Current Lab Projects

Exploring Relations Between Self-Concept Complexity and Emotion Regulation Strategy Choice

Emotions are the data of the human experience. Experiences of sadness, joy, guilt, and fear alter our thoughts, physiology, and behaviour. However, emotional responses are not always adaptive, such as experiencing paralyzing fear when writing an exam or severe road rage. As such, we must manage our emotions to thrive. But how do we do that? What strategies do we choose, consciously or nonconsciously, to regulate our emotions? Maybe we engage in cognitive reappraisal – for example, imagining a better future outcome or diminishing the personal relevance of an emotional event. Or maybe we disengage entirely, using distraction. We might also try an autonomic strategy, such as holding our breath. Perhaps we use a combination of strategies – but how did we choose them, and why? Research on emotion regulation (ER) strategy choice endeavors to understand how individuals choose the conscious or nonconscious strategies they use to regulate their emotions. Although some research has examined specific strategies and when they tend to be used, there is much we do not know on how and why people choose the strategies they do. In particular, there is a major gap in our understanding of how one’s beliefs about oneself influence ER strategy choice. For example, if one believed they were a good employee, and this was their main source of life satisfaction, it might be much more difficult to regulate sadness associated with being fired as compared to someone who had many more positive and important aspects of their identity. Given that identity and emotion are tightly linked, this dearth of research is glaring when trying to understand how humans choose effective strategies to regulate their emotions.

This research program has two objectives. Objective A is to improve the assessment of ER strategy choice by developing a new way to assess this construct. Most researchers examining ER strategy use train people on how to regulate their emotions, and force them to choose specific strategies in experimental tasks. Although this clarifies how specific strategies affect individuals’ emotional experience, these tasks tend to poorly relate to real-world strategy use. I propose a new way to examine ER strategy use that can enhance our understanding of individual differences in emotion processing by encouraging individuals to choose strategies they would use in real life. Objective B is to use this new way of measuring ER strategy choice to explore the relationship between ER strategy choice and self-concept clarity, which is a measure of beliefs about one’s identity. Given that self-related beliefs become activated in emotional scenarios, I expect that this influences ER strategy choice by constraining individuals’ available cognitive resources such that they are less able to choose strategies that involve cognitive flexibility.

Grant Collaborations

2021-2026

Primary Investigator: Dr. Skye Fitzpatrick, Assistant Professor, York University

Co-investigators: Dixon-Gordon, Katherine; Fergus, Karen D; Liebman, Rachel; Monson, Candice; Fredborg, Bev

Canadian Institutes of Health Research Project Grant

Title: How do communication behaviours contribute to and buffer against suicidal and self-injurious acts in couples wherein one member has borderline personality disorder? (Note: Dr. Fredborg is not listed as a collaborator on the funding decisions website as she was added to the grant after its acceptance).

Project Description: Suicidal behavior and self-injury (SSI) in borderline personality disorder (BPD) is often prompted by relationship problems, but it is unclear how intimate partners of those with BPD influence SSI. Such information is key to understand whether and how incorporating partners into BPD treatments may help reduce SSI. We aim to study the ways that intimate partners talk to those with BPD in general and about SSI, and immediately respond to SSI, that predict a higher or lower likelihood of it happening again. First, we will examine if individuals with BPD and their intimate partner's communication in general and about SSI specifically interplays with their emotion to predict SSI. Next, we will identify how intimate partners immediately respond to SSI in those with BPD, and whether specific types of responses make it more or less likely to recur. Finally, we will develop a new method of measuring how intimate partners immediately respond to SSI in those with BPD. 250 people with BPD who engage in SSI and their intimate partners will complete measures negative emotion, general and SSI-specific communication, and SSI once every three months for a year (four times total), and on their smartphones ~5 times per day for 30 days. On their smart phones, intimate partners will also describe how they immediately respond to SSI, and the first 20 intimate partners will further describe this in an interview. These responses will be used to categorize types of immediate responses to SSI so that we can examine which types predict a higher or lower likelihood of SSI happening again. A questionnaire measuring types of immediate responses will also be developed based on smart phone and interview data, which will be evaluated in our sample. Findings will provide critical information about what partners should do or not do to reduce SSI in those with BPD. They will also guide future research on BPD and SSI by providing a new measure of immediate responses to SSI in intimate partners.

2024-2029

Nominated Principal Investigator: Dr. Skye Fitzpatrick, Assistant Professor, York University

Other Principal Investigators: Daros, Alexander R; Fredborg, Beverley K; Liebman, Rachel; McMain, Shelley F

Co-Investigators: Courey, Lynn; Crenshaw, Alexander O; Monson, Candice; Traynor, Jenna M

Canadian Institutes of Health Research Project Grant - $952,425 CAD

Title: A randomized controlled trial testing Sage: A couple intervention for borderline personality disorder

Project Description: Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a life-threatening, costly public health crisis affecting 1-3% of North Americans, with 10% dying by suicide and annual healthcare costs of $63k (Canadian Dollars)/patient. Further, people with BPD's intimate relationships are highly disrupted, and their partners report elevated mental health problems but little access to treatment. Existing BPD treatments are resource-heavy, inaccessible, and 47% of people with BPD do not respond to them. These treatments also neglect relationship problems and intimate partner's mental health concerns, even though they are thought to play a key role in BPD maintenance. BPD interventions may produce stronger, quicker, and more durable outcomes if they incorporated partners to target both the emotional and relationship core of BPD. Moreover, incorporating partners into interventions may improve relationship outcomes and partner mental health without added resource investments. Accordingly, members of our team developed Sage. Named after a plant that thrives in relationship with its ecosystem, Sage is a brief, 12-session conjoint intervention for people with BPD and their intimate partners that targets BPD, relationship conflict, and partner mental health. Our recent uncontrolled trial provides preliminary support for its efficacy. As a next step in testing Sage, it is critical to utilize a Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) design to identify if Sage is more efficacious than standard care that these couples typically receive; supportive individual psychotherapy (SIP) for people with BPD and their partners. The investigators propose to conduct the first RCT of Sage for couples wherein one member has BPD. The study will examine if Sage is more efficacious than SIP in improving BPD symptoms (primary outcome), as well as relationship conflict and partner mental health (secondary outcomes), as well as a range of other outcomes, from pre- to post-intervention, and post-intervention to follow-up. It will also investigate factors that influence treatment response, BPD severity, and related problems. Up to 152 couples wherein one member has BPD will be randomized to receive Sage or SIP. Gold-standard measures of primary, secondary, and exploratory outcomes will be administered at baseline, mid-intervention, post-intervention, and a one-month, three- month, and six-month follow-up.