Cross-sectional analysis identifies distinct emotional profiles linked to psychological symptoms and quality of life in students facing interpersonal adversity, highlighting response heterogeneity.
This study aimed to identify distinct emotional profiles among individuals who have experienced interpersonal adversity using latent profile analysis (LPA). In addition, the study examined associations between latent profile membership and demographic variables, adversity-related characteristics, including internal-dysfunctional emotion regulation, psychological symptoms (depression, anxiety, and stress), and quality of life. LPA was conducted using data from college students who reported experiences of interpersonal adversity ( N = 394). Covariates included gender, age, education, economic status, and adversity-related characteristics. The biased adjusted maximum likelihood three-step approach was used to examine the effects of covariates and a distal outcome were estimated after identifying the optimal latent profile model. Quality of life was included as a distal outcome variable. Four distinct emotional profiles were identified: low level (LL, 18.2%), anxiety fear (AF, 24.0%), overwhelming negative emotion (ONE, 21.3%), and anger (A, 36.4%). Women were more likely in the ONE group, while higher education correlated with the LL group. No significant differences were observed in overall emotion regulation, but significant group differences emerged in internal-dysfunctional emotion regulation, depression, anxiety, and stress levels. The ONE group showed the highest levels of depression, anxiety, and stress levels, while the AF group exhibited higher anxiety and stress than the LL group. Dysfunctional emotion regulation was significantly higher in the anger group than in the LL group. The findings highlight the heterogeneity of emotional responses following interpersonal adversity and underscore the importance of identifying distinct emotional profiles to better understand variability in psychological outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yoon et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: