ArticlePloS one2024
Social good reappraisal as a novel and effective emotion regulation strategy.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Society asks individuals, such as front-line medical and emergency personnel or social media moderators, to help others under highly negative emotional circumstances, and those individuals need to regulate their emotions for their own well being. A well-studied form of emotion regulation is reappraisal, the use of cognitive processes used to reinterpret initial emotional responses to negative events. Distancing (pretending that a situation is distant in time or space) is well documented to be an effective form of emotion regulation, but it may not be applicable in social contexts where individuals must engage with distressing events to help others. Here, for the first time, we asked whether a novel reappraisal strategy focused on Social Good-imagining that an aversive event is also an opportunity to prevent harm to others-can be an effective form of reappraisal. In a pre-registered experiment, participants were randomly assigned to Distancing or Social Good conditions as they viewed neutral or highly aversive images and then reported their subjective emotional states with or without reappraisal. Both Distancing and Social Good reappraisals led to significantly less negative affect. Distancing yielded a stronger effect, but importantly, participants reported both Distancing and Social Good as equally easy to employ and both were effective across multiple demographic and personality characteristics, indicating the broad value of both as effective forms of reappraisal. Across both reappraisal conditions, effective reappraisal increased with age and positive affect. These findings indicate that Social Good is an effective reappraisal strategy and raise the possibility that it could be particularly valuable in contexts in which emotionally demanding tasks are completed on behalf of the good for other people.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.