情緒調節策略與調控焦點的適配性

When the Means Justify the Ends: The Role of Regulatory Fit in Emotion Regulation

蔡曉天(Hsiao-Tien Tsai)

指導教授 ： 蘇珍頤

國立臺灣大學/理學院/心理學研究所/碩士(2013年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2013.00429

摘要

過去研究在評估情緒調節策略的成效時，主要是根據該策略是否能帶來較好的調節結果（e.g., Gross & John, 2003），卻忽略了使用策略背後的動機可能在其中扮演的調節角色。根據調控焦點適配理論（Higgins, 2000），當個體的動機傾向與其使用的策略具有適配性時，個體會有較強的動機與較佳的表現。本研究欲將該理論應用在情緒調節的課題上，檢驗動機傾向（促進型焦點與預防型焦點）與情緒調節策略（重新評估與表達壓抑）之間是否具有適配性。首先，本研究假設促進型焦點與重新評估策略之間存在適配關係，而預防型焦點與表達壓抑策略之間存在適配關係。此外，相較於處於不適配狀態(促進型焦點—表達壓抑;預防型焦點—重新評估)，本研究預期個體在達到適配狀態(促進型焦點—重新評估;預防型焦點—表達壓抑)時會產生較佳的情緒調節結果。研究一問卷調查的結果顯示，當個體的促進型動機傾向越高時，慣性使用重新評估作為情緒調節策略的程度也越高，而當個體的預防型動機傾向越高時，慣性使用表達壓抑作為情緒調節策略的程度也越高；相反地，當個體的促進型動機傾向越高時，慣性使用表達壓抑作為情緒調節策略的程度也越低，而當個體的預防型動機傾向越高時，慣性使用重新評估作為情緒調節策略的程度也越低。研究二以實驗法操弄調控焦點與情緒調節策略。實驗結果顯示，在觀看引發害怕情緒的影片後，相較於不適配情境下的參與者，適配情境下的參與者有較高的情緒穩定度以及較少的自我調控資源耗損。最後，我們也針對本研究的貢獻與限制進行更深入的討論。

關鍵字

情緒調節 ； 表達壓抑 ； 重新評估 ； 調控焦點 ； 促進型焦點 ； 預防型焦點 ； 調控適配性 ； 自我控制

並列摘要

Previous research tend to infer the effects of emotion regulation strategies primarily from the consequences they brought about, ignoring the role that motivational orientation in goal pursuit may play in moderating such consequences. According to regulatory fit theory (Higgins, 2000), regulatory fit occurs when there is fit between one’s motivational orientation and one’s strategy used in goal pursuit, which in turn leads to enhanced motivation and performance. Extending regulatory fit theory to the realm of emotion regulation, we examined relations of fit between motivational orientation in goal pursuit (i.e., promotion focus and prevention focus) and emotion regulation strategy (reappraisal and suppression). We hypothesized fit of promotion focus to reappraisal and of prevention focus to suppression. Furthermore, we expected better regulatory outcomes in the fit conditions (i.e., promotion－reappraisal and prevention－suppression) than in the non-fit conditions (i.e., promotion－suppression and prevention－reappraisal). In Study 1, we found that chronic promotion focus was associated with greater habitual use of reappraisal, whereas chronic prevention focus was associated with greater habitual use of suppression. By contrast, chronic promotion focus was associated with lower habitual use of suppression, whereas chronic prevention focus was associated with lower habitual use of reappraisal. In Study 2, both regulatory focus and emotion regulation were manipulated in a laboratory setting. Results showed that individuals in the fit conditions showed greater emotional stability and lower self-regulatory resource depletion than those in the non-fit conditions after watching a fear-eliciting film. Contributions and limitations of the present study were discussed.

並列關鍵字

emotion regulation ； suppression ； reappraisal ； regulatory focus ； promotion focus ； prevention focus ； regulatory fit ； self-control

參考文獻

Avnet, T., Laufer, D., & Higgins, E. T. (2013). Are all experiences of fit created equal? Two paths to persuasion. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23, 301-316. doi: 10.1016/j.jcps.2012.10.011

Baumeister, R. F., & Heatherton, T. F. (1996). Self-regulation failure: An overview. Psychological Inquiry, 7, 1-15. doi: 10.1207/s15327965pli0701_1

Bonanno, G. A., Papa, A., Lalande, K., Westphal, M., & Coifman, K. (2004). The importance of being flexible: The ability to both enhance and suppress emotional expression predicts long-term adjustment. Psychological Science, 15, 482-487. doi: 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00705.x

Brendl, C. M., & Higgins, E. T. (1996). Principles of judging valence: What makes events positive or negative? Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 95-160. doi: 10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60237-3

Butler, E. A., Lee, T. L., & Gross, J. J. (2007). Emotion regulation and culture: Are the social consequences of emotion suppression culture-specific? Emotion, 7, 30-48. doi: 10.1037/1528-3542.7.1.30