Change in emotional processing in daily life: relationship with in-session self-esteem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In-session emotional processing is a central component of psychotherapy, but little is known about the types and the quality of emotional processing individuals engage in daily life. An ecological momentary assessment (EMA) schedule has been validated to assess distinct emotional experiences as they emerge in daily life. It remains an open question whether changes observed in distinct emotional experiences over a week of assessment are related to in-session self-esteem. In total, N = 42 university students participated in a one-week assessment of emotions using ecological momentary assessment, as well as in a one-session experiential task of resolving self-criticism (using a two-chair dialogue from emotion-focused therapy). The emotions in daily life were self-reported by the participants on a regular basis, and self-esteem was assessed three times during the two-chair dialogue. Two-level hierarchical linear models reveal emotional changes in daily life, and in-session self-esteem is introduced as predictor at level 2. In-session self-esteem was correlated with symptom levels. The results showed that changes in primary maladaptive emotions in the one-week assessment were predicted by state and trait components of in-session self-esteem, which took place at the outset of the EMA. Trait-components of self-esteem were linked with the level of symptoms, whereas state-components of self-esteem were not. The present study underscores the importance of extending research from within-session observations of emotional processing towards daily life. .
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".