Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39349677›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Emotion regulation elicits cross-linguistically shared and language-specific forms of linguistic distancing.

Kevin J Holmes, Lena Kassin, Daniela Buchillon-Almeida, Enriqueta Canseco-Gonzalez

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Kevin J HolmesDepartment of Psychology, Reed College, Portland, OR, 97202, USA. kjholmes@reed.edu.
Lena KassinDepartment of Psychology, Reed College, Portland, OR, 97202, USA.
Daniela Buchillon-AlmeidaDepartment of Psychology, Reed College, Portland, OR, 97202, USA.
Enriqueta Canseco-GonzalezDepartment of Psychology, Reed College, Portland, OR, 97202, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cognitively reappraising a stressful experience-reinterpreting the situation to blunt its emotional impact-is effective for regulating negative emotions. English speakers have been shown to engage in linguistic distancing when reappraising, spontaneously using words that are more abstract or impersonal. Across two preregistered studies (N = 299), we investigated whether such shifts in language use generalize to Spanish, a language proposed to offer unique tools for expressing psychological distance. Bilingual speakers of Spanish and English and a comparison group of English monolinguals transcribed their thoughts in each of their languages while responding naturally to negative images or reappraising them. Reappraisal shifted markers of psychological distance common to both languages (e.g., reduced use of "I"/"yo"), as well as Spanish-specific markers (e.g., greater use of "estar": "to be" for temporary states). Whether these linguistic shifts reflected successful emotion regulation depended on language experience: in exploratory analyses, the common markers were more strongly linked to reduced negative affect for late than early Spanish learners, and one Spanish-specific marker ("estar") also predicted reduced negative affect for early learners. Our findings suggest that people distance their language in both cross-linguistically shared and language-specific ways when regulating their emotions.

Indexed as

Emotional RegulationLanguageLinguisticsMultilingualismAdolescentAdultEmotionsFemaleHumansMaleYoung AdultEmotion regulationLanguage and thoughtLinguistic distancingPsychological distanceReappraisalSpanish

Identifiers

PMID39349677
PMCPMC11443042

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.