Search for: All records

Abstract Emotion regulation is a powerful predictor of youth mental health and a crucial ingredient of interventions. A growing body of evidence indicates that the beliefs individuals hold about the extent to which emotions are controllable (emotion controllability beliefs) influence both the degree and the ways in which they regulate emotions. A systematic review was conducted that investigated the associations between emotion controllability beliefs and youth anxiety and depression symptoms. The search identified 21 peer-reviewed publications that met the inclusion criteria. Believing that emotions are relatively controllable was associated with fewer anxiety and depression symptoms, in part because these beliefs were associated with more frequent use of adaptive emotion regulation strategies. These findings support theoretical models linking emotion controllability beliefs with anxiety and depression symptoms via emotion regulation strategies that target emotional experience, like reappraisal. Taken together, the review findings demonstrate that emotion controllability beliefs matter for youth mental health. Understanding emotion controllability beliefs is of prime importance for basic science and practice, as it will advance understanding of mental health and provide additional targets for managing symptoms of anxiety and depression in young people. 

Exposure to adversity (e.g., poverty, bereavement) is a robust predictor of disruptions in psychological functioning. However, people vary greatly in their responses to adversity; some experience severe long-term disruptions, others experience minimal disruptions or even improvements. We refer to the latter outcomes—faring better than expected given adversity—as psychological resilience. Understanding what processes explain resilience has critical theoretical and practical implications. Yet, psychology's understanding of resilience is incomplete, for two reasons: ( a) We lack conceptual clarity, and ( b) two major approaches to resilience—the stress and coping approach and the emotion and emotion-regulation approach—have limitations and are relatively isolated from one another. To address these two obstacles,we first discuss conceptual questions about resilience. Next, we offer an integrative affect-regulation framework that capitalizes on complementary strengths of both approaches. This framework advances our understanding of resilience by integrating existing findings, highlighting gaps in knowledge, and guiding future research.