Assessing Emotion Regulation in Social Anxiety Disorder: The Emotion Regulation Interview

Social anxiety disorder (SAD) is thought to involve emotional hyper-reactivity and emotion dysregulation. However, the precise nature of the emotion dysregulation in SAD has not been well characterized. In the present study, the Emotion Regulation Interview (ERI) was developed to quantify the frequency and self-efficacy of five emotion regulation strategies specified by Gross’s (Review of General Psychology 2: 271–299, 1998) process model of emotion regulation. Forty-eight individuals with SAD and 33 healthy controls (HCs) were interviewed about responses during (a) a laboratory speech task and (b) two recent social anxiety-evoking situations. Individuals with SAD reported greater use of avoidance and expressive suppression than HCs, as well as lesser self-efficacy in implementing cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression. These regulation deficits were not accounted for by differences in emotional reactivity. These findings highlight specific emotion regulation deficits in SAD, and support the idea that the Emotion Regulation Interview may be usefully applied to other clinical disorders.     

Number gestures predict learning of number words

When asked to explain their solutions to a problem, children often gesture and, at times, these gestures convey information that is different from the information conveyed in speech. Children who produce these gesture‐speech “mismatches” on a particular task have been found to profit from instruction on that task. We have recently found that some children produce gesture‐speech mismatches when identifying numbers at the cusp of their knowledge, for example, a child incorrectly labels a set of two objects with the word “three” and simultaneously holds up two fingers. These mismatches differ from previously studied mismatches (where the information conveyed in gesture has the potential to be integrated with the information conveyed in speech) in that the gestured response contradicts the spoken response. Here, we ask whether these contradictory number mismatches predict which learners will profit from number‐word instruction. We used the Give‐a‐Number task to measure number knowledge in 47 children (M_age = 4.1 years, SD = 0.58), and used the What's on this Card task to assess whether children produced gesture‐speech mismatches above their knower level. Children who were early in their number learning trajectories (“one‐knowers” and “two‐knowers”) were then randomly assigned, within knower level, to one of two training conditions: a Counting condition in which children practiced counting objects; or an Enriched Number Talk condition containing counting, labeling set sizes, spatial alignment of neighboring sets, and comparison of these sets. Controlling for counting ability, we found that children were more likely to learn the meaning of new number words in the Enriched Number Talk condition than in the Counting condition, but only if they had produced gesture‐speech mismatches at pretest. The findings suggest that numerical gesture‐speech mismatches are a reliable signal that a child is ready to profit from rich number instruction and provide evidence, for the first time, that cardinal number gestures have a role to play in number‐learning.     

Blind Speakers Show Language‐Specific Patterns in Co‐Speech Gesture but Not Silent Gesture

Sighted speakers of different languages vary systematically in how they package and order components of a motion event in speech. These differences influence how semantic elements are organized in gesture, but only when those gestures are produced with speech (co‐speech gesture), not without speech (silent gesture). We ask whether the cross‐linguistic similarity in silent gesture is driven by the visuospatial structure of the event. We compared 40 congenitally blind adult native speakers of English or Turkish (20/language) to 80 sighted adult speakers (40/language; half with, half without blindfolds) as they described three‐dimensional motion scenes. We found an effect of language on co‐speech gesture, not on silent gesture—blind speakers of both languages organized their silent gestures as sighted speakers do. Humans may have a natural semantic organization that they impose on events when conveying them in gesture without language—an organization that relies on neither visuospatial cues nor language structure.     

Early gesture selectively predicts later language learning

The gestures children produce predict the early stages of spoken language development. Here we ask whether gesture is a global predictor of language learning, or whether particular gestures predict particular language outcomes. We observed 52 children interacting with their caregivers at home, and found that gesture use at 18 months selectively predicted lexical versus syntactic skills at 42 months, even with early child speech controlled. Specifically, number of different meanings conveyed in gesture at 18 months predicted vocabulary at 42 months, but number of gesture+speech combinations did not. In contrast, number of gesture+speech combinations, particularly those conveying sentence‐like ideas, produced at 18 months predicted sentence complexity at 42 months, but meanings conveyed in gesture did not. We can thus predict particular milestones in vocabulary and sentence complexity at age by watching how children move their hands two years earlier.     

Book review

Divorce Poison: Protecting the Parent-Child Bond from a Vindictive Ex. by Richard A. Warshak, New York: Regan Books/Harper Collins, 2002, 320 pages, $26.00.     

Psychometrics of Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) scores

A sample of 183 medical students completed the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT V2.0). Scores on the test were examined for evidence of reliability and factorial validity. Although Cronbach's alpha for the total scores was adequate (.79), many of the scales had low internal consistency (scale alphas ranged from .34 to .77; median = .48). Previous factor analyses of the MSCEIT are critiqued and the rationale for the current analysis is presented. Both confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses of the MSCEIT item parcels are reported. Pictures and faces items formed separate factors rather than loading on a Perception factor. Emotional Management appeared as a factor, but items from Blends and Facilitation failed to load consistently on any factor, rendering factors for Emotional Understanding and Emotional Facilitation problematic.