Emotion regulation and self-control: Same same but different and even incompatible?

OBJECTIVE: We explore the idea that inhibitory self-control and prohedonic emotion regulation may be incompatible concerns. BACKGROUND: Specifically, we propose that because some forms of self-control involve denying oneself hedonic pleasures, it may lead to negative affect. Because people may then prioritize emotion regulation over self-control, negative affect may in turn lead to emotion regulation efforts, specifically the use of emotion regulation strategies, and an increased likelihood of self-control failure. METHOD: To explore the relationship between emotion regulation and self-control in daily life, we conducted a secondary analysis of a 6-week, 6-signal-per-day ambulatory assessment data set (N = 125 participants with a total of 22,845 completed measurement occasions). RESULTS: Consistent with our predictions, we found that self-control efforts of resisting a pleasurable desire led to significantly increased subsequent negative affect, which, in turn, led to significantly increased emotion regulation efforts and to significantly more likely self-control failures. CONCLUSIONS: We found evidence for the notion that inhibitory self-control and prohedonic emotion regulation are, on average, somewhat incompatible concerns. We discuss our findings in the context of other phenomena in which emotion regulation concerns may conflict with the pursuit of other goals.

Metacognition and polyregulation in daily self-control conflicts.

Metacognition is important for self-regulated learning, and it has recently been argued that it may play an important role in self-control more generally. We studied multiple aspects of metacognition in self-control, namely metacognitive knowledge including a person's repertoire ("toolbox") of different self-regulatory strategies, metacognitive regulation (planning, monitoring, and evaluation), and polyregulation (using more self-regulatory strategies in a single self-control conflict) as predictors of people's self-control success in daily life. In a preregistered experience sampling study, N = 503 participants reported their self-control conflicts up to eight times per day for 10 days, yielding 9,639 reports of daily self-control conflicts. Analyses showed that higher levels of metacognitive knowledge, planning, monitoring, evaluation, and polyregulation as well as a larger strategy repertoire were associated with higher levels of success in resolving daily self-control conflicts. Additionally, higher levels of trait self-control were associated with higher levels of metacognitive knowledge, planning, and monitoring. These findings highlight the importance of metacognition and polyregulation for successful self-control.

Metacognition and self-control: An integrative framework.

Self-control describes the processes by which individuals control their habits, desires, and impulses in the service of long-term goals. Research has identified important components of self-control and proposed theoretical frameworks integrating these components (e.g., Inzlicht et al., 2021; Kotabe & Hofmann, 2015). In our perspective, these frameworks, however, do not yet fully incorporate important metacognitive aspects of self-control. We therefore introduce a framework explicating the role of metacognition for self-control. This framework extends existing frameworks, primarily from the domains of self-regulated learning and problem-solving (e.g., Schraw & Moshman, 1995; Zimmerman, 2000), and integrates past and contemporary research and theorizing on self-control that involves aspects of metacognition. It considers two groups of metacognitive components, namely, (a) individual metacognitive characteristics, that is a person's declarative, procedural, and conditional metacognitive knowledge about self-control, as well as their self-awareness (or metacognitive awareness), and (b) metacognitive regulatory processes that unfold before a self-control conflict (forethought and prevention), when a self-control conflict is identified, during a self-control conflict (regulation and monitoring), and after a self-control conflict (reflection and evaluation). The proposed framework integrates existing research and will be useful for highlighting new directions for research on the role of metacognition for self-control success and failure. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).