REAPPRAISING REAPPRAISAL 1 Manuscript in press at Emotion Review REAPPRAISING REAPPRAISAL Andero Uusberga,c, Jamie L. Taxera, Jennifer Yiha,b, Helen Uusbergc, James J. Grossa a Department of Psychology, Stanford University, 450 Serra Mall, Stanford, CA, U.S.A., 94305. b Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences, Stanford University, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA, U.S.A., 94305. c Institute of Psychology, University of Tartu, Näituse 2, Tartu, Estonia, 50411. ABSTRACT What psychological mechanisms enable people to reappraise a situation to change its emotional impact? We propose that reappraisal works by shifting appraisal outcomes – abstract representations of how a situational construal compares to goals – either by changing the construal (reconstrual) or by changing the goal set (repurposing). Instances of reappraisal can therefore be characterized as change vectors in appraisal dimensional space. Affordances for reappraisal arise from the range of mental models that could explain a situation (construal malleability) and the range of goals that the situation could serve (goal set malleability). This framework helps to expand our conception of reappraisal, assess and classify different instances of reappraisal, predict their relative effectiveness, understand their brain mechanisms, and relate them to individual differences. Keywords: appraisal, reappraisal, cognitive change, emotion regulation If you are distressed by anything external, the propositions of our framework. First, pain is not due to the thing itself, but to your reappraisal can involve changing how a estimate of it. situation is construed as well as changing which goals this construal is compared to. Second, Marcus Aurelius reappraisal can be characterized in terms of the Finding the elevator out of order en route to a appraisal shifts it produces along appraisal top-floor meeting can feel frustrating. On dimensions. Third, reappraisal depends on how second thought, however, the situation can be malleable the situational construal and the reconstrued as a minor setback and repurposed current goals are. We end by considering as an opportunity to get some exercise by several broader implications of this framework. taking the stairs. This is how an emotional response to a situation can be changed by REAPPRAISAL: THE STATE OF THE ART thinking differently about the situation – a The phenomenon of reappraisal that we seek to phenomenon known as reappraisal (Buhle et explain encompasses a range of different al., 2013; Gross, 1998; Lazarus, 1966; McRae, behaviors that amount to intentional changes 2016). In this paper, we propose an integrative to appraisal aimed at changing emotion. These framework for understanding reappraisal. We changes are intentional in the sense that they start with a brief overview of the history and are directed at a goal to alter the emotion the current state of reappraisal research. Next, trajectory. For instance, reappraisal can be we sketch a working model of appraisal and use triggered by a goal to reduce negative it to reveal the basic psychological mechanisms emotions as well as to increase positive of reappraisal. We then introduce the core REAPPRAISING REAPPRAISAL 2 emotions, and vice versa (Tamir, 2015). Our important for understanding as well as framework applies to reappraisal irrespective of alleviating mental ailments. For instance, which kind of emotion goal it serves (although etiologies of mental illnesses such as down-regulation of negative emotion will be depression and anxiety implicate negative over-represented in this paper much as it is in interpretation biases (Everaert, Podina, & everyday life). Our framework also applies to Koster, 2017), and/or the attenuation of reappraisal irrespective of its automaticity. positive interpretation biases (Mezulis, Even though we view reappraisal as an Abramson, Hyde, & Hankin, 2004; Snyder, intentional process (Gross, Sheppes, & Urry, 1989). Interventions designed to alleviate 2011), it may or may not also be controllable, mental illness therefore often target conscious, and efficient (Melnikoff & Bargh, interpretation biases. For instance, cognitive 2018). For instance, an emotion goal can be therapists teach patients how to identify and activated inside as well as outside awareness, challenge specific kinds of interpretation and reappraisal can then proceed similarly patterns such as overgeneralization or inside as well as outside awareness (Braunstein, exaggeration (Williams & Garland, 2002). Gross, & Ochsner, 2017). Thus, we will not Improved reappraisal skills are among the systematically explore differences between desired outcomes of many effective implicit and explicit reappraisal, although doing therapeutic systems such as rational