More (of the right strategies) is better: disaggregating the naturalistic between- and within-person structure and effects of emotion regulation strategies.

Although people often use multiple strategies to regulate their emotions, it is unclear if using more strategies effectively changes emotional outcomes. This may be because there is no clear, data-driven structure to organise which strategies people use together, so strategies with opposing impacts are modelled together. We first conducted a multilevel factor analysis of negative- and positive-emotion regulation strategies among undergraduates (n = 92) completing ecological momentary assessment three times per day for 10 days. Solutions including 3-within/3-between factors were most interpretable. Using more between-person Adaptive Engagement strategies and within-person Adaptive Engagement, Enhancement, and Behavioural strategies predicted improved mood, whereas using more between-person Aversive Cognitive and within-person Aversive Cognitive and Disengagement strategies predicted worse mood, ps < .05. Using a greater quantity of strategies may thus promote better, or worse, emotional outcomes, depending on the class of strategies used.