What empathizers do: Empathy and the selection of everyday interpersonal emotion regulation strategies

BACKGROUND

Empathic behavior is crucial in promoting positive social outcomes and strengthening interpersonal bonds. Research on how empathy modulates responses to others' emotions remains scarce yet is fundamental for elucidating mechanisms of impaired social functioning in psychopathology and its treatment.

METHODS

Two ecological momentary assessment studies (Ns = 125 and 204) investigated participants' empathy and usage of interpersonal emotion regulation strategies in 5537 social interactions. We measured empathy, a multi-faceted construct, as dissected into its components of mentalizing and experience sharing in Study 1, while Study 2 additionally investigated empathic concern and personal distress.

RESULTS

Findings revealed that empathizers engage in significantly increased other-focused regulation, especially when feeling empathic concern. We also found differences in the strengths of the links between empathy and responses to others' emotions: When we mentalize, share others' emotions, or feel concerned, we choose more relationship-oriented strategies, including validation and soothing, and less cognitive reappraisal and avoidance to regulate others' emotions. In contrast, when personally distressed by others' emotions, we select more cognitive reappraisal and avoidance and less relationship-oriented strategies.

LIMITATIONS

Both studies relied on regulator reports.

CONCLUSIONS

Empathy facets distinctly shape our responses to others' emotions and can make us increasingly emotionally responsive and relationship-oriented. Understanding these dynamics can enhance the treatment of affective disorders characterized by deficits in social functioning.

Successful negotiation of goal conflict between romantic partners predicts better goal outcomes during COVID-19: A mixed methods study

When romantic partners' personal goals conflict, this can negatively affect personal goal outcomes, such as progress. In a concurrent mixed methods study, we investigated whether goal conflict and negation of goal conflict were associated with goal outcomes (progress, confidence, motivation) and what strategies partners used during the COVID-19 pandemic to negotiate goal conflict. Survey participants (n = 200) completed a daily diary for a week and weekly longitudinal reports for a month and interview participants (n = 48) attended a semi-structured interview. Results showed that higher goal conflict was associated with lower goal outcomes, and successful negotiation of goal conflict was associated with better goal outcomes. Qualitative analyses identified three goal conflict negotiation strategies (compromise, integration, concession). Conversations focused on both practical and emotional needs and included respectful communication and space from conflict (timeout or avoidance). The mixed methods results suggest that goal conflict was low during the pandemic and participants were often able to negotiate goal conflict resulting in better goal outcomes.

Construção e Evidências de Validade da Escala de Qualidade Conjugal

Resumo Este estudo buscou construir e verificar evidências de validade de uma escala de avaliação da qualidade conjugal (EQC) para a população brasileira. Os itens foram avaliados por juízes especialistas e leigos. A versão preliminar da EQC consistiu em 28 itens avaliando cinco dimensões: satisfação, compromisso, intimidade, sexualidade e afetividade. A escala foi aplicada em 655 pessoas que estavam em um relacionamento amoroso e em coabitação com o(a) companheiro(a) há no mínimo seis meses. Os participantes também responderam a instrumentos sobre dados sociodemográficos, ajustamento (RDAS-P), satisfação (RelAS), qualidade (Aquarela-R) e conflito conjugal (CRBQ). Foi realizada uma análise fatorial confirmatória, análises de consistência interna e de correlação. O modelo da EQC obteve bom ajuste aos dados, consistência interna adequada e correlações nas direções esperadas com as demais escalas. Conclui-se que o instrumento apresentou evidências de validade satisfatórias, baseadas no conteúdo, estrutura interna e relações com variáveis relacionadas, para aplicação no contexto brasileiro.

Attachment styles, negotiation of goal conflict, and perceived partner support during COVID-19

Due to the pandemic, people have been stuck indoors with their partners for months. Instead of being able to rely on multiple sources of support, many couples have to rely on each other more. We investigated whether goal conflict, successful negotiation of the conflict, and individual differences in attachment styles were associated with perceived partner support to understand factors that may enable or hinder goal pursuit during the pandemic. Participants (n = 200) completed a daily diary for a week and weekly longitudinal reports for five weeks. Results showed that higher goal conflict predicted perception of less relational catalyst (RC) support and more anti-RC support from partner, whereas more successful negotiation of goal conflict predicted higher RC support and lower anti-RC support. Attachment avoidance was directly associated with less support whereas attachment anxiety moderated the relationship between goal conflict and support. Implications for partner support during the pandemic are discussed.