ArticleScientific reports2025
Testing a digital and interactive scale (the three circles) to assess emotion regulation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The tripartite model of emotion regulation (Three Circle Model), comprising threat, drive, and soothing systems, underpins Compassion Focused Therapy (CFT). These systems are implicated in experiences of emotion, motivation, and physiological activation and this model is used within CFT frameworks to assess emotion regulation functioning and assist with case formulation. Despite its importance to CFT, each system is typically gauged using proxy self-report measures of emotion, lacking direct measurement of system interactivity. In this study, we developed and psychometrically tested a novel digital measure of the tripartite model with 311 young adults (aged 18-24, M = 19.6; 223 female, 85 male, 3 non-binary). Here we report that evaluation indicated the measure had good construct validity with other validated self-report measures of emotion, emotion regulation, and mental health. Test-retest reliability of the scale was then established in a second sample with 90 participants (aged 18-24, M = 23.2; 43 female, 46 male, 1 non-binary). These findings support the use of this measure as a brief, dynamic scale that captures central CFT theory and can be easily used with clients or in research contexts.
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.