17 sources: 1 acute laboratory study, 2 cohort studies, 2 cross-sectional studies, 1 meta-analysis, 1 non-randomised trial, 4 randomised controlled trials, 6 with design not recorded
Emotional · Practice
Cognitive Reappraisal Practice
Naming the automatic thought and generating alternative interpretations of a stressful situation: one way to carry out what the review summary this entry was written from reports: that reappraisal training durably increases reappraisal use, tied to lower depression and higher well-being.
Beta content: this dimension's review set is version 0.9-beta and upgrades in place after the Round-2 internal reviews.
1 of 18 sources behind this entry were read from the abstract only; they are marked in the sources list.
as-needed
Beginner-friendlyAnywhere
Before you start
Do not use reframing to deny real harm, injustice, or danger that requires action.
When to seek a professional
- Low mood, sadness, or loss of interest that persists most days for more than 2 weeks
- Anxiety, worry, or fear that persists more than 2 weeks or interferes with work, relationships, sleep, or daily functioning
- Any thoughts of self-harm or suicide, stop and contact a crisis line (e.g., 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline in the US) or emergency services immediately
- Distress that worsens or feels unmanageable during or after a practice
- Using these practices to avoid, delay, or replace care for a diagnosed or suspected mental health condition
- Negative interpretations you cannot shift, or that involve hopelessness or self-harm
How to do it
When stressed, name the automatic thought, then deliberately generate 1-2 alternative interpretations; practice on real situations several times per week.
none (optional prompt card or app)For most adultsStudentsWorking adultsUnder high stress
What the evidence says
What the sources say
This practice is one way to carry out what the sources on the concept entry (emo.emotion-regulation) studied: cognitive reappraisal compared with suppression and acceptance, and whether reappraisal can be trained. LeBlanc 2017 (randomised trial) reports a significant increase in reappraisal scores in the treatment group compared with the control group at one-year follow-up, and concludes that the results may provide a first step toward showing that a brief intervention can produce enduring positive changes in mental health. Wolgast 2011 (randomised trial) reports that both reappraisal and acceptance significantly reduced distress, physiological reactions and avoidance compared with control, with few differences between the two. Marciniak 2026 reports that reappraisal's effectiveness is context-dependent and better suited to some real-world stressor types than others. The full account, source by source, is on the concept entry this practice links to (emo.emotion-regulation).
Common misconceptions
- Misconception: 'Reappraisal is forcing positive spin.' It is finding a more accurate reading, which is sometimes neutral, not positive.
- Misconception: 'It should work instantly and always.' It is a skill that strengthens with training, and its usefulness depends on the situation.
What we won't claim
- Does not diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent depression, anxiety, PTSD, or any mental health disorder
- Not a substitute for psychotherapy, counseling, or psychiatric care
- Cannot claim to 'fix' emotions, eliminate stress, or guarantee happiness
- No claim of clinical, therapeutic, or medication-like effects
- Cannot claim to deliver clinical CBT for a diagnosed disorder
17 sources: 1 acute laboratory study, 2 cohort studies, 2 cross-sectional studies, 1 meta-analysis, 1 non-randomised trial, 4 randomised controlled trials, 6 with design not recorded
- Agreement
- Direction recorded for 0 of 17 sources; not yet recorded for the rest.
- The claim's outcome
- Outcome not yet recorded
- Certainty
- No source states a certainty rating.
- Authors
- Sources share authors: Sara Leblanc (first author of 2 sources); C. Mohiyeddini (senior author of 2 sources); N. Levit-Binnun (senior author of 2 sources).
- How the sources were read
- Some sources are based on abstracts, not full texts.
What each source measured and concluded (17)
design not recorded · 2020
LeBlanc et al. (2020) — Validation of an Emotion Regulation Training Program on Mental Well-Being
- What it measured
- Emotion regulation (reappraisal) and mental well-being
- How it was read
- based on the abstract, not the full text
randomised controlled trial · 2017
LeBlanc et al. (2017) — Effect of an Emotion Regulation Training Program on Mental Well-Being
- What it measured
- Reappraisal.
