White, R., Kuehn, M. M., Kross, E., & Ayduk, O
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Emotion Focusing on the Future From Afar: Self-Distancing From Future Stressors Facilitates Adaptive Coping Rachel E. White, Maya M. Kuehn, Angela L. Duckworth, Ethan Kross, and Özlem Ayduk Online First Publication, September 17, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/emo0000491 CITATION White, R. E., Kuehn, M. M., Duckworth, A. L., Kross, E., & Ayduk, Ö. (2018, September 17). Focusing on the Future From Afar: Self-Distancing From Future Stressors Facilitates Adaptive Coping. Emotion. Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/emo0000491 Emotion © 2018 American Psychological Association 2018, Vol. 1, No. 999, 000 1528-3542/18/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/emo0000491 Focusing on the Future From Afar: Self-Distancing From Future Stressors Facilitates Adaptive Coping Rachel E. White Maya M. Kuehn Hamilton College and University of Pennsylvania University of California, Berkeley Angela L. Duckworth Ethan Kross University of Pennsylvania University of Michigan Özlem Ayduk University of California, Berkeley Prior research indicates that visual self-distancing enhances adaptive self-reflection about negative past events (Kross & Ayduk, 2011). However, whether this process is similarly useful when people reflect on anxiety-provoking future negative experiences, and if so, whether a similar set of mechanisms underlie its benefits in this context, is unknown. Here we addressed these questions using a combination of experimental and individual difference methods with adults and adolescents (total N ϭ 2,344). In Studies 1 and 2, spontaneous self-distancing predicted less anxious emotional reactivity among adults and adolescents. This effect was mediated by differences in how vividly participants imagined a future anxiety-provoking event. Study 3 provided causal evidence in an adult sample: Adopting a self-distanced (vs. self-immersed) perspective when reflecting on a future stressor led to lower levels of anxiety as well as lower imagery vividness. Consistent with Studies 1 and 2, reductions in imagery vividness mediated the emotion regulatory benefits of self-distancing. A meta-analysis of all three studies further confirmed these findings across samples. Thus, the current studies extend previous research on the benefits of self-distancing to future stressors. In addition, they highlight a novel mechanism for this relation: imagery vividness. Keywords: self-distancing, anxiety, prospection, imagery vividness, emotion regulation Supplemental materials: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/emo0000491.supp Although reflecting on past and future negative experiences can rumination (Nolen-Hoeksema, 1991) or future-oriented worry help people make meaning out of these events, it can also lead to (Nolen-Hoeksema, Wisco, & Lyubomirsky, 2008). This raises the maladaptive, recursive patterns of thought such as past-oriented question: What mechanisms determine whether people’s attempts to understand their feelings succeed or fail? According to one program of research, a person’s ability to “take a step back” and reflect on their feelings from a self-distanced visual perspective plays a critical role in facilitating adaptive self-reflection. How- Rachel E. White, Department of Psychology, Hamilton College, and ever, all of this work has focused on the role that self-distancing This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its alliedDepartment publishers. of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania; Maya M. Kuehn, plays in allowing people to reflect on negative past experiences. This article is intended solely for the personal use ofDepartment the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley; Angela L. Recent work sheds new light on the importance of turning our Duckworth, Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania; Ethan Kross, Department of Psychology, University of Michigan; Özlem Ayduk, attention to the relatively understudied domain of prospective Department of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley. thought (e.g., Baumeister & Vohs, 2016; Baumeister, Vohs, & Rachel E. White and Maya M. Kuehn contributed equally. Oettingen, 2016; Gilbert & Wilson, 2007; Jing, Madore, & This research was partly funded by grants from the John F. Templeton Schacter, 2016; Seligman, Railton, Baumeister, & Sripada, 2013; Foundation awarded to Özlem Ayduk and Ethan Kross (24226) and to Szpunar, Spreng, & Schacter, 2014). How we represent our pos- Angela L. Duckworth and Ethan Kross (21564). We thank Brian Vickers sible futures is a core feature of human thought that can determine for his assistance on statistical analysis. anything from affect to our perception of available choices and our Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Rachel E. ability to build meaning of our experiences (Seligman et al., 2013). White, Department of Psychology, Hamilton College, 198 College Hill Road, Clinton, NY 13323, or to Özlem Ayduk, Department of Psychology, Yet, it is still unclear whether visual self-distancing operates when University of California, Berkeley, 3411 Tolman Hall, 2121 Berkeley people reflect on anxiety-provoking stressors that have yet to Way, Berkeley, CA 94720. E-mail: [email protected] or ayduk@ occur. The main goal of the current research was to address this berkeley.edu issue. 