Theories suggest that nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) is strongly related to heightened negative emotion. However, it is unclear when and why those who engage in NSSI experience heightened negative emotion. In a series of studies, I examined whether individuals with a history of NSSI (versus controls) experience greater negative emotion in response to positive (but not negative) contexts. Results showed that in community, clinical, and college samples, after controlling for depression and anxiety, those with a history of NSSI (versus controls) do not experience heightened negative emotions in negative situations (Studies 1, 2, and 4). However, they consistently experience heightened negative emotions in positive situations (Studies 1-5) even when controlling for depression and anxiety symptoms (Studies 2-4). Heightened negative emotion persists across both high and low-arousal positive situations (Studies 3-4). Furthermore, the association between NSSI and negative emotion in positive situations is mediated by negative self-beliefs (Studies 5 and 6). However, experimentally manipulating negative self-beliefs was not shown to reduce negative self-beliefs or negative emotion in positive situations (Study 6). These findings suggest that NSSI is associated with heightened negative emotion in positive, but not negative, situations and that heightened negative self-beliefs contribute to these negative emotions. However, interventions that directly target negative self-beliefs may not be the most effective way to reduce negative emotions in NSSI.

We frequently encounter other people’s emotions, and how we respond to them should have important implications for the quality of our relationships. Individuals who value emotion control (i.e., think emotions should be controlled versus expressed) may respond more negatively to others’ emotional expressions, and in turn, experience lower-quality relationships. We tested this proposition across six samples using multi-method designs. Valuing emotion control was associated with lower relationship quality in three diverse samples: US undergraduates, US community adults, and US Chinese-American adolescents (Study 1; N total=780). Furthermore, valuing emotion control was associated with more negative judgments of romantic partners’ emotions during a laboratory conflict conversation (Study 2; N=376; 187 couples), and more negative responses to a friend’s or romantic partner’s emotions, which in turn accounted for lower relationship quality (Studies 3a, 3b; Ns = 226, 353). In sum, these results suggest that valuing emotion control is linked with crucial drawbacks for people’s relationships.

As humans, we have a unique capacity to theorize about our experiences, including our emotions. We develop implicit theories about the nature of emotions, and these beliefs are consequential, guiding whether and how we try to influence our emotions and how we feel as a consequence. One fundamental belief about emotions concerns whether emotions are relatively controllable or uncontrollable. I propose that believing emotions are uncontrollable (entity beliefs) should reduce individuals’ use of emotion regulation strategies that could help them change their emotional experiences (e.g., cognitive reappraisal). This, in turn, could negatively influence psychological health (e.g., depressive symptoms). This model holds particular relevance during youth, when beliefs about emotions first develop and stabilize and when maladaptive beliefs could contribute to the rising depression rates that characterize adolescence. In the present investigation, a pilot diary study (N=223, aged 21-60) demonstrated that individuals’ entity beliefs predicted less use of cognitive reappraisal in everyday life. Then, two studies examined whether entity beliefs set youths on a maladaptive trajectory: In a cross-sectional study (N=136, aged 14-18), youths with stronger entity beliefs experienced more depressive symptoms because they used reappraisal less frequently. This pattern was replicated and extended in a longitudinal study (N=227, aged 10-18), where depressive symptoms were assessed using youth and parent reports 18 months after assessing beliefs. These results suggest that entity beliefs about emotion are risk factors for depression that act via emotion regulation. Because beliefs are still developing in youths, targeting youths’ beliefs represents an important avenue for prevention and intervention.

Beliefs about whether emotions Should be controlled and Can be controlled are two beliefs about controlling emotions. Because past research has generally examined Should and Can emotion control beliefs only separately and in general terms, that is, without reference to aspects of emotions (e.g., valence, response channel), three crucial questions remain unanswered: (a) Are these two beliefs distinct types of emotion control beliefs, and, within each belief, (b) are they distinguished by and (c) do they differ across aspects of emotion? To advance measurement and understanding of emotion control beliefs, I created the Beliefs about Emotion Control Inventory (BECI), which measures Should and Can emotion control beliefs across valence (positive vs. negative) and channel (behavior vs. experience). Two preregistered studies with large student (Study 1A/1B, Ns=430/1,112) and non-student adult (Study 2: N=1,319) samples that varied in age (largely 18-25 vs. distributed across 18-71) and gender (predominantly women vs. equal men and women), revealed results consistent with the preregistered hypotheses. Specifically, Should and Can emotion control beliefs were distinct types of beliefs that were distinguished by and differed as a function of valence and channel. Should emotion control beliefs were stronger (i.e., higher means) for experience (vs. behavior), negative (vs. positive) emotions, and experience (vs. behavior) differences were larger for negative (vs. positive) emotions. Can emotion control beliefs were stronger for behavior (vs. experience), but similar across valence. In each study, (a) age was linked with stronger Can, but not Should, emotion control beliefs, and (b) men held stronger Should and Can emotion control beliefs than women, especially for Should beliefs. Our results suggest that peoples’ beliefs about whether emotions Can and Should be controlled are distinct beliefs, distinguished by and vary in different ways across valence and response channel, and influenced by both age and gender.

People are not impassive bystanders to their emotional experiences. Instead, people tend to judge their emotions as good or bad. In this research, I examined individual differences in emotion judgments and their implications for emotional responses and psychological health. In Study 1 (N = 1,136), I developed a questionnaire to assess four types of habitual emotion judgments. The four types of emotion judgments differed according to the valence of the emotion being judged (positive or negative) and the valence of the judgment (positive or negative). In Study 2 (81 participants and 2,999 observations), I examined the relationship between habitual emotion judgments and emotion judgments in daily life. Emotion judgments were common in daily life and were predicted by habitual emotion judgments. In Study 3 (same participants as in Study 1), I examined cross-sectional associations between habitual emotion judgments and psychological health. Positive judgments of positive emotions were associated with greater psychological health and negative judgments of negative emotions were associated with poorer psychological health, above and beyond other types of emotion judgments and key confounds. In Study 4 (111 participants and 835 observations), I examined prospective links between habitual emotion judgments and psychological health over one month and the mediating role of net emotions (emotions that linger after an emotional event has passed). Negative judgments of negative emotions were associated with worse psychological health one month later, and this relationship was partially mediated by daily net emotions. In sum, individuals differ in the types of emotion judgments that they tend to make and these individual differences appear to powerfully shape daily emotional responses and in turn, psychological health.