| Title |
Individual differences in emotion regulation moderate the associations between empathy and affective distress
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Motivation and Emotion, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11031-018-9684-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Philip A. Powell |
| Abstract |
Individual differences in empathy can have positive and negative psychological outcomes. Yet, individual differences in the processing and regulation of empathy-induced emotion have not been fully explored within this dynamic. This study was designed to explore whether individual differences in emotion regulation strategies moderated the effects of empathy on common forms of affective distress. Eight hundred and forty four participants completed survey measures of trait empathy, emotion regulation strategies, and symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress. Affective empathy typically predicted greater affective distress, but the effects on depression and anxiety were offset when people were effective at reappraising their emotions. Cognitive empathy predicted lower distress on average, but this beneficial effect on anxiety and stress was absent in those who typically suppressed their emotions. Finally, suppression unexpectedly reduced the depression and stress reported for people high in affective empathy. Individual differences in emotion regulation are an important moderator between empathy and psychological health, and thus a useful target for intervention. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 2 | 18% |
| Norway | 1 | 9% |
| China | 1 | 9% |
| Australia | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 6 | 55% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 45% |
| Scientists | 4 | 36% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 18% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 142 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 142 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 23 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 14% |
| Researcher | 15 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 8% |
| Unknown | 43 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 70 | 49% |
| Neuroscience | 8 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 4% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 11 | 8% |
| Unknown | 42 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 August 2023.
All research outputs
#2,197,625
of 24,520,187 outputs
Outputs from Motivation and Emotion
#165
of 804 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,010
of 338,177 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Motivation and Emotion
#5
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,520,187 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 804 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 338,177 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.