;ournal uf -\bnonnaJ P<;)'chology Copynght 1997 by the Amencan ?<iYCOOIOglCaJ Assoclaoon. IN'. ,'i'/7. Vol. 106. So. 1.95-103 oo21-1l41)(/97IS3oo Hiding Feelings: The Acute Effects of Inhibiting Negative and Positive Emotion James J. Gross Robert VV. Levenson Stanford University University of California, Berkeley Emotion regulation plays a central role in mental health and illness, but little is known about even the most basic forms of emotion regulation. To examine the acute effects of inhibiting negative and positive emotion. we asked 180 female participants to watch sad, neutral. and amusing films under I of 2 conditions. Suppression participants (N = 90) inhibited their expressive behavior while watching the films; no suppression participants (N = 90) simply watched the films. Suppression diminished expressive behavior in all 3 films and decreased amusement self-reports in sad and amusing films. Physiologically. suppression had no effect in the neutral film, but clear effects in both negative and positive emotional films. including increased sympathetic activation of the cardiovascular system. On the basis of these findings, we suggest several ways emotional inhibition may influence psychological functioning. Emotion regulation and dysregulation figure prominently in processes simply overwhelms any attempt at scientific analysis. mental health and illness (Gross & Munoz. 1995). Indeed. by If this view is correct, the reason that little has been done is our count, over half of the nonsubstance related Axis I disorders that little can be done. and all of the Axis II personality disorders involve some form Without minimizing its complexity. we propose that emotion of emotion dysregulation (American Psychiatric Association. regulation can indeed be broken down into pieces that are ame­ 1994; see also Thoits. 1985). Thus. for example. major de­ nable to empirical study. One way to do this is to study specific pressive disorder is characterized by a deficit of positive emotion clinical populations. Examples of this approach include studies and/or a surplus of negative emotion; generalized anxiety disor­ that examine regional lateralization of brain activity in de­ der by heightened levels of anxiety; schizophrenia. disorganized pressed individuals (Henriques. & Davidson. 1991) or assess type, by inappropriate emotional responses; and hisQionic per­ blunted affect in people with schizophrenia (Kring & Neale. in sonality disorder by excessive emotionality. press). A second, complementary approach examines aspects Despite the manifest importance of emotion regulation to of emotion regulation in nonclinical populations that hwe par­ psychological well-being. surprisingly little has been done to ticular relevance to clinical syndromes. Such studies both eluci­ document adults' attempts to influence which emotions they date the fundamental nature of these emotional responses and have, when they have them. or how these emotions are experi­ help establish norms necessary for subsequent determination of enced or expressed. I This relative neglect is quite puzzling and whether and how these responses are altered in clinical popula­ invites speculation. Is emotion regulation so ubiquitous that we tions. Examples of this approach can be found in work studying already know all there is to know about it? This seems unlikely. processes of emotional suppression (Gross & Levenson. 1993) in that commonsense views of emotion regulation are remark­ or rumination (Nolen-Hoeksema. 1993) in nonclinical or sub­ ably inconsistent (e.g., the injunction to count to 10 before clinical populations. In this article. we take the second approach. acting so that your anger will disappear seems to contradict the with a particular focus on the inhibition of negative and positive conventional wisdom that bottling up your anger will hurt you). emotion. A second possibility is that the diversity of emotion regulatory Emotional Inhibition: For Better or for Worse? Civilization seems to require that we inhibit the free play of James 1. Gross. Department of Psychology. Stanford University; Rob­ our emotions, and many have wondered what consequences such ert W. Levenson. Department of Psychology. University of California. emotional inhibition might have (Elias. 1978; Freud, 1961; Tom­ Berkeley. kins. 1984). Some commentators have feared for the worst. A This study was submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of century ago, for example, Freud argued that emotional inhibition James J. Gross's doctoral degree at the University of California. Berke­ was an important cause of psychological illness. and his talk ley. This research was supported by National Institute of Mental Health therapy was designed to release "strangulated affect" whose (NIMH) National Research Service Award MHl003401. National Insti­ expression. for one reason or ano~ had been severely cur­ tute on Aging Grant AG07476, and NIMH Grant MH39895. We thank Joseph Campos, Paul Ekman, Stephen Hinshaw. and George Lakoff for tailed (Breuer & Freud. 