This study set out to enhance our understanding of emotions and their regulation in educational dialogues. One hundred and ten undergraduate students participated in small-group computer-mediated contentious discussions and reported on emotional experiences during discussions in a reflection task. Sixteen discussions were analyzed using the Scheme for Educational Dialogue Analysis (Hennessy et al., 2016) to investigate the impact of emotional intensity on the quality of dialogue. Ninety-four reflections were analyzed qualitatively to investigate the reasons discussions were reported as emotionally significant, and the extent to which these emotions were shared by other group members. We found that strong emotions did not impair the quality of dialogue. The discussion topic and the participation at the individual and group levels were the key factors for identifying discussions as emotionally significant. Moreover, moments reported as emotionally significant were often shared, yet shared intensity was not always accompanied by shared emotional valence. We interpret this discrepancy considering participants' emotion regulation processes and the quality of the discussion. We conclude by stressing the importance of emotionally-loaded moments in contentious discussions as a context for practicing emotion regulation and the role of the moderator in cases where participation and emotional regulation are sub-optimal.

本研究旨在加强我们对情绪及其在教育对话中的调节的理解。110 名本科生参加了以计算机为媒介的小组讨论，并在反思任务中报告了讨论期间的情感体验。使用教育对话分析方案 (Hennessy et al., 2016) 分析了 16 次讨论，以研究情绪强度对对话质量的影响。对 94 条反思进行了定性分析，以调查讨论被报告为情绪上重要的原因，以及其他小组成员分享这些情绪的程度。我们发现强烈的情绪不会影响对话的质量。讨论主题以及个人和团体层面的参与是确定讨论具有情感意义的关键因素。此外，被报告为具有情感意义的时刻通常是共享的，但共享的强度并不总是伴随着共享的情感效价。我们考虑参与者的情绪调节过程和讨论的质量来解释这种差异。最后，我们强调在有争议的讨论中情绪负荷时刻作为练习情绪调节的背景的重要性，以及主持人在参与和情绪调节不是最佳的情况下的作用。然而，共同的强度并不总是伴随着共同的情感效价。我们考虑参与者的情绪调节过程和讨论的质量来解释这种差异。最后，我们强调在有争议的讨论中情绪负荷时刻作为练习情绪调节的背景的重要性，以及主持人在参与和情绪调节不是最佳的情况下的作用。然而，共同的强度并不总是伴随着共同的情感效价。我们考虑参与者的情绪调节过程和讨论的质量来解释这种差异。最后，我们强调在有争议的讨论中情绪负荷时刻作为练习情绪调节的背景的重要性，以及主持人在参与和情绪调节不是最佳的情况下的作用。