CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 18COVID-19 and Mental HealthAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Flexible emotion regulatory selection when coping with COVID-19-related threats during quarantine

Open access
Shabat, Maya, Shafir, Roni, Sheppes, Gal·2021·Scientific Reports
DOI 10.1038/s41598-021-00716-6PMC PMC8563799
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic poses significant emotional challenges that individuals need to select how to regulate. The present study directly examined how during the pandemic, healthy individuals select between regulatory strategies to cope with varying COVID-19-related threats, and whether an adaptive flexible regulatory selection pattern will emerge in this unique threatening global context. Accordingly, this two-study investigation tested how healthy individuals during a strict state issued quarantine, behaviorally select to regulate COVID-19-related threats varying in their intensity. Study 1 created and validated an ecologically relevant set of low and high intensity sentences covering major COVID-19 facets that include experiencing physical symptoms, infection threats, and social and economic consequences. Study 2 examined the influence of the intensity of these COVID-19-related threats, on behavioral regulatory selection choices between disengagement via attentional distraction and engagement via reappraisal. Confirming a flexible regulatory selection conception, healthy individuals showed strong choice preference for engagement reappraisal when regulating low intensity COVID-19-related threats, but showed strong choice preference for disengagement distraction when regulating high intensity COVID-19-related threats. These findings support the importance of regulatory selection flexibility for psychological resilience during a major global crisis.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41598-021-00716-6

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Healthy individuals have shown a preference for using cognitive reappraisal for low-intensity stressors and distraction for high-intensity stressors during the pandemic.

    “healthy individuals have demonstrated a preference to use cognitive reappraisal when managing low-intensity stressors and distraction when addressing high-intensity stressors during the pandemic (Shabat et al., 2021)”

    From RESILIENCE, COPING, AND THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC ACROSS THE GLOBE – AN UPDATE: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED? (2023) · cites this paper as Shabat et al., 2021

