Skip to content
PaperFren

Emotion

Is the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire actually useful?

Ioannidis CA, Siegling AB · Frontiers in psychology · 2015

Open access · cc by · source: Europe PMC

While the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire helps predict cognitive flexibility and coping, it does not add much predictive power beyond basic personality traits for general emotional states.

Study at a glance

Design
Cross-sectional — Online ERQ reappraisal/suppression survey with incremental validity over Big Five
N
N=203 · 145 female students and non-students via a British university subject pool
Population
University-affiliated adults
Outcome
Criterion and incremental validity of ERQ for affect and cognitive coping

Structured fields used in claim comparison tables when every cited study has a complete layer.

Key findings

Cognitive reappraisal was linked to higher positive affect and lower negative affect, while expressive suppression was tied to lower positive affect but not higher negative affect. Furthermore, after controlling for personality, the questionnaire's subscales still explained a unique 3% of the variance in mental flexibility and 4% in constructive self-assertion. However, the strategies failed to explain additional variance in general emotional states like anxiety or worry once basic personality traits were controlled.

Methodology

The researchers surveyed 203 individuals, mostly university students, using an online questionnaire to evaluate their use of cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression. They measured how well these two emotion regulation strategies predicted participants' emotional states and cognitive coping styles. Crucially, they tested whether these strategies could predict these outcomes even after accounting for the participants' personality traits.

Limitations

Because this study is cross-sectional and correlational, it cannot prove that using these emotion regulation strategies causes better mental health outcomes. The sample was also highly specific, consisting primarily of young, female psychology and linguistics students in the UK, which limits how well these findings apply to other age groups or cultures. Finally, the questionnaire uses brief scales with only a few items, which might not fully capture the complex, real-time ways people manage their emotions in daily life.

How this study connects

Role on claims

Each row is a claim on a concept or method page where this paper supports, challenges, or qualifies the statement. Roles are hand-checked — not a model guess.

  • SupportsCognitive Reappraisalconcept

    The use of cognitive reappraisal is associated with greater psychological well-being, higher positive affect, and lower negative affect.

    Evidence for the claim as stated.

  • SupportsCognitive Reappraisalconcept

    While retrospective trait questionnaires link cognitive reappraisal to reduced global negative affect and improved well-being, a daily diary study tracking real-time emotional adjustments in high-stress roles found that managing daily negative emotions had no significant short-term daily impact on stress or well-being.

    Evidence for the claim as stated.

  • SupportsExpressive Suppressionconcept

    Expressive suppression is generally associated with reduced positive affect, higher daily stress, and increased depressive symptoms, although its negative effects are not uniform across all individuals.

    Evidence for the claim as stated.

  • SupportsExpressive Suppressionconcept

    Measures of expressive suppression fail to explain additional variance in general emotional states like anxiety or worry once basic personality traits are controlled for.

    Evidence for the claim as stated.

Open questions

Tensions this paper is part of

From concept pages' “where studies disagree.” Disagreement means the same question; scope means different assays, populations, or outcomes.

Related papers in this topic

Same topic cluster — not a recommendation engine.