Effectiveness of emotion regulation strategies measured by self-report and EMG as a result of strategy used, negative emotion strength and participants’ baseline HRV

Figures

• 

  Figure 1. Example of a single experimental trial. The picture originates from the Open Affective Standardized Image Set92 and serves only as an example.

• 

  Figure 2. Corrugator supercilii activity. (a) Corrugator supercilii response (median) corresponding to low or high negativity stimuli in different emotion regulation conditions and low or high baseline HRV groups. (b) Pairwise contrasts of the corrugator supercilii response between emotional regulation conditions corresponding to low or high negativity stimuli in the low or high HRV group. (c) Contrasts of the corrugator supercilii response between low and high negativity stimuli across emotional regulation conditions in the low or high HRV group. (d) Contrasts of the corrugator supercilii response between low versus high baseline HRV groups. Corrugator supercilii activity is expressed in millivolts (mV) and has been rescaled to a range between 0 and 1. Error bars represent 95% CI of the corresponding estimate. *, significant contrast.

• 

  Figure 3. Perceived picture negativity. (a) Perceived picture negativity (median) corresponding to low or high negativity stimuli in different emotion regulation conditions and low or high baseline HRV groups. (b) Pairwise contrasts of the perceived picture negativity between emotional regulation conditions corresponding to low or high negativity stimuli in the low or high HRV group. (c) Contrasts of the perceived picture negativity between low and high negativity stimuli across emotional regulation conditions in the low or high HRV group. (d) Contrasts of the perceived picture negativity scores between low versus high baseline HRV groups. Behavioral responses have been rescaled to a range between 0 and 1. Error bars represent 95% CI of the corresponding estimate. *, significant contrast.

• 

  Figure 4. Perceived effectiveness in applying experimental instructions. (a) Perceived effectiveness in applying experimental instructions (median) corresponding to low or high negativity stimuli in different experimental conditions and low or high baseline HRV groups. (b) Pairwise contrasts of the Perceived effectiveness in applying experimental instructions between emotional regulation conditions corresponding to low or high negativity stimuli in the low or high HRV group. (c) Contrasts of the Perceived effectiveness in applying experimental instructions between low and high negativity stimuli across emotional regulation conditions in the low or high HRV group. (d) Contrasts of the Perceived effectiveness in applying experimental instructions between low versus high baseline HRV groups. Behavioral responses have been rescaled to a range between 0 and 1. Error bars represent 95% CI of the corresponding estimate. *, significant contrast.

• 

  Figure 5. Perceived effortfulness. (a) Perceived effortfulness scores (median) corresponding to low or high negativity stimuli in different experimental conditions and low or high baseline HRV groups. (b) Pairwise contrasts of the Perceived effortfulness between emotional regulation conditions corresponding to low or high negativity stimuli in the low or high HRV group. (c) Contrasts of the Perceived effortfulness between low and high negativity stimuli across emotional regulation conditions in the low or high HRV group. (d) Contrasts of the Perceived effortfulness between low versus high baseline HRV groups. Behavioral responses have been rescaled to a range between 0 and 1. Error bars represent 95% CI of the corresponding estimate. *, significant contrast.