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 42

  1. Gross, J. J. The extended process model of emotion regulation: elaborations, applications, and future directions. Psychol. Inq. 26(1), 130–137 (2015). · DOI
  2. Sheppes, G. Transcending the “good & bad” and “here & now” in emotion regulation: costs and benefits of strategies across regulatory stages. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 61, 185–236 (2020). · DOI
  3. Brooks, S. K. et al. The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence. Lancet 395(10227), 912–920 (2020). · DOI · Paper page
  4. Jiang, H. J., Nan, J., Lv, Z. Y. & Yang, J. Psychological impacts of the COVID-19 epidemic on Chinese people: Exposure, post-traumatic stress symptom, and emotion regulation. Asian Pac J Trop Med 13(6), 252–259 (2020). · DOI
  5. Tyra, A. T., Griffin, S. M., Fergus, T. A. & Ginty, A. T. Individual differences in emotion regulation prospectively predict early COVID-19 related acute stress. J. Anxiety Disord. 81, 102411 (2021). · DOI
  6. Panayiotou, G., Panteli, M. & Leonidou, C. Coping with the invisible enemy: The role of emotion regulation and awareness in quality of life during the COVID-19 pandemic. J. Context. Behav. Sci. 19, 2212–1447 (2021). · DOI
  7. Li, J. B., Yang, A., Dou, K. & Cheung, R. Y. M. Self-control moderates the association between perceived severity of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and mental health problems among the Chinese public. PsyArXiv Preprints (2020). · DOI
  8. Schudy, A. et al. Mental well-being during pandemic: the role of cognitive biases and emotion regulation strategies in risk perception and affective response to COVID-19. Front. Psych. 11, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.589973 (2020). · DOI
  9. Ford, B. Q. & Feinberg, M. Coping with politics: the benefits and costs of emotion regulation. Curr. Opin. Behav. Sci. 34, 123–128 (2020). · DOI
  10. Ford, B. Q., Feinberg, M., Lam, P., Mauss, I. B. & John, O. P. Using reappraisal to regulate negative emotion after the 2016 US presidential election: Does emotion regulation trump political action?. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 117(5), 998 (2019). · DOI
  11. Smith, A. M. et al. Coping with health threats: the costs and benefits of managing emotions. Psychol. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976211024260 (2021). · DOI
  12. Wang, K. A et al. global test of brief reappraisal interventions on emotions during the COVID-19 pandemic. (2020). https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/m4gpq. · DOI
  13. Arbel, R., Khouri, M., Sagi, J. & Cohen, N. Reappraising Negative Emotions Reduces Distress During the COVID-19 Outbreak. PsyArXiv. (2020). https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/y25gx. · DOI
  14. Gross, J. J., Uusberg, H. & Uusberg, A. Mental illness and well-being: an affect regulation perspective. World Psychiatry 18, 130–139 (2019). · DOI
  15. Sheppes, G. & Levin, Z. Emotion regulation choice: Selecting between cognitive regulation strategies to control emotion. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 7, 179 (2013). · DOI
  16. Shafir, R., Schwartz, N., Blechert, J. & Sheppes, G. Emotional intensity influences pre-implementation and implementation of distraction and reappraisal. Soc. Cogn. Aff. Neurosci. 10(10), 1329–1337 (2015). · DOI
  17. Sheppes, G., Brady, W. J. & Samson, A. C. In (visual) search for a new distraction: The efficiency of a novel attentional deployment versus semantic meaning regulation strategies. Front. Psychol. 5, 346 (2014). · DOI
  18. Denny, B. T., Inhoff, M. C., Zerubavel, N., Davachi, L. & Ochsner, K. N. Getting over it: Long-lasting effects of emotion regulation on amygdala response. Psychol. Sci. 26, 1377–1388 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  19. Thiruchselvam, R., Blechert, J., Sheppes, G., Rydstrom, A. & Gross, J. J. The temporal dynamics of emotion regulation: An EEG study of distraction and reappraisal. Biol. Psychol. 87(1), 84–92 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  20. Bonanno, G. A. et al. Psychological resilience and dysfunction among hospitalized survivors of the SARS epidemic in hong kong: a latent class approach. Health Psychol. 27(5), 659–667 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  21. Chen, S. & Bonanno, G. A. Psychological adjustment during the global outbreak of COVID-19: A resilience perspective. Psychol. Trauma Theory Res. Pract. Policy 12(S1), S51–S54 (2020). · DOI
  22. Last, M. The First Wave of COVID-19 in Israel-Initial Analysis of Publicly Available Data. medRxiv (2020).‏ · DOI
  23. Shafir, R., Zucker, L. & Sheppes, G. Turning off hot feelings: Down-regulation of sexual desire using distraction and situation-focused reappraisal. Biol. Psychol. 137, 116–124 (2018). · DOI
  24. Shafir, R. & Sheppes, G. When knowledge Is (Not) power- the influence of anticipatory information on subsequent emotion regulation: neural and behavioral evidence. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 147(8), 1225–1240 (2018). · DOI
  25. Sheppes, G., Catran, E. & Meiran, N. Reappraisal (but not distraction) is going to make you sweat: Physiological evidence for self-control effort. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 71(2), 91–96 (2009). · DOI
  26. Sheppes, G., Scheibe, S., Suri, G. & Gross, J. J. Emotion-regulation choice. Psychol. Sci. 22(11), 1391–1396 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  27. Sternberg, N. et al. When facebook and finals collide-procrastinatory social media usage predicts enhanced anxiety. Comput. Hum. Behav. 109, 106358 (2020). · DOI · Paper page
  28. Ilan, S. D., Shafir, R., Birk, J. L., Bonanno, G. A. & Sheppes, G. Monitoring in emotion regulation: behavioral decisions and neural consequences. Soc. Cogn. Aff. Neurosci. 14(12), 1273–1283 (2019). · DOI
  29. McRae, K., Ciesielski, B. & Gross, J. J. Unpacking cognitive reappraisal: goals, tactics, and outcomes. Emotion 12(2), 250–255 (2012). · DOI
  30. Qi, S. et al. The temporal dynamics of detached versus positive reappraisal: An ERP study. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 17(3), 516–527 (2017). · DOI
  31. Sheppes, G. et al. Emotion regulation choice: A conceptual framework and supporting evidence. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 143(1), 163–181 (2014). · DOI
  32. Lovibond, P. F. & Lovibond, S. H. The structure of negative emotional states: Comparison of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) with the Beck Depression and Anxiety Inventories. Behav. Res. Ther. 33, 335–343 (1995). · DOI · Paper page
  33. Buysse, D. J., Reynolds, C. F., Monk, T. H., Berman, S. R. & Kupfer, D. J. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index: A new instrument for psychiatric practice and research. Psychiatry Res. 28, 193–213 (1989). · DOI · Paper page
  34. Spielberger, C. D., Gorsuch, R. L., Lushene, R., Vagg, P. R. & Jacobs, G. A. Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Palo Alto, CA: (Consulting Psychologists Press, 1983).
  35. Suri, G., Whittaker, K. & Gross, J. J. Launching reappraisal: It’s less common than you might think. Emotion 15(1), 73–77 (2015). · DOI
  36. Mehta, A., Young, G., Wicker, A., Barber, S. & Suri, G. Emotion regulation choice: Differences in US and Indian populations. Int. J. Indian Psychol. 4(2), 202–219 (2017).
  37. Moodie, C. A. et al. The neural bases of cognitive emotion regulation: The roles of strategy and intensity. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 20, 1–21 (2020). · DOI
  38. Birk, J. L. & Bonanno, G. A. When to throw the switch: The adaptiveness of modifying emotion regulation strategies based on affective and physiological feedback. Emotion 16(5), 657–670 (2016). · DOI
  39. Aldao, A. & Tull, M. T. Putting emotion regulation in context. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 3, 100–107 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  40. Hollenstein, T., Lichtwarck-Aschoff, A. & Potworowski, G. A model of socioemotional flexibility at three time scales. Emot. Rev. 5, 397–405 (2013). · DOI
  41. Rodin, R. et al. Expressive flexibility in combat veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder and depression. J. Affect. Disord. 207, 236–241 (2017). · DOI
  42. Matthews, M., Webb, T. L., Shafir, R., Snow, M. & Sheppes, G. Identifying the Determinants of Emotion Regulation Choice: A Meta-Analysis (under review).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Shabat, M., Shafir, R., & Sheppes, G.
Affiliations
Tel Aviv University (IL)
Corresponding author
  • Shabat, Maya
  • Sheppes, Gal
Venue
Scientific Reports
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2021-11-02
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
21468-21468
ISSN
2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1038/s41598-021-00716-6
PMC
PMC8563799
OpenAlex
W3210806739
Cited by
18
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3
FWCI
2.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Israel Science Foundation (1130/16)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
emotion regulation, COVID-19 pandemic, quarantine, threat intensity, cognitive reappraisal, disengagement, attentional distraction, psychological resilience
MeSH terms
Emotional Regulation, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Quarantine, Resilience, Psychological

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