- How it measured it
- Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ; validated).
- Its conclusion, in its own words
- “The results of this research may provide the first step in this direction, by demonstrating that a brief, theoretically derived intervention can elicit enduring, positive changes in mental health.”
- How it was read
- read in full text
randomised controlled trial · 2025
Feng et al. (2025) — The Effects of Mindfulness Training on Emotion Regulation Among Undergraduates: A Randomized Controlled Trial
- What it measured
- Emotion regulation.
- How it measured it
- Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ) (self-report).
- How it was read
- read in full text
non-randomised trial · 2019
Alkoby et al. (2019) — An eight-week mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) workshop increases regulatory choice flexibility.
- What it measured
- Regulatory choice flexibility.
- How it measured it
- ER choice task (validated).
- Its conclusion, in its own words
- “Our study points to MBSR as an effective intervention to increase regulatory choice flexibility.”
- How it was read
- read in full text
randomised controlled trial · 2021
Ardi et al. (2021) — The Effects of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction on the Association Between Autonomic Interoceptive Signals and Emotion Regulation Selection
- What it measured
- Change in emotion regulation strategy selection (increased reappraisal).
- How it measured it
- Emotion Regulation Choice (ERC) task (validated).
- Its conclusion, in its own words
- “Mindfulness seems to increase the sensitivity of regulatory selections to interoceptive signals, and this is associated with subjective well-being. This may be a central pathway through which MBIs exert their positive effects on mental health and resilience.”
- How it was read
- read in full text
design not recorded · 2026
Marciniak et al. (2026) — Contextual factors influence effectiveness of cognitive reappraisal.
- What it measured
- Effectiveness of cognitive reappraisal in regulating real-world stressors
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
design not recorded · 2019
Boehme et al. (2019) — Effects of Differential Strategies of Emotion Regulation
- What it measured
- Emotion regulation effectiveness (self-report, skin conductance response, P300)
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
cohort study · 2023
Dawel et al. (2023) — For Whom and What Does Cognitive Reappraisal Help? A Prospective Study
- What it measured
- Changes in depression, anxiety, loneliness, functional impairment, and wellbeing
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
design not recorded · 2017
Troy et al. (2017) — Cognitive Reappraisal and Acceptance: Effects on Emotion, Physiology, and Perceived Cognitive Costs
- What it measured
- Subjective negative/positive emotion, physiological responses, and perceived cognitive costs
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
design not recorded · 2019
Goldin et al. (2019) — Acceptance versus reappraisal: Behavioral, autonomic, and neural effects
- What it measured
- Negative emotion ratings, autonomic psychophysiology, and fMRI BOLD responses
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
cross-sectional study · 2020
Salimzadeh et al. (2020) — Stress, Emotion Regulation, and Well-Being among Canadian Faculty Members in Research-Intensive Universities
- What it measured
- Well-being outcomes (emotional exhaustion, job satisfaction, quitting intentions, psychological maladjustment, illness symptoms)
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
cross-sectional study · 2018
Kotsou et al. (2018) — Acceptance alone is a better predictor of psychopathology and well-being than emotional competence, emotion regulation and mindfulness.
- What it measured
- Psychological distress (anxiety, depression) and well-being (happiness)
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
design not recorded · 2017
Brockman et al. (2017) — Emotion regulation strategies in daily life: mindfulness, cognitive reappraisal and emotion suppression
- What it measured
- Daily negative and positive affect
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
cohort study · 2008
Berking et al. (2008) — Emotion-regulation skills as a treatment target in psychotherapy.
- What it measured
- Emotion-regulation skills application and treatment outcome
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
meta-analysis · 2024
Stover et al. (2024) — A meta-analysis of cognitive reappraisal and personal resilience.
