Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39417024›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2024

Strategies and goals in Emotion Regulation models: a systematic review.

Consuelo Martínez-Priego, Belén Poveda García-Noblejas, Pablo Roca

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
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

3 authors.

Consuelo Martínez-PriegoDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Villanueva, Madrid, Spain.
Belén Poveda García-NoblejasDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Villanueva, Madrid, Spain.
Pablo RocaDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Villanueva, Madrid, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Studies examining the role of Emotion Regulation (ER) do not consistently explain the underlying model or theory they are employing, resulting in a conflation of different strategies and goals within the ER scientific literature. This study aims to conduct a systematic review and conceptual analysis of the primary strategies and goals advocated in the ER models, theories, and frameworks. Furthermore, we explored the distinctions between the prevailing contemporary ER models and classical conceptions of emotional dynamics, such as those proposed by Aristotle, Descartes, and Darwin. Methods: An electronic search was conducted in the Web of Science, Medline, and Scopus databases in November 2023. The key search terms used were grouped into two different topics: Emotion Regulation and Models/Theories/Frameworks. Articles were included if they reported one or more ER model in healthy individuals or emotionally disordered individuals and if they were published in a peer-reviewed journal in English in the last 5 years (from 2019 to 2023). A total of two reviewers independently assessed the titles, abstracts, and full texts. Models identified were summarized and classified based on the different ER strategies and goals. Results: Of the 1,012 titles for initial consideration, 139 articles met the full eligibility criteria and were included for data extraction and synthesis. The review identified 10 ER models, and the most commonly used were the Process Model of Emotion Regulation and the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation. There was a great deal of homogeneity among the proposed ER strategies and goals: the cognitive dimension is the core of ER strategy, and the ER goals are primarily hedonic or instrumental in nature. Discussion: Both Descartes and Darwin views were present in the ER models; however, some of the most significant contributions in Aristotelian proposal seem to be forgotten, such as the integration of the physical, operational, and growth dimensions (eudaimonic goals). Systematic review registration: This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines and was preregistered at Prospero platform (CRD42023491948).

Indexed as

emotion regulationframeworksgoalsmodelsstrategiestheorieswellbeing

Identifiers

PMID39417024
PMCPMC11479914

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.