1 2 WHITE, KUEHN, DUCKWORTH, KROSS, AND AYDUK Self-Distancing in Retrospective Self-Reflection self-distancing to facilitate effective emotion regulation similarly when reflecting over the past and the future. When people reflect on negative past events, they typically On the other hand, retrospection and prospection also differ adopt a self-immersed, first person perspective, seeing the situa- from each other on several dimensions. For example, prospection tion replay through their own eyes (Kross & Ayduk, 2011; Nigro is less constrained by reality than retrospection. It therefore tends & Neisser, 1983). However, it is also possible for them to reflect to be more creative, more imaginative, and less effortful (see Van on the self from a self-distanced or “fly on the wall” perspective in Boven, Kane, & McGraw, 2008 for review). Furthermore, remem- which they see themselves from afar. bered past events are construed more concretely than imagined A number of studies have examined the emotion regulatory future events (Kane, Van Boven, & McGraw, 2012), containing implications of analyzing negative feelings from a self-distanced more idiosyncratic details such as time and place, objects and versus a self-immersed perspective. Self-distancing engenders a people, and sound and color (D’Argembeau & Van der Linden, number of benefits. Namely, it leads to lower levels of negative 2004; Johnson, Foley, Suengas, & Raye, 1988). Prospection also affect and physiological reactivity after reflecting on past events elicits greater affective intensity than retrospection (Van Boven & (e.g., Ayduk & Kross, 2008, 2010; Kross & Ayduk, 2008; Kross, Ashworth, 2007). The asymmetry in affective evocativeness be- Ayduk, & Mischel, 2005; Verduyn, Van Mechelen, Kross, Chezzi, tween retrospection and prospection is partly due to the uncertainty & Van Bever, 2012; Wisco & Nolen-Hoeksema, 2011), and re- associated with the future, which potentiates the intensity of emo- duces intrusive ideation and rumination over time (Ayduk & tional reactions (Wilson, Centerbar, Kermer, & Gilbert, 2005). In Kross, 2010; Kross & Ayduk, 2008; Verduyn et al., 2012). addition, mental simulations tend to be more extensive and vivid The aforementioned findings have been observed both when when anticipating what future events might be like than when self-distancing is experimentally manipulated and spontaneously remembering what past events were like (Van Boven & Ashworth, assessed as an individual difference (Ayduk & Kross, 2010; Gross- 2007). mann & Kross, 2010; Kross & Ayduk, 2011; Verduyn et al., 2012). Given the differences between retrospection and prospection, it They have been observed in several populations including children is difficult to make firm predictions about whether self-distancing (Kross, Duckworth, Ayduk, Tsukayama, & Mischel, 2011), ado- should or should not function similarly when people try to cope lescents (White, Kross, & Duckworth, 2015), adults (Ayduk & with negative events that have already happened versus negative Kross, 2010; Kross et al., 2005; Verduyn et al., 2012), and various events that they fear might happen; rather this is an open empirical clinical populations (Kross, Gard, Deldin, Clifton, & Ayduk, 2012; question. Prospection could be a boundary condition for the emo- Park, Ayduk, & Kross, 2016; Penner et al., 2016). Collectively, tion regulatory effectiveness of self-distancing because thinking they suggest that self-distancing enables adaptive self-reflection about anticipated future events elicits more intense and evocative over negative past experiences. But what about reflecting on future emotions than thinking about past events. Alternatively, self- negative experiences? distancing could be even more effective when dealing with antic- ipated negative events because with greater emotional intensity From Past to Future: Self-Distancing in Prospective there might be more room for self-distancing to serve a down- Self-Reflection regulatory function. Given these opposing possibilities, the first goal of the present research was to examine whether visual self- Despite evidence suggesting that self-distancing is beneficial in distancing reduces emotional reactivity to