{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03329145728643216, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00628140703517588, 'mean_word_length': 5.8076923076923075, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Individual differences in emotion processing styles are differentially associated with affective dynamics.

Previous research has identified four emotion-processing styles (cerebral, hot, cold, and overwhelmed) based on levels of emotional clarity, attention to emotion, and affect intensity. Although associated with psychopathology, studies have yet to examine whether these styles are associated with the dynamics of everyday emotional experiences. Cluster analysis (n = 233) replicated cerebral, hot, cold, and overwhelmed emotion processing styles based on participants' scores on the Affect Intensity Measure and Clarity and Attention subscales of the Trait Meta Mood Scale. Participants completed experience sampling surveys assessing high and low arousal negative (NA) and positive affect (PA) for 14 days, eight times per day. Mean-level affect, instability (root mean square of successive differences), and inertia (autocorrelation lag 1) were computed. Multilevel models revealed overwhelmed individuals tended to display the highest level of affective dysregulation in daily life. Specifically, they experienced higher mean-level NA, had lower mean-level low-arousal PA, and showed evidence of higher instability of both high- and low-arousal NA compared to the other styles. Emotion processing styles were not well differentiated by levels of inertia. We discuss implications for psychopathology and utility of emotion processing style in clinical contexts for idiographically tailoring emotion-focused interventions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).