Behavioral Assessment of the Negative Emotion Aspect of Distress Tolerance: Tolerance to Emotional Images.

The current behavioral tasks assessing distress tolerance measure tolerance to frustration and tolerance to physical discomfort, but do not explicitly assess tolerance to negative emotion. We closely evaluated the conceptual distinctions between current behavioral tasks and self-report tasks assessing distress tolerance, and then developed a new behavioral distress tolerance task called the Emotional Image Tolerance (EIT) task. The EIT task retains elements of existing behavioral tasks (e.g., indices of persistence) while augmenting the reliability and content sufficiency of existing measures by including multiple trials, including a variety of negative affect stimuli, and separating overall task persistence from task persistence after onset of distress. In a series of three studies, we found that the EIT correlated with extant behavioral measures of distress tolerance, the computerized mirror-tracing task and a physical cold pressor task. Across all of the studies, we also evaluated whether the EIT correlated with self-report measures of distress tolerance and measures of psychopathology (e.g., depression, anxiety, and binge eating). Implications for the refinement of the distress tolerance construct are discussed.

The dynamics of persisting through distress: Development of a Momentary Distress Intolerance Scale using ecological momentary assessment.

Distress tolerance, or the ability to withstand uncomfortable states, is thought to be a transdiagnostic risk factor for psychopathology. Distress tolerance is typically measured using self-report questionnaires or behavioral tasks, both of which construe distress tolerance as a trait and downplay the potential variability in distress tolerance across time and situation. The aim of the current study was to provide a method for assessing momentary distress tolerance using ecological momentary assessment to capture both within- and between-individual information. Participants (n = 86) responded to random prompts on their cell phones seven times per day for one week, which included 10 momentary distress tolerance items as well as momentary emotion. After examining item distributions and interclass correlations, we conducted a multilevel exploratory factor analysis using both within-individual and between-individual data to arrive at a brief, 3-item measure we call the Momentary Distress Intolerance Scale. Model fit and reliability indices were good for both within- and between-individual approaches. We found that distress tolerance varied significantly over time, and that average momentary distress intolerance and instability in momentary distress intolerance were associated with trait distress tolerance, emotion dysregulation and tendencies to use experiential avoidance. Neither average momentary distress intolerance nor instability in momentary distress intolerance correlated with behavioral distress tolerance tasks. We discuss the importance of construing distress tolerance from a dynamic perspective and provide recommendations toward future research. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Multidimensional assessment of beliefs about emotion: development and validation of the emotion and regulation beliefs scale.

Recent work has extended the idea of implicit self-theories to the realm of emotion to assess beliefs in the malleability of emotions. The current article expanded on prior measurement of emotion beliefs in a scale development project. Items were tested and revised over rounds of data collection with both students and nonstudent adult online participants. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses revealed a three-factor structure. The resulting scale, the Emotion and Regulation Beliefs Scale, assesses beliefs that emotions can hijack self-control, beliefs that emotion regulation is a worthwhile pursuit, and beliefs that emotions can constrain behavior. Preliminary findings suggest that the Emotion and Regulation Beliefs Scale has good internal consistency, is conceptually distinct from measures assessing individuals' beliefs in their management of emotions and facets of emotional intelligence, and predicts clinically relevant outcomes even after controlling for an existing short measure of beliefs in emotion controllability.