OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether coherent integration of negative memories into the self could positively predict well-being over time, and whether certain emotion regulation strategies could facilitate this coherent integration. In turn, coherent integration of negative memories was expected to further facilitate adaptive emotion regulation strategies over time. METHOD: A total of 303 participants took part in this longitudinal study. At Phase 1, they completed measures of emotion regulation and well-being. Three months later, they described the memory of the most negative event they experienced since Phase 1, and completed measures assessing its integration. One month later, participants completed the well-being measures again, and another month later, their emotion regulation was reassessed. RESULTS: Adaptive emotion regulation predicted adaptive memory integration, which in turn led to increases in well-being and adaptive emotion regulation. Contrariwise, the incapacity to adaptively regulate emotions predicted poor memory integration, which in turn led to decreases in well-being. CONCLUSION: The way people regulate their negative emotions acts as an individual difference influencing how negative memories are integrated into the self, which can in return alter well-being and emotion regulation capacity over time. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether coherent integration of negative memories into the self could positively predict well-being over time, and whether certain emotion regulation strategies could facilitate this coherent integration. In turn, coherent integration of negative memories was expected to further facilitate adaptive emotion regulation strategies over time. METHOD: A total of 303 participants took part in this longitudinal study. At Phase 1, they completed measures of emotion regulation and well-being. Three months later, they described the memory of the most negative event they experienced since Phase 1, and completed measures assessing its integration. One month later, participants completed the well-being measures again, and another month later, their emotion regulation was reassessed. RESULTS: Adaptive emotion regulation predicted adaptive memory integration, which in turn led to increases in well-being and adaptive emotion regulation. Contrariwise, the incapacity to adaptively regulate emotions predicted poor memory integration, which in turn led to decreases in well-being. CONCLUSION: The way people regulate their negative emotions acts as an individual difference influencing how negative memories are integrated into the self, which can in return alter well-being and emotion regulation capacity over time. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.