An Emotion Regulation Intervention for Adolescents

• In Event: Different Routes to the Similar Outcomes: Improving Students' Well-Being in Addition to Achievement in School

Abstract

Implicit theories influence what people believe they can change and how they can focus their efforts in productive ways. For example, whereas some individuals believe that intelligence is a fixed trait that cannot be changed, others believe that intelligence is malleable; that people can develop and grow their intelligence over time. Students with more malleable beliefs exhibit more adaptive behaviors (Mueller & Dweck, 1997), and improved academic outcomes compared to peers with fixed beliefs (Blackwell, Trzesniewski, & Dweck, 2007). Importantly, these beliefs can be changed through targeted interventions (Paunesku et al., 2015).

Recent work has begun to assess these beliefs in the domain of emotion regulation. Those with malleable beliefs of emotion exhibit increased emotion regulation strategy use (Mauss & Tamir, 2014), have fewer depressive symptoms and greater well-being (Romero, Master, Paunesku, Dweck, & Gross, 2014), and show greater social adjustment and more positive emotions across the major transition to college (Tamir et al., 2007). However, we do not know of any study that has attempted to influence emotion regulation beliefs or strategies and observe resulting outcomes.
In this study, we examine how individuals’ beliefs about emotion regulation influence regulation strategies and well-being by delivering a brief online intervention to 1,604 middle school students (50% Female; Mean age = 12.6 years) across ten middle schools. We extend prior research of implicit theories to assess and influence two separable facets of emotion regulation beliefs: potency beliefs, that people have influence over their emotions currently, and malleability beliefs, that people can improve emotion regulation efficacy over time. Prior research has not made this distinction and has used both potency and malleability items within the same scale. We hypothesized that students taught about the potency and malleability of emotion regulation and supporting strategies would exhibit more frequent and efficacious emotion regulation and report higher well-being.

Students were randomly assigned to the treatment condition or an active control, and completed two 45-minute online sessions delivered at schools and a 15-minute follow up session one month later. Intervention materials were developed through multiple iterations of focus groups and cognitive pretesting with middle school students and teachers. Students assigned to the treatment group were taught 1) What emotions are and how emotions arise (through a simplified version of the emotion process model; see Gross, 2008), 2) That emotion regulation strategies can help people work with their emotions and succeed in their goals, and 3) That everyone can find emotion regulation strategies that work best for them through time and practice.

Students in the treatment group reported higher well-being in school one month after the intervention and greater emotion regulation efficacy. We do not find consistent increases in students’ use of regulation strategies as hypothesized. This research demonstrates the ability to influence beliefs of emotion regulation and observe a resulting improvement in well-being. We will discuss implications for practitioners interested in cultivating students’ well-being, and encourage researchers to further investigate how these emotion regulation beliefs and strategies affect students’ response to social and academic challenges.

Authors

• Eric Smith, Stanford University

• Carissa Romero, Stanford University

• Brian Donovan, Stanford University

• Ihno Lee

• David Paunesku, Stanford University

• Rachel Herter, Stanford University

• Geoffrey L. Cohen, Stanford University

• Carol Dweck, Stanford University

• James J Gross, Stanford University