Cognitive Emotion Regulation and Psychopathology across Cultures: A Comparison between Six European Countries

By S. Potthoff, N. Garnefski, Mónika Miklósi, A. Ubbiali, F. Domínguez-Sánchez, E. C. Martins, M. Witthöft, V. Kraaij. 2016

101 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Abstract Use of cognitive emotion regulation strategies in response to stressful life events varies by country, though research has been limited to comparisons between American and Asian cultures. This study aimed to compare six European countries to investigate cross-cultural differences in the use of cognitive strategies and test if the relationship between specific strategies and psychopathology varies across countries. Data arrays were collected from the Netherlands, Hungary, Spain, Italy, Portugal and Germany (N = 1553) and cross-cultural measures of cognitive emotion regulation using the Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (CERQ) were included. Measures of depression and anxiety were also included. Results showed significant differences on all the subscales of the CERQ. Most notably, there were differences on strategies that have been linked to symptoms of psychopathology; overall northern European countries (Germany and Netherlands) made less use of strategies such as rumination, catastrophizing, and other-blame, when compared to southern and eastern European countries (Spain, Italy, Portugal, and Hungary). The direction of the relationships between specific strategies and symptoms of psychopathology was consistent across countries. Although there were cross-cultural differences in the use of cognitive strategies, the consistent relationship between strategies and psychopathology across countries supports the idea of a trans-cultural approach to treat psychopathology.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ea22ba82b8e5c58dada78816c553109ed8e0685f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Clinical Psychology

  1. Angelica Moè
  2. I. Katz

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

  1. Angelica Moè
  2. I. Katz

In Social Psychology

  1. I. Katz
  2. Angelica Moè

Citations in the corpus