MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2796443593 · doi:10.1037/xge0000396

The cost of believing emotions are uncontrollable: Youths’ beliefs about emotion predict emotion regulation and depressive symptoms.

2018· article· en· W2796443593 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Psychology General · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institutes of HealthWest Virginia University
KeywordsPsychologyPessimismDepressive symptomsSet (abstract data type)Affect (linguistics)Depression (economics)Everyday lifeCognitive reappraisalDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyIntervention (counseling)Reactivity (psychology)Social psychologyAnxietyCognitionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As humans, we have a unique capacity to reflect on our experiences, including emotions. Over time, we develop beliefs about the nature of emotions, and these beliefs are consequential, guiding how we respond to emotions and how we feel as a consequence. One fundamental belief concerns the controllability of emotions: Believing emotions are uncontrollable (entity beliefs) should reduce the likelihood of trying to control emotional experiences using effective regulation strategies like reappraisal; this, in turn, could negatively affect core indices of psychological health, including depressive symptoms. This model holds particular relevance during youth, when emotion-related beliefs first develop and stabilize and when maladaptive beliefs could contribute to emerging risk for depression. In the present investigation, a pilot diary study (N = 223, aged 21-60) demonstrated that entity beliefs were associated with using reappraisal less in everyday life, even when controlling for possible confounds (i.e., self-efficacy, pessimism, stress exposure, stress reactivity). Then, two studies examined whether entity beliefs and associated impairments in reappraisal may set youths on a maladaptive trajectory: In a cross-sectional study (N = 136, aged 14-18), youths with stronger entity beliefs experienced greater depressive symptoms, and this link was mediated by lower reappraisal. This pattern was replicated and extended in a longitudinal study (N = 227, aged 10-18), wherein youth- and parent-reported depressive symptoms were assessed 18 months after assessing beliefs. These results suggest that entity beliefs about emotion constitute a risk factor for depression that acts via reappraisal, adding to the growing literature on emotion beliefs and their consequences for self-regulation and health. (PsycINFO Database Record

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.557
Threshold uncertainty score0.677

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.302 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it