- What it measured
- Association between cognitive reappraisal and personal resilience
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
- What the review says it includes
- Meta-analysis
- Studies and participants, as stated
- 64 independent samples from 55 studies (N=29,824)
randomised controlled trial · 2011
Wolgast et al. (2011) — Cognitive reappraisal and acceptance: an experimental comparison of two emotion regulation strategies.
- What it measured
- Subjective distress, physiological reactions, behavioral avoidance to aversive emotional states
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
acute laboratory study · 2021
Rompilla et al. (2021) — Emotion regulation in the face of loss: How detachment, positive reappraisal, and acceptance shape experiences, physiology, and perceptions in late life.
- What it measured
- Emotional experiences, physiology, and perceptions of regulation success/motivation in response to loss film clips
- How it was read
- screened only, not extracted
Key sources (18) · 1 not counted
Each source below is shown with its study design and a link to the original study, or, where it is not a completed research paper, with what kind of record it is; those are not counted. This is the audit trail.
design not recordedValidation of an Emotion Regulation Training Program on Mental Well-Being
randomised controlled trialEffect of an Emotion Regulation Training Program on Mental Well-Being
randomised controlled trialThe Effects of Mindfulness Training on Emotion Regulation Among Undergraduates: A Randomized Controlled Trial
non-randomised trialAn eight-week mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) workshop increases regulatory choice flexibility.
randomised controlled trialThe Effects of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction on the Association Between Autonomic Interoceptive Signals and Emotion Regulation Selection
design not recordedContextual factors influence effectiveness of cognitive reappraisal.
design not recordedEffects of Differential Strategies of Emotion Regulation
cohort studyFor Whom and What Does Cognitive Reappraisal Help? A Prospective Study
design not recordedCognitive Reappraisal and Acceptance: Effects on Emotion, Physiology, and Perceived Cognitive Costs
design not recordedAcceptance versus reappraisal: Behavioral, autonomic, and neural effects
cross-sectional studyStress, Emotion Regulation, and Well-Being among Canadian Faculty Members in Research-Intensive Universities
cross-sectional studyAcceptance alone is a better predictor of psychopathology and well-being than emotional competence, emotion regulation and mindfulness.
design not recordedEmotion regulation strategies in daily life: mindfulness, cognitive reappraisal and emotion suppression
cohort studyEmotion-regulation skills as a treatment target in psychotherapy.
meta-analysisA meta-analysis of cognitive reappraisal and personal resilience.
randomised controlled trialCognitive reappraisal and acceptance: an experimental comparison of two emotion regulation strategies.
acute laboratory studyEmotion regulation in the face of loss: How detachment, positive reappraisal, and acceptance shape experiences, physiology, and perceptions in late life.
Type not recordedRegulation of Emotions Under Stress
Why do some records show a record type instead of a study design?
A study design is shown for a completed, peer-reviewed paper. A registered protocol, a preprint, a conference abstract, a referee report or a book chapter has not been through peer review as a finished paper, so it is labelled for what it is, and it is counted in no source count. Where a record could not be confirmed as a completed paper at all, it says so rather than guessing. They all stay in the list, and their DOI still resolves, because the count of what was screened is part of the audit trail.
- Protocol / registration A registered plan for a review or trial, not its results.
- Preprint Posted by its authors before peer review.
- Conference abstract A conference summary rather than a peer-reviewed paper.
- Peer-review report A referee's report on a paper, not the paper itself.
- Guideline / position stand A recommendation derived from evidence, which is a step further from the data than the evidence itself.
- Book chapter A chapter in a scholarly book rather than a journal paper.
- Type not recorded Our record does not say what kind of publication this is, so it is counted in no source count. That is a gap in our data, not a judgement about the research.
“Abstract only” means the review read that paper’s abstract, not its full text; “screened only” means it was included at re-screening and not extracted. Both stay in the trail with their DOI, because how a source was read is part of the audit.
Explore all 242 studies in Emotional →
The full evidence base this focus area draws on, every study with its design and DOI.What it is for
Bounce back from setbacks more easilyFeel less stressedHandle difficult feelings better