Cited by 466Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 55 of the 63 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 1 of the 24 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

How to handle anxiety: The effects of reappraisal, acceptance, and suppression strategies on anxious arousal

Open access
Hofmann, Stefan G., Heering, Sanna, Sawyer, Alice T., Asnaani, Anu·2009·Behaviour Research and Therapy

Abstract

It has been suggested that reappraisal strategies are more effective than suppression strategies for regulating emotions. Recently, proponents of the acceptance-based behavior therapy movement have further emphasized the importance of acceptance-based emotion regulation techniques. In order to directly compare these different emotion regulation strategies, 202 volunteers were asked to give an impromptu speech in front of a video camera. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups. The Reappraisal group was instructed to regulate their anxious arousal by reappraising the situation; the Suppression group was asked to suppress their anxious behaviors; and the Acceptance group was instructed to accept their anxiety. As expected, the Suppression group showed a greater increase in heart rate from baseline than the Reappraisal and Acceptance groups. Moreover, the Suppression group reported more anxiety than the Reappraisal group. However, the Acceptance and Suppression groups did not differ in their subjective anxiety response. These results suggest that both reappraising and accepting anxiety is more effective for moderating the physiological arousal than suppressing anxiety. However, reappraising is more effective for moderating the subjective feeling of anxiety than attempts to suppress or accept it. © 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.brat.2009.02.010

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

1 of 24 cited sources checked · 1 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 23 claims

  • Probably not a substantial claim. 12
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 16
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
22 of 22
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Participants complied with the emotion regulation instructions they received.

    “Another weakness was the lack of a manipulation check.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The brief acceptance instructions were strong enough to engage the intended acceptance process.

    “Particularly challenging was the acceptance instructions. In contrast to previous studies (Campbell-Sills et al., 2006a,b), the acceptance instructions were relatively brief, without the use of any metaphors and imagery.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The speech task produced enough anticipatory anxiety to reveal group differences.

    “It is possible that the differences might have been more pronounced if we had induced greater anticipatory anxiety by making the speech task more challenging.”
3 of 3

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?

Statistics recomputed

Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.

  • ConsistentF(2, 191) = 2.04reported p > .13 · recomputed p = .133

    “F (2, 191) = 2.04, p > .13”

  • ConsistentF(2, 191) = 0.48reported p > .6 · recomputed p = .620

    “F (2, 191) = .48, p > .6”

  • ConsistentF(2, 193) = 0.3reported p > .7 · recomputed p = .741

    “F (2, 193) = .30, p > .7”

  • ConsistentF(2, 193) = 3.06reported p = .049 · recomputed p = .049

    “F (2, 193) = 3.06, p = .049”

  • ConsistentF(2, 193) = 2.13reported p = .12 · recomputed p = .122

    “F (2, 193) = 2.13, p = .12”

  • ConsistentF(4, 187) = 158.89reported p < .0001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F (4, 187) = 158.89, p < .0001”

  • ConsistentF(2, 190) = 3.46reported p = .033 · recomputed p = .033

    “F (2, 190) = 3.46, p = .033”

  • ConsistentF(2, 190) = 3.56reported p = .03 · recomputed p = .030

    “F (2, 190) = 3.56, p = .03”

  • ConsistentF(2, 199) = 1.88reported p > .15 · recomputed p = .155

    “F (2, 199) = 1.88, p > .15”

  • Consistentχ²(2) = 1.82reported p > .4 · recomputed p = .403

    “χ2 (2) = 1.82, p > .4”

10 of 10

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Self-check results appear here once an independent check has confirmed them.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 63 references

8 of the 63 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 466

Metadata

Authors
Hofmann, S. G., Heering, S., Sawyer, A. T., & Asnaani, A.
Affiliations
Boston University (US)
Corresponding author
Hofmann, Stefan G.
Venue
Behaviour Research and Therapy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-05
Volume
47
Issue
5
Pages
389-394
ISSN
0005-7967 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2030217702
Cited by
464
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 51 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 34 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 27 · 2013: 34 · 2012: 30
FWCI
25.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Behaviour Research and Therapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH078308)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
emotion regulation, anxiety, cognitive reappraisal, acceptance, expressive suppression, anxious arousal, heart rate, subjective anxiety, speaking anxiety, physiological arousal
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Anxiety, Arousal, Female, Heart Rate, Humans, Internal-External Control, Male, Middle Aged, Repression, Psychology, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Young Adult

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

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