↓ Skip to main content

Cut! that’s a wrap: regulating negative emotion by ending emotion-eliciting situations

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Cut! that’s a wrap: regulating negative emotion by ending emotion-eliciting situations
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00165
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lara Vujovic, Philipp C. Opitz, Jeffrey L. Birk, Heather L. Urry

Abstract

Little is known about the potentially powerful set of emotion regulation (ER) processes that target emotion-eliciting situations. We thus studied the decision to end emotion-eliciting situations in the laboratory. We hypothesized that people would try to end negative situations more frequently than neutral situations to regulate distress. In addition, motivated by the selection, optimization, and compensation with ER framework, we hypothesized that failed attempts to end the situation would prompt either (a) greater negative emotion or (b) compensatory use of a different ER process, attentional deployment (AD). Fifty-eight participants (18-26 years old, 67% women) viewed negative and neutral pictures and pressed a key whenever they wished to stop viewing them. After key press, the picture disappeared ("success") or stayed ("failure") on screen. To index emotion, we measured corrugator and electrodermal activity, heart rate, and self-reported arousal. To index overt AD, we measured eye gaze. As their reason for ending the situation, participants more frequently reported being upset by high- than low-arousal negative pictures; they more frequently reported being bored by low- than high-arousal neutral pictures. Nevertheless, participants' negative emotional responding did not increase in the context of ER failure nor did they use overt AD as a compensatory ER strategy. We conclude that situation-targeted ER processes are used to regulate emotional responses to high-arousal negative and low-arousal neutral situations; ER processes other than overt AD may be used to compensate for ER failure in this context.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Portugal 1 2%
Unknown 51 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 21%
Researcher 8 15%
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 9 17%
Unknown 8 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 35 66%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Linguistics 1 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 10 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 26 April 2014.
All research outputs
#6,587,685
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#9,545
of 31,442 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,763
of 309,169 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#91
of 180 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,442 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 309,169 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 180 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.