Automatic self-focused and situation-focused reappraisal of disgusting emotion by implementation intention: an ERP study
- 60 Downloads
Detachment (self-focused) and positive reinterpretation (situation-focused) are two important forms of cognitive reappraisal during emotion regulation. Previous research shows situation-focused reappraisal to be more effective than self-focused reappraisal for intentional emotion regulation. How the two differ in emotional consequences as components of automatic emotion regulation is however unclear. In the current study, event-related potentials were recorded to clarify this problem, while participants passively viewed disgusting or neutral scenes or formed implementation intentions based on self-focused or situation-focused reappraisal. Behavioural results showed fewer negative emotions during self-focused reappraisal than during either situation-focused reappraisal or free viewing (which had similar emotion ratings). In addition, self-reported cognitive cost was not enhanced during the two forms of reappraisal compared to passive viewing. Late positive potential (LPP) amplitudes for disgusting stimuli were larger than those elicited for neutral stimuli, at both frontal and posterior-parietal regions. This amplitude enhancement effect, irrespective of whether frontal or parietal LPP were involved, was found to be weaker during self-focused reappraisal than when participants were engaged in situation-focused reappraisal or passive viewing. The latter two conditions showed similar amplitude enhancement. These findings suggest that automatic self-focused reappraisal by implementation intention produces more favourable emotion regulation than situation-focused reappraisal, without enhancing cognitive cost.
KeywordsImplementation intention Self-focused reappraisal Situation-focused reappraisal Automatic emotion regulation Event-related potentials Late-positive potential
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 31671164, 31871103, 31600886).
Complaince with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
All authors report no biomedical financial interests or potential conflicts of interest.
- Gollwitzer PM, Sheeran P (2006) Implementation intentions and goal achievement: a meta-analysis of effects and processes. Adv Exp Soc Psychol 38:69–119Google Scholar
- Gross JJ (2014) Emotion regulation: conceptual and empirical foundation. In: Gross JJ (ed) Handbook of emotion regulation, 2nd edn, Guilford Press: New York, pp 3–20Google Scholar
- Hajcak G, Dunning JP, Foti D, Weinberg A (2014) Temporal dynamics of emotion regulation. In: Gross JJ (ed) Handbook of emotion regulation, 2nd edn. Guilford Press, New York, pp 441–474Google Scholar
- Huang YX, Luo YJ (2004) Native assessment of international affective picture system. Chin Mental Health J 9:631–634Google Scholar
- Lang PJ, Bradley MM, Cuthbert BN (1999) International affective picture system (IAPS): technical manual and affective ratings. Gainesville, FL: The Center for Research in Psychophysiology, University of FloridaGoogle Scholar
- Luck SJ (2005) An introduction to the event-related potential technique. MIT press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Posner MI, Snyder CRR (1975) Attention and cognitive control. In: Solso RL (ed) Information processing and cognition. Erlbaum, HillsdaleGoogle Scholar
- Xie X, Mulej Bratec S, Schmid G, Meng C, Doll A, Wohlschläger A, Finke K, Förstl H, Zimmer C, Pekrun R, Sorg C (2016) How do you make me feel better? Social cognitive emotion regulation and the default mode network. NeuroImage 134:270–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.04.015 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar