Annika Kohl1, Winfried Rief, Julia Anna Glombiewski. 1. Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Philipps-University of Marburg, Gutenbergstr. 18, D-35032 Marburg, Germany. annika.kohl@staff.uni-marburg.de
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Experimental research on psychological acceptance strategies revealed discrepant results regarding superiority of these strategies compared to other emotion regulation strategies. A review examining results of experimental comparisons between acceptance and other emotion regulation strategies (e.g. suppression, distraction, reappraisal) is still missing. The present meta-analytic approach aims to fill this gap. METHOD: A literature search was performed using PsychInfo and PubMed and effect sizes (ES; Hedge's g) were calculated. RESULTS: The search identified 30 relevant studies. Many studies reported that acceptance strategies were superior when compared to other emotion regulation strategies for the outcomes of pain tolerance, negative affect and believability of thoughts. Meta-analytic results replicate findings of primary studies for pain tolerance: A small to medium between-group ES was found favoring acceptance strategies (g = 0.43, p < 0.01, 95% CI[0.12, 0.73]). With respect to pain intensity and negative affect, meta-analysis did not show any significant differences between acceptance and other emotion regulation strategies. In sum, acceptance strategies proved to be superior to other emotion regulation strategies with respect to pain tolerance but not for pain intensity and negative affect. LIMITATIONS: Future research should address which characteristics of participants lead to respond to either acceptance or to other emotion regulation strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Acceptance strategies are at least as useful in treatments for chronic pain and depression as other emotion regulation strategies.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Experimental research on psychological acceptance strategies revealed discrepant results regarding superiority of these strategies compared to other emotion regulation strategies. A review examining results of experimental comparisons between acceptance and other emotion regulation strategies (e.g. suppression, distraction, reappraisal) is still missing. The present meta-analytic approach aims to fill this gap. METHOD: A literature search was performed using PsychInfo and PubMed and effect sizes (ES; Hedge's g) were calculated. RESULTS: The search identified 30 relevant studies. Many studies reported that acceptance strategies were superior when compared to other emotion regulation strategies for the outcomes of pain tolerance, negative affect and believability of thoughts. Meta-analytic results replicate findings of primary studies for pain tolerance: A small to medium between-group ES was found favoring acceptance strategies (g = 0.43, p < 0.01, 95% CI[0.12, 0.73]). With respect to pain intensity and negative affect, meta-analysis did not show any significant differences between acceptance and other emotion regulation strategies. In sum, acceptance strategies proved to be superior to other emotion regulation strategies with respect to pain tolerance but not for pain intensity and negative affect. LIMITATIONS: Future research should address which characteristics of participants lead to respond to either acceptance or to other emotion regulation strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Acceptance strategies are at least as useful in treatments for chronic pain and depression as other emotion regulation strategies.
Authors: Emily K Lindsay; Brian Chin; Carol M Greco; Shinzen Young; Kirk W Brown; Aidan G C Wright; Joshua M Smyth; Deanna Burkett; J David Creswell Journal: J Pers Soc Psychol Date: 2018-12