Tran, A., Greenaway, K. H., & Kalokerinos, E. K. (2025). Why do we engage in everyday interpersonal emotion regulation? Emotion, 25(2), 300–319. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001399

Key Takeaways

Focus: The study explored the motives behind interpersonal emotion regulation in everyday life.
Aims: The research aimed to identify and catalogue the motives behind intrinsic and extrinsic interpersonal emotion regulation.
Findings: The study found a diverse range of motives for interpersonal emotion regulation, including hedonic (seeking pleasure or avoiding pain) and instrumental (achieving a goal or task) motives.
Implications: The findings can help researchers and practitioners better understand the reasons behind people’s attempts to regulate their own and others’ emotions in social contexts, potentially leading to more effective interventions and support strategies.

interpersonal emotion regulation — Interpersonal emotion regulation refers to the process where individuals manage their own emotions or those of others within a social context. It can be categorized into two types: intrinsic regulation, where individuals seek help from others to regulate their own emotions, and extrinsic regulation, where individuals influence the emotions of others.

Rationale

Emotion regulation is a complex process that involves both intrapersonal (regulating one’s own emotions) and interpersonal (regulating others’ emotions) aspects.

While research has traditionally focused on the “how” of emotion regulation, this study emphasizes the importance of understanding the “why”.

The authors argue that understanding the motives behind interpersonal emotion regulation is crucial because motives drive regulatory goals and strategy selection.

Previous research has explored motives for intrapersonal emotion regulation, identifying hedonic and instrumental motives.

However, there is a lack of comprehensive research on the motives behind interpersonal emotion regulation.

This study aims to fill this gap by systematically exploring the motives behind both intrinsic (regulating one’s own emotions through social contact) and extrinsic (regulating others’ emotions) interpersonal emotion regulation in everyday social interactions.

Method

Procedure

The study employed a mixed-methods approach with three studies:

Study 1a: Participants (N = 100) were asked to recall and describe a recent social interaction where they engaged in either intrinsic or extrinsic interpersonal emotion regulation, focusing on both affect-improving and affect-worsening instances. They then provided open-ended responses about their motives for regulating emotions in these interactions.
Study 1b: A larger sample of participants (N = 399) completed a questionnaire about their most recent instances of intrinsic and extrinsic interpersonal emotion regulation, both affect-improving and affect-worsening. They selected their motives from a list generated from Study 1a and had the option to provide open-ended responses for motives not listed.
Study 2: Participants (N = 200) completed a daily diary for 14 days, reporting on their experiences with interpersonal emotion regulation and their motives for regulating emotions in everyday social interactions.

Sample

Study 1a: N = 100, Mage = 28.97, SDage = 7.62; 54% women; 66% White.
Study 1b: N = 399, Mage = 44.38, SDage = 15.56; 50% women; 77% White.
Study 2: N = 200.

Measures

Study 1a and 1b: Open-ended questions and checklists based on the motive taxonomy generated in Study 1a.
Study 2: Daily diary entries reporting on interpersonal emotion regulation experiences and motives.

Statistical measures

Study 1a: Content analysis of open-ended responses.
Study 1b: Descriptive statistics and Spearman’s ρ correlations to refine the motive taxonomy.
Study 2: Descriptive statistics and analyses of motive frequencies and co-occurrences in daily diary entries.

Results

The study identified a wide range of motives for interpersonal emotion regulation, categorized as intrinsic or extrinsic and affect-improving or affect-worsening.

Intrinsic affect-improving motives included seeking validation, comfort, or reassurance; seeking advice, clarity, or another perspective; wanting to feel better; wanting to vent or get something off one’s chest; wanting to distract oneself; wanting to maintain or build a good relationship; wanting to achieve a goal or get something done; and needing help to resolve something.
Intrinsic affect-worsening motives included wanting to express how upset one was about something; wanting others to validate how one felt; wanting to punish oneself for something one did; wanting others to give one a reality check or manage one’s expectations; wanting to understand others’ feelings or what they were going through; wanting to achieve a goal or get something done; and wanting to feel powerful.
Extrinsic affect-improving motives included wanting to make others feel better; liking or caring about the other person; wanting to maintain or build a good relationship; wanting to offer advice, clarity, or another perspective; wanting to avoid uncomfortable feelings or situations; wanting to get others to achieve a goal or do something; and wanting to feel helpful or good about oneself.
Extrinsic affect-worsening motives included wanting to give others a reality check or manage their expectations; wanting others to understand one’s feelings or what one was going through; wanting to get others to apologize; wanting to punish others for something they had done to others; wanting to seek revenge for something others had done to oneself; wanting to achieve a goal or get something done; wanting to help others; wanting to feel better about oneself; and disliking the other person.

Insight

This study provides valuable insights into the diverse motives behind interpersonal emotion regulation in everyday life.

The findings highlight that people engage in interpersonal emotion regulation for a variety of reasons, including seeking support, achieving goals, maintaining relationships, and even expressing negative emotions.

This research extends previous work on intrapersonal emotion regulation by demonstrating the complexity and diversity of motives in the interpersonal domain.

The study’s findings suggest that motives for interpersonal emotion regulation are not always prohedonic (seeking pleasure or avoiding pain).

People also engage in affect-worsening regulation, both intrinsically and extrinsically, for various reasons, such as expressing discontent, seeking validation for negative emotions, or punishing oneself or others.

This finding challenges the traditional view that emotion regulation is always aimed at feeling better and highlights the importance of understanding the full spectrum of motives behind emotion regulation.

The study also reveals that motives for interpersonal emotion regulation can be instrumental, meaning that people regulate emotions as a means to an end.

For example, people may regulate their own or others’ emotions to achieve a goal, maintain a relationship, or avoid uncomfortable situations.

This finding emphasizes the importance of considering the context and goals of emotion regulation when trying to understand people’s motives.

Clinicla Implications

The findings of this study have important implications for practitioners and policymakers working in various fields, including mental health, education, and social work.

By understanding the motives behind interpersonal emotion regulation, practitioners can better support individuals in developing healthy and effective emotion regulation strategies.

For example, if a person is engaging in affect-worsening regulation as a way to punish themselves, practitioners can help them explore alternative coping mechanisms and develop self-compassion.

The study’s findings can also inform the development of interventions and programs aimed at improving emotion regulation skills.

By understanding the diverse motives behind emotion regulation, practitioners can tailor interventions to meet the specific needs and goals of individuals and groups.

For example, interventions could focus on helping people identify their motives for emotion regulation, develop a broader range of emotion regulation strategies, and learn how to use emotion regulation in a way that supports their overall well-being.

Strengths

Mixed-methods approach: The study combined qualitative and quantitative data to provide a comprehensive understanding of interpersonal emotion regulation motives.
Daily diary methodology: The use of daily diaries in Study 2 allowed for the examination of emotion regulation motives in everyday life, increasing ecological validity.
Large and diverse sample: The study included a large and diverse sample of participants, enhancing the generalizability of the findings.

Limitations

Self-report measures: The study relied on self-report measures, which can be subject to biases and limitations.
Focus on explicit motives: The study primarily focused on explicit motives, which may not capture the full range of unconscious or implicit motives driving emotion regulation.
Limited information on emotion regulation strategies: The study did not extensively explore the specific emotion regulation strategies used by participants, which could provide additional insights into the relationship between motives, strategies, and outcomes.

Reference