emotive so would be valuable in the future. Finally, in behavior therapy (Ellis, 1957; Ellis & MacLaren, addition to the intrapersonal level, reappraisal 1998) and cognitive behavioral therapy (Beck, can also occur on interpersonal level, such as 1963, 1964; Beck & Dozois, 2011). when people seek and offer alternative A second major source of inspiration for interpretations for distressing events in social modern reappraisal research is the study of interactions (Zaki & Williams, 2013). The psychological stress and coping, spearheaded present framework focuses exclusively on by Richard Lazarus (Lazarus, 1966; Smith & intrapersonal reappraisal, although we believe Kirby, 2011). Seminal experiments in the 1960s that it could prove useful for future efforts to suggested that stress responses depend on the understand interpersonal reappraisal as well. way people cognitively construe, or appraise A Brief History of Reappraisal Research (Arnold, 1960), stressful situations (Lazarus & Alfert, 1964; Speisman, Lazarus, Mordkoff, & Attempts to reinterpret a situation to change Davison, 1964). The term “reappraisal” was its emotional impact have long been of interest introduced to denote updates to the initial in psychology, resulting in a rich, but appraisal that could occur as the situation and increasingly complex, set of findings and ideas. its interpretation continually unfold (Lazarus, Systematic study of reappraisal can be traced 1968). This early meaning of “reappraisal” was back to the idea of ego-defenses that broader than the meaning of this term in the psychoanalysts associated with the context of emotion regulation and this paper. management of negative emotions (Freud, For Lazarus, reappraisal could be intentional as 1926/1959). Lists of identified ego-defenses well as unintentional, and could reflect overt included reappraisal-like constructs such as changes to the situation as well as covert intellectualization and rationalization. Even as changes to the interpretation. By contrast, as clinical psychology has witnessed major an emotion regulation strategy, reappraisal paradigm shifts, constructs related to usually encompasses only intentional changes interpretation of situations have remained to the covert interpretation, falling within the REAPPRAISING REAPPRAISAL 3 subspace of reappraisal that Lazarus called switch to) a comedy instead of a drama (using emotion-focused coping (intentional changes strategies from the situation selection and to overt situations would meanwhile fall within modification family); fiddle with a smartphone problem-focused coping). A key contribution of during intense portions of the drama the stress and coping literature to reappraisal (attentional deployment); construe the drama research is the realization that reappraisal as irrelevant because it is fictional (reappraisal); works through appraisal change. However, or hold back tears (response modulation). beyond this broad insight, the literatures on The process model of emotion regulation, and appraisal and reappraisal have drifted apart the systematic research it has inspired, has over the years, creating a chasm that we hope made significant conceptual as well as to help bridge (Smith & Kirby, 2011; Yih, empirical contributions to our understanding of Uusberg, Taxer, & Gross, 2019). reappraisal. Conceptually, the process model Reappraisal in Modern Emotion distinguishes reappraisal from two related but Regulation Research distinct forms of emotion regulation. On the one hand, it suggests that although attentional Much of modern reappraisal research has been deployment and reappraisal strategies are conducted in the context of the broader project similarly cognitive, they target different of understanding the many ways people components of emotion generation (Ochsner & attempt to regulate their emotions. Emotion Gross, 2005). Whereas reappraisal biases regulation encompasses all overt or covert emotion by changing appraisals, attentional behaviors that change one or more aspects of deployment biases emotion by interfering with emotion (Gross, 1998, 1999, 2015; Koole, 2009; the stream of information that appraisals rely Larsen, 2000; Webb, Schweiger Gallo, Miles, on. On the other hand, the process model also Gollwitzer, & Sheeran, 2012). According to the distinguishes reappraisal from situation process model (Gross, 1998, 2015), emotion selection and modification strategies. Both sets regulation follows when an emotion, either of strategies end up changing appraisals, but experienced or imagined, is identified to be situation selection and modification do so by helpful or harmful to some end, such as to changing the overt situation while reappraisal experience pleasure or to perform well on a does so by changing the covert interpretation task