ABSTRACT

Writing about emotions related to a life stressor is thought to promote coping via emotional processing. However, all styles of emotional processing may not be beneficial to managing stress. Such styles can include constructive (planning/problem-solving, meaning-making) and unconstructive (rumination, worry) forms. This study utilised a randomised experimental design to examine the physiological impact (as indexed by heart rate variability, salivary cortisol reactivity and recovery) of expressive writing with guidance to promote constructive and discourage unconstructive styles (EP+) versus expressive writing with no guidance (EP). Participants (N = 151) engaged in three sessions of expressive writing anchored to a self-nominated stressor over three days. Stress reactivity was measured two weeks later in response to a stress recall task. There was no effect of group on cortisol reactivity, cortisol recovery, or HRV reactivity. However, there was a significant interaction of group and subjective stressfulness of the nominated stressor was observed, such that EP+ was associated with greater cortisol recovery. Those with more taxing stressors may be better equipped to process emotions with guidance on emotional processing styles.

摘要

写下与生活压力源相关的情绪被认为可以通过情绪处理来促进应对。然而，所有类型的情绪处理可能都无助于管理压力。这种风格可以包括建设性的（计划/解决问题，意义制定）和非建设性的（沉思，担心）形式。本研究采用随机实验设计来检查有指导的表达性写作的生理影响（以心率变异性、唾液皮质醇反应性和恢复为指标），以促进建设性和阻止非建设性风格 (EP+) 与没有指导的表达性写作 (EP) . 参与者（N= 151）在三天内进行了三期以自我命名的压力源为基础的表达性写作。两周后测量压力反应性以响应压力回忆任务。组对皮质醇反应性、皮质醇恢复或 HRV 反应性没有影响。然而，组间存在显着的交互作用，并且观察到指定压力源的主观压力，因此 EP+ 与更大的皮质醇恢复相关。那些有更多压力源的人可能会在情绪处理方式的指导下更好地处理情绪。