Department of Psychology, Christopher Newport University, Forbes Hall, 1 Avenue of the Arts, Newport News, VA, 23606, USA.
Department of Psychology, Temple University, 1701 North 13th St, 6th Floor Weiss Hall, Philadelphia, PA, 19122, USA.
J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2019 Feb;47(2):313-324. doi: 10.1007/s10802-018-0454-2.
Anxious youth often have trouble regulating negative affect (NA) and tend to over-rely on parents when faced with challenges. It is unclear how social interactions with parents or peers actually helps or hinders anxious youths' success in regulating NA. The aim of this study was to examine whether the success of anxious youths' emotion regulation strategies differed according to social context. We compared the effectiveness of co-ruminating, co-problem solving and co-distracting with parents/peers for regulating anxious youth's NA in response to stress in their daily lives. We also examined the benefit of attempting each strategy socially vs. non-socially (e.g., co-ruminating vs. ruminating). One-hundred-seventeen youth (9-14) with a current diagnosis of Separation Anxiety Disorder, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and/or Social Phobia completed an ecological momentary assessment (14 calls over 5 days), reporting on recent stressors, their affective state, presence of others, and emotion regulation strategies within the prior hour. Mixed linear models revealed that co-distracting was the most effective social strategy for reducing NA, but only for boys. Co-rumination was the least effective social strategy for regulating NA. Regarding social context, only co-distracting was more effective for regulating NA over distracting alone, but only among anxious boys. Results suggest that co-rumination is an ineffective use of social support for regulating NA. Anxious boys may benefit from social support by co-distracting with parents/peers, but improper use may reflect avoidance and contribute to long-term anxiety maintenance. Results extend research on gender differences in interpersonal relationships and emotion regulation.
焦虑的年轻人在面对挑战时往往难以调节负面情绪（NA），并且往往过度依赖父母。目前尚不清楚与父母或同伴的社交互动实际上是如何帮助或阻碍焦虑青年成功调节 NA 的。本研究旨在探讨焦虑青年情绪调节策略的成功是否因社会环境而异。我们比较了与父母/同伴共同沉思、共同解决问题和共同分散注意力对调节焦虑青年在日常生活中应对压力时的 NA 的效果。我们还探讨了每种策略在社交和非社交环境下（例如，共同沉思与沉思）尝试的益处。117 名患有当前分离焦虑症、广泛性焦虑症和/或社交恐惧症的年轻人（9-14 岁）完成了一项生态瞬时评估（5 天内 14 次通话），报告了最近的压力源、他们的情绪状态、他人的存在以及前一小时内的情绪调节策略。混合线性模型显示，共同分散注意力是最有效的社交策略，可以减轻 NA，但仅对男孩有效。共同沉思是调节 NA 最无效的社交策略。关于社会环境，只有共同分散注意力在调节 NA 方面比单独分散注意力更有效，但仅在焦虑男孩中有效。结果表明，共同沉思是一种无效的利用社会支持来调节 NA 的方式。焦虑的男孩可能会受益于与父母/同伴共同分散注意力的社会支持，但不当使用可能反映出回避，从而导致长期焦虑维持。结果扩展了人际关系和情绪调节方面的性别差异研究。
