulnerabilities (e.g., neuroticism).","PeriodicalId":48316,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Therapy and Research","volume":"62 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"For Whom and What Does Cognitive Reappraisal Help? A Prospective Study\",\"authors\":\"Amy Dawel, Paige Mewton, Amelia Gulliver, Louise M. Farrer, Alison L. Calear, Eryn Newman, Nicolas Cherbuin\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10608-023-10407-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Purpose Recent literature highlights that no emotion regulation strategy is universally helpful or harmful. The present study aimed to build understanding of for whom and what cognitive reappraisal is helpful, by testing the influential hypothesis that reappraisal is most helpful when there is good individual or situational capacity to apply this strategy effectively. Methods The present study tested how eight variables theorised to be associated with the effectiveness of reappraisal moderated the link between reappraisal use and changes in depression, anxiety, loneliness, functional impairment, and wellbeing in a nationally representative sample, over three ( n = 752) and twelve month ( n = 512) periods. Results Contrary to our hypothesis, we found reappraisal was most beneficial for individuals or in situations characterised by additional vulnerabilities (e.g., average or high levels of stress, neuroticism, difficulty identifying feelings, or poor self-efficacy). Results also support prior evidence that reappraisal can be more helpful for improving wellbeing than reducing mental health symptoms. Conclusions Altogether, our findings provide new insight into the complex nature of relationships between reappraisal and psychological outcomes. A key clinical implication is that reappraisal may be particularly helpful for people with stable vulnerabilities (e.g., neuroticism).\",\"PeriodicalId\":48316,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cognitive Therapy and Research\",\"volume\":\"62 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cognitive Therapy and Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-023-10407-3\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Therapy and Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-023-10407-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要目的最近的研究表明,没有一种情绪调节策略是普遍有益或有害的。本研究旨在通过检验一个有影响力的假设,即当有良好的个人或情境能力来有效地应用认知重评价策略时,重评价是最有帮助的,从而建立对认知重评价对谁和什么有帮助的理解。方法:本研究在全国代表性样本中测试了八个变量如何与重新评估的有效性相关,这些变量在三个(n = 752)和十二个月(n = 512)期间调节了重新评估使用与抑郁、焦虑、孤独、功能障碍和幸福感变化之间的联系。与我们的假设相反,我们发现重新评估对个体或在具有额外脆弱性特征的情况下(例如,平均或高水平的压力,神经质,难以识别情感或低自我效能)最有益。研究结果也支持了先前的证据,即重新评估对改善幸福感比减少心理健康症状更有帮助。总之,我们的研究结果为重新评估和心理结果之间关系的复杂性提供了新的见解。一个关键的临床意义是,重新评估可能对具有稳定脆弱性(例如,神经质)的人特别有帮助。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
For Whom and What Does Cognitive Reappraisal Help? A Prospective Study
Abstract Purpose Recent literature highlights that no emotion regulation strategy is universally helpful or harmful. The present study aimed to build understanding of for whom and what cognitive reappraisal is helpful, by testing the influential hypothesis that reappraisal is most helpful when there is good individual or situational capacity to apply this strategy effectively. Methods The present study tested how eight variables theorised to be associated with the effectiveness of reappraisal moderated the link between reappraisal use and changes in depression, anxiety, loneliness, functional impairment, and wellbeing in a nationally representative sample, over three ( n = 752) and twelve month ( n = 512) periods. Results Contrary to our hypothesis, we found reappraisal was most beneficial for individuals or in situations characterised by additional vulnerabilities (e.g., average or high levels of stress, neuroticism, difficulty identifying feelings, or poor self-efficacy). Results also support prior evidence that reappraisal can be more helpful for improving wellbeing than reducing mental health symptoms. Conclusions Altogether, our findings provide new insight into the complex nature of relationships between reappraisal and psychological outcomes. A key clinical implication is that reappraisal may be particularly helpful for people with stable vulnerabilities (e.g., neuroticism).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cognitive Therapy and Research
Cognitive Therapy and Research PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
52
期刊介绍: Cognitive Therapy and Research (COTR) focuses on the investigation of cognitive processes in human adaptation and adjustment and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). It is an interdisciplinary journal welcoming submissions from diverse areas of psychology, including cognitive, clinical, developmental, experimental, personality, social, learning, affective neuroscience, emotion research, therapy mechanism, and pharmacotherapy.
期刊最新文献
Examining Relationships between Psychological Flexibility and Comorbidity of Depression and Anxiety: A Network Analysis in a Non-Clinical Community Sample Lay Theories for Social Anxiety: Examining the Impact of Viewing Social Anxiety as Malleable Due to Personal Effort versus Fixed in Nature in a Non-clinical Sample Training to Increase Processing of Positive Content Paradoxically Decreases Positive Memory Bias in High Levels of Depression Associations Between Self-Criticism, Basic Psychological Needs Frustration, and Self-Damaging Behaviors: An Application of Self-Determination Theory Relapse prevention following guided self-help for common health problems: A Scoping Review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1