1957/1895, p. (7). Despite the substan- their help in formulating this study. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to James J. Gross. Department of Psychology. Jordan Hall, Building 420. Stanford I This is true despite a recent explosion of interest in the study of University. Stanford. California 94305-2130. Electronic mail may be developmental aspects of emotion regulation (e.g.• Fox, 1994; Garber & sent via Internet to [email protected]. Dodge. 1991). 95 96 GROSS AND LEVENSON tial changes from Freud's original theory of pathogenesis that a sample of healthy volunteers using a similar methodology to occurred over the ensuing decades, the idea that emotional inhi­ the one we used previously to study disgust (Gross &: Levenson, bition may lead to psychological distress remains a central tenet 1993). This time, however, we examined both a negative emo­ of psychodynamic psychotherapy. Accordingly, an important tion (sadness) and a positive emotion (aImscment), as well as goal of expressive therapies continues to be the fuller expression a control neutral emotional state. (e.g., representation in conscious awareness; experience and Our decision to study healthy participants was dictated by a expression in the context of the therapeutic relationship) of desire to establish nonnative data relevant to this form of emo­ inhibited emotional responses (Alexander &: French. 1946; tion regulation before engaging the compleXities of clinical sam­ Brenner. 1982; Levy. 1990). ples. Our selection of target emotions was dictated by the desire Recently, others have cast emotional inhibition in a more to extend our previous study of the negative emotion of disgust positive light. arguing that this and other forms of emotion regu­ to a more clinically relevant negative emotion (sadness), whose lation represent an essential developmental milestone (Kopp. regulation is centrally implicated in mood disorders such as 1989; Saami, 1990; Thompson. 1991). This view is consistent major depressive disorder: Given the theoretical importance with the notion that healthy adults often IDlSt inhibit (to varying attached to distinctions between negative and positive emotions, degrees) their ongoing emotion-expressive behavior (lbmkins. we also wished to include a positive emotion (aImsement) that 1984 ). It also accords weU with the evidence concerning the also IDlSt at times be suppressed (e.g., to facilitate task focus). potent destructive effects of unregulated emotional responding, In addition, to address the possibility that the observed pattern as in the precipitous expression of anger in intermittent explosive of findings might result from inhibiting any behavior (rather disorder: On this view, emotional inhibition is not uniformly than emotional inhibition per se), we included a control condi­ pathogenic. Indeed. in many circumstances, it may be the failure tion in which participants were instructed to inhibit their expres­ of emotional inhibition that is problematic. sive behavior while in a neutral emotional state. Obviously, there is a middle ground between these two per­ spectives, one that holds that there is an optimal level of emo­ Hypotheses tional regulation-somewhere between total strangulation and completely unfettered expression. The point we wish to empha­ We view emotional inhibition as an active, effortful affair in size here. howev~ is the extremely important role that emo­ which inhibitory processes are recruited and then pitted against tional inhibition bas J)layed historically in clinical theory. ongoing emotional responses. This leads to the prediction that some signs of emotion may be visible even as higher order inhibitory processes are activated. In addition. if emotional inhi­ Empirical Findings bition requires effort, it should have physiological conse­ Despite long-standing clinical interest in the topic of emo­ quences. This leads to the prediction that participants who in­ tional inhibition, the relevant empirical literature is impover­ hibit ongoing emotion-expressive behavior should show greater ished and inconsistent (for a review, see Gross &: Levenson, signs of physiological activation that participants who do not 1993 ). EveJl if we limit ourselves to questions about the inhibi­ engage in emotional inhibition. FInally, given the marked behav­ tion of emotion-expressive behavior (as opposed to the inhibi­ ioral and physiological changes we anticipated would be tion of subjective emotional experience), clear conclusions