What are the types of emotion regulation theories?

Currently, emotion regulation theories commonly used in academia and practice mainly evolve around the three core dimensions of process, individual characteristics, and scene. In recent years, they have also been supplemented by new directions of embodiment and cultural orientation. The applicable scenarios and controversial points of different theories are very clear. When we do front-line intervention, we basically use a mix and match.

The first to become popular and the most grounded is the process-oriented theory. The most representative one is Gross's emotion regulation process model. To put it bluntly, it treats emotion generation as an assembly line: first you encounter a triggering event, then you notice the event, then you evaluate the event, and finally you generate an emotional response. Regulatory actions can take effect wherever you insert them. For example, an Internet operator visitor I received last week used to wait until he was so angry that he was dizzy with news about product changes before he tried to suppress it. He could not suppress it no matter what. I taught him to put his phone on the table for 30 seconds before touching it the next time he saw such news. This was equivalent to quenching the emotional flames in half during the "pay attention to allocation" link. Later, he reported that the frequency of his anger dropped by 70%. Most of the emotional regulation techniques currently circulating on the Internet, such as abdominal breathing and cognitive restructuring, basically come from this theoretical framework. However, there are also different voices in the academic circle, saying that this model is too biased towards "active conscious regulation" and ignores the regulatory actions that many people can complete subconsciously. When guiding practice, it is easy for people to think that "I deliberately regulate it to be useful", which in turn adds to pressure.

Different from the idea of ​​​​focusing on the process of emotion generation, the theory of trait orientation focuses on the differences of "people" themselves from the beginning. The core of this type of theory is that everyone's emotion regulation ability is inherently different, and coupled with acquired regulatory beliefs, the final state is very different. For example, the emotion regulation self-efficacy theory mentions that you first believe that you can handle emotions, and the success rate of regulation will be high. I have met two Internet practitioners who were optimized at the same time. One girl always said "I panic when something happens". She cried until she couldn't breathe on the day she received the layoff notice. She lay at home for a week before she recovered. ； Another boy is usually very carefree and always says, "No matter what happens, it can be overcome." On that day, he took his friends to eat hot pot to celebrate that he could finally take half a year's annual leave. However, this type of theory is often criticized for being too "innate deterministic". If it is not guided well, it is easy for users to feel that "I am born with poor emotional management and can't change it." Instead, it becomes an excuse to avoid adjustments.

The first two categories either look at the process or the individual. What has become more and more popular among practitioners in the past decade is the situation-oriented emotion regulation theory. The core point is particularly practical: there is no absolutely correct method of adjustment, only methods that adapt to the current scene. Just like when you get into trouble with your family, acting coquettishly and having a temper are all fun, but if you show off your face at Party A’s matchmaking meeting, that means you don’t want to do it anymore. The requirements for emotional expression in different scenarios are very different, so the way of adjustment naturally has to change. When I was doing EAP training for the sales team, many people said that they were born with bad tempers and couldn't stand customers' criticism. I told them that they don't need to change their tempers and just use "surface acting" when dealing with customers. Even if they are in a state of mind, just keep a polite smile on their face. Don't wear a mask when you get home from get off work and get along with your family. You should get angry when you should complain, but you will not be easily emotionally exhausted. Of course, this type of theory is also controversial. Many researchers feel that it is too pragmatic. If everyone is always required to wear a mask according to the scene, it will easily accumulate hidden emotional pressure in the long run. Now we will also use boundary setting techniques when doing intervention to make up for this shortcoming.

There have been many emerging directions in the past two years, such as the embodied-oriented emotion regulation theory, which says that emotions are not just a matter of the brain, but are very tightly bound to the state of the body. When you are unhappy, smile for two minutes, raise your head and chest, and take two steps. The effect is much better than sitting there and trying to persuade yourself to "be happy."； There is also the theory of cultural orientation, which specializes in studying the preferences of different cultures for emotional expression. For example, our East Asian culture does not encourage overly extroverted emotional expression. If we insist on learning the Western method of "shouting out when you are emotional", it will make everyone feel awkward. Nowadays, many adjustment techniques for Chinese people are based on this idea. As frontline workers, we never get stuck in a certain theoretical framework. A useful theory is one that can help users solve practical problems.