| Literature DB >> 35389529 |
Lital Daches Cohen1, Orly Rubinsten1.
Abstract
The literature suggests an interplay between executive control functions and emotion regulation processes, with each playing a key role in math anxiety. We examined the relation between the use of two different emotion regulation strategies (reappraisal and suppression) and the ability to reduce emotional interference in high-conflict situations (i.e., executive control of attention) in cases of math anxiety. A sample of 107 adults completed emotion regulation tendencies and math anxiety questionnaires and performed a flanker task following the priming of a math-related or negative word. The findings revealed: (1) highly math-anxious individuals had difficulty controlling emotional distractions induced by math information, even as simple as math-related words, in high-conflict conditions; and (2) the tendency to use reappraisal in everyday situations was associated with math-anxious individuals' ability to avoid heightened emotional reactions when encountering math-related (i.e., threatening) information. These findings point to the efficacy of reappraisal-focused intervention and suggest an innovative mechanism through which reappraisal reduces emotional reactions and improves performance among math-anxious individuals, indicating a new way to approach interventions for math anxiety.Entities:
Keywords: emotion regulation; executive control; math anxiety; reappraisal; suppression
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35389529 PMCID: PMC9544869 DOI: 10.1111/nyas.14772
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann N Y Acad Sci ISSN: 0077-8923 Impact factor: 6.499
Figure 1An example of a trial
Descriptive statistics of research variables
|
|
| Range | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math anxiety (sMARS) | 63.31 | 21.04 | 25–108 |
| ERQ reappraisal scale | 4.66 | 1.26 | 1–7 |
| ERQ suppression scale | 3.44 | 1.53 | 1–7 |
|
| |||
| Math‐related words | 497.96 | 123.77 | 297.85–995.27 |
| Words with negative valence | 503.78 | 109.97 | 326.25–865.19 |
| Pseudowords | 515.33 | 124.67 | 318.42–889.75 |
|
| |||
| Math‐related words | 549.22 | 133.01 | 318.13–954.38 |
| Words with negative valence | 537.05 | 136.03 | 284.13–903.86 |
| Pseudowords | 543.52 | 139.66 | 226.5–945.93 |
Figure 2Differences between trials preceded by math‐related and negative words in congruent and incongruent trials among highly and slightly math‐anxious individuals
Correlation matrix of research variables
| Variable | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. sMARS | ||||
|
| ||||
| 2. Induced by irrelevant math‐related words | 0.04 | |||
| 3. Induced by irrelevant words with negative valence | 0.10 | 0.64 | ||
|
| ||||
| 4. Induced by irrelevant math‐related words | 0.24 | 0.53 | 0.47 | |
| 5. Induced by irrelevant words with negative valence | 0.10 | 0.52 | 0.36 | 0.78 |
Note: Emotional distraction induced by irrelevant math‐related words = RTs in trials preceded by math‐related words minus RTs in trials preceded by pseudowords. Emotional distraction induced by irrelevant words with negative valence = RTs in trials preceded by words with negative valence minus RTs in trials preceded by pseudowords.
P < 0.025.
P < 0.001.
Figure 3Scatterplot of correlation between math anxiety and emotional distraction induced by irrelevant math‐related words in incongruent trials
Summary of hierarchical regression analyses to predict emotional distractions
| Model 1 | Model 2 | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| Variables |
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
| ||||||||||
| Math anxiety | 1.53 | 0.32 | 2.73 | 0.61 | 0.24 | 1.54 | 0.34 | 2.74 | 0.60 | 0.24 |
| Reappraisal | –21.21 | –41.25 | –1.16 | 10.11 | –0.20 | |||||
| Suppression | 3.56 | –12.96 | 20.08 | 8.33 | 0.04 | |||||
|
| ||||||||||
| Math anxiety | 0.61 | –0.57 | 1.79 | 0.60 | 0.09 | 0.57 | –0.60 | 1.74 | 0.59 | 0.09 |
| Reappraisal | –21.74 | –41.28 | –2.21 | 9.85 | –0.21 | |||||
| Suppression | –3.65 | –19.76 | 12.45 | 8.12 | –0.04 | |||||
|
| ||||||||||
| Math anxiety | 0.17 | –0.77 | 1.12 | 0.48 | 0.04 | 0.20 | –0.74 | 1.14 | 0.47 | 0.04 |
| Reappraisal | –14.55 | –30.27 | 1.17 | 7.93 | –0.18 | |||||
| Suppression | 5.36 | –7.60 | 18.32 | 6.53 | 0.08 | |||||
|
| ||||||||||
| sMARS | 0.50 | –0.47 | 1.4 | 0.49 | 0.10 | 0.48 | –0.50 | 1.46 | 0.49 | 0.10 |
| Reappraisal | –7.66 | –24.05 | 8.74 | 8.27 | –0.09 | |||||
| Suppression | –1.25 | –14.76 | 12.27 | 6.81 | –0.02 | |||||
Abbreviations: LL, lower limit of confidence interval; UL, upper limit of confidence interval.
P < 0.05, ** P < 0.025.
Figure 4Increased math anxiety and reduced use of reappraisal predict emotional distraction induced by irrelevant math‐related words in incongruent trials