CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 603Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesIdentity, Memory, and TherapyEmotions and Moral Behavior

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

When Asking “Why” Does Not Hurt Distinguishing Rumination From Reflective Processing of Negative Emotions

Kross, Ethan, Ayduk, Ozlem, Mischel, Walter·2005·Psychological Science
DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01600.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Two experiments examined the psychological operations that enable individuals to process negative emotions and experiences without increasing negative affect. In Study 1, type of self-perspective (self-immersed vs. self-distanced) and type of emotional focus (what vs. why) were experimentally manipulated following the recall of an anger-eliciting interpersonal experience. A why focus on emotions from a self-distanced perspective (distanced-why strategy) was expected to enable “cool,” reflective processing of emotions, in which individuals can focus on their experience without reactivating excessive “hot” negative affect. Findings were consistent with this hypothesis. Study 2 replicated these findings and furthermore demonstrated that (a) the degree to which individuals construe their recalled experience in abstract versus concrete terms mediates the effect of the distanced-why strategy and (b) the status of the recalled experience (resolved vs. unresolved) does not moderate the effectiveness of the distanced-why strategy. These findings help disentangle the mechanisms that may allow adaptive working through from those that lead to rumination.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01600.x

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 41 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. 10.1037/0021-843X.109.3.504 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Zeno W.M., 1995, The educator's word frequency index

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–400 of 603

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Kross, E., Ayduk, O., & Mischel, W.
Affiliations
  • Columbia University (US)
  • University of California, Berkeley
ORCID
Kross, Ethan
Venue
Psychological Science
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2005-09
Volume
16
Issue
9
Pages
709-715
ISSN
  • 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9280
DOI
10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01600.x
OpenAlex
W2100543830
Cited by
603
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 60 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 37 · 2015: 31 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 35
FWCI
13.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (MH39349)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Identity, Memory, and Therapy
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Emotions and Moral Behavior
Keywords
rumination, reflective processing, negative emotions, emotional focus, anger, interpersonal conflict, unresolved conflicts, emotion regulation, working through
MeSH terms
Adult, Affect, Anger, Conflict, Psychological, Female, Humans, Male, Self Concept

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