Cited by 151Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesChild Therapy and Development

The role of emotion regulation in the treatment of child anxiety disorders

Hannesdottir, Dagmar Kristin, Ollendick, Thomas H.·2007·Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review

Abstract

In this review, we examine the role of emotion regulation in the treatment of children with anxiety disorders. Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) has been shown to "work" for children with anxiety disorders and it has been categorized as an evidence-based treatment. However, most studies have shown that the treatment is effective for about 60-70% of children, leaving the remaining children symptomatic and oftentimes with persisting psychological disorders. Of importance, it has also been shown that many children with anxiety disorders demonstrate poor emotion regulation skills. Despite these findings, little attention has been directed toward incorporating emotion regulation strategies into these relatively effective cognitive-behavioral treatments. It is possible that CBT programs do not work as well for a portion of children because their emotion regulation deficits, if present, are not being targeted sufficiently. In this review, it is suggested that adding an emotion regulation component could increase treatment efficacy. In addition, strategies aimed at improving emotion regulation at the individual level and at the family level are introduced. Details of how improved emotion regulation skills could be beneficial in bringing about change are discussed. Finally, issues of measurement and the clinical implications for research and practice are considered.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10567-007-0024-6

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • One possible reason for not completing or not responding to ERP is the aversive nature of exposures, which requires patients to engage in challenging tasks without utilizing maladaptive coping strategies such as emotional suppression.

    “One possible reason for not completing or not responding to ERP is the aversive nature of exposures, which requires a patient to engage in challenging tasks without utilizing maladaptive coping strategies such as emotional suppression (Hannesdottir & Ollendick, 2007;Mitchell, Riccardi, Keough, Timpano, & Schmidt, 2013).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hannesdottir, D. K., & Ollendick, T. H.
Affiliations
Virginia Tech (US)
Venue
Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review
Published
2007-08-20
Volume
10
Issue
3
Pages
275-293
ISSN
  • 1096-4037 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2827
OpenAlex
W1963550785
Cited by
151
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 7
FWCI
1.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Therapy and Development
Keywords
emotion regulation, childhood anxiety disorders, cognitive behavioral therapy, treatment efficacy, emotional dysregulation, family intervention, treatment-resistant anxiety
MeSH terms
Affect, Anxiety Disorders, Child, Humans, Phobic Disorders, Social Control, Informal, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Panic Disorder

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review