Ls (clarity, acceptance, and tolerance) were included in the regression. Out

Ls (clarity, acceptance, and tolerance) were get Indirubin-3′-oxime included in the regression. Out of the selected emotion regulation skills only acceptance was included in the prediction model ?= -0.231 (p = 0.015). This was associated with a further 1702259-66-2 significant increase in explained variance of the pain ratings by 4?0 (N = 104, p < 0.01). The remaining emotion regulation competencies are excluded in the course of the stepwise regression analysis. In the following, we examined a further potential model for the stress ain rating relation: The moderating impact of emotion regulation skills.EMOTION REGULATION SKILLS MODULATE THE RELATION BETWEEN ACUTE PSYCHOSOCIAL STRESS AND RATINGS OF PAIN IN OTHERSFirstly, we computed interaction terms between Group and the mean centered value for each emotion regulation skill (SEK27) and included these terms in the correlation analysis. This resulted in small, but significant correlations of the pain ratings on painful pictures with Group ?clarity (r = -0.162, p = 0.028) and Group ?tolerance (r = -0.162, p = 0.026), and to a trend toward significant correlations with Group ?understanding (r = -0.138, p = 0.060) and Group ?acceptance (r = -0.140, p = 0.055). Hence, we added these interaction terms into the following moderated regression analysis. Secondly, we conducted a moderated regression analysis with the covariate gender, Group as independent variable, emotion regulation skills as predictors (clarity, understanding, acceptance, tolerance), and with the respective interaction terms between group and emotion regulation skill. Our assumption concerning the potential moderating effect of specific emotion regulation skills on the relation between acute psychosocial stress and pain ratings had to be rejected (N = 104). None of the tested interaction effects were significant (Group ?clarity: B = -0.176, SE = 0.145, p = 0.228; Group ?understanding: B = -0.175, SE = 0.121, p = 0.151; Group ?acceptance: B = -0.095, SE = 0.123, p = 0.442). However, one effect showed a trend toward significance (Group ?tolerance: B = -0.192, SE = 0.110, p = 0.083). In Figure 6 the interactions of Group with the investigatedTable 1 | Correlation coefficients between control variables, stress, emotion regulation skills, and pain ratings. Pain rating on painful pictures SOCIODEMOGRAPHIC Gender (N = 104) Age (N = 90) EMPATHY (TRAIT) - IRI (N = 102) Fantasy Perspective taking Empathic concern Personal distress Reappraisal Suppression Stress vs. Placebo (N = 104) Awareness Body sensations Clarity Understanding Modification Acceptance Tolerance Self-support Readiness to confront*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01,+p-0.15+ 0.02 -0.03 -0.12 -0.08 0.12 -0.05 0.12 -0.15+ 0.02 -0.03 -0.13+ -0.06 -0.07 -0.17* -0.15* -0.02 0.1 -0.01 -0.22** -0.05 -0.26** -0.33** -0.13 0.28** 0.03 -0.32** -0.16+ -0.14 -0.12 0.05 -0.01 0.12 -0.09 -0.13 1 0.12 -0.05 -0.14 0.05 -0.07 0.10 -0.06 -0.06 -0.23** -0.21** -0.20* -0.05 -0.17* -0.09 -0.10 -0.09 1 0.20** 0.32** 0.12 0.03 -0.20** -0.10 0.11 0.07 0.07 0.10 -0.03 0.08 -0.00 0.05 -0.05 1 0.11 -0.13 0.25** -0.04 0.10 0.11 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.25** 0.18* 0.25** 0.24** 0.11 1 0.17* -0.02 -0.30** 0.02 0.22** 0.13 0.04 0.06 -0.02 0.06 -0.05 -0.01 0.00 1 -0.14* -0.17 -0.00 0.06 0.05 -0.06 -0.00 -0.18* -0.19** -0.26** -0.14 -0.16* 1 0.05 0.01 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.25** 0.11 0.14* 0.39** 0.30** 1 -0.10 -0.20** -0.15** PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19906222 -0.21** -0.24** -0.01 -0.16* -0.00 -0.04 0.01 1 0.03 0.06 0.03 -0.07 -0.00 -0.04 -0.01 0.01 0.HABITUAL EMOTION REGULATION – ERQ (N = 102).Ls (clarity, acceptance, and tolerance) were included in the regression. Out of the selected emotion regulation skills only acceptance was included in the prediction model ?= -0.231 (p = 0.015). This was associated with a further significant increase in explained variance of the pain ratings by 4?0 (N = 104, p < 0.01). The remaining emotion regulation competencies are excluded in the course of the stepwise regression analysis. In the following, we examined a further potential model for the stress ain rating relation: The moderating impact of emotion regulation skills.EMOTION REGULATION SKILLS MODULATE THE RELATION BETWEEN ACUTE PSYCHOSOCIAL STRESS AND RATINGS OF PAIN IN OTHERSFirstly, we computed interaction terms between Group and the mean centered value for each emotion regulation skill (SEK27) and included these terms in the correlation analysis. This resulted in small, but significant correlations of the pain ratings on painful pictures with Group ?clarity (r = -0.162, p = 0.028) and Group ?tolerance (r = -0.162, p = 0.026), and to a trend toward significant correlations with Group ?understanding (r = -0.138, p = 0.060) and Group ?acceptance (r = -0.140, p = 0.055). Hence, we added these interaction terms into the following moderated regression analysis. Secondly, we conducted a moderated regression analysis with the covariate gender, Group as independent variable, emotion regulation skills as predictors (clarity, understanding, acceptance, tolerance), and with the respective interaction terms between group and emotion regulation skill. Our assumption concerning the potential moderating effect of specific emotion regulation skills on the relation between acute psychosocial stress and pain ratings had to be rejected (N = 104). None of the tested interaction effects were significant (Group ?clarity: B = -0.176, SE = 0.145, p = 0.228; Group ?understanding: B = -0.175, SE = 0.121, p = 0.151; Group ?acceptance: B = -0.095, SE = 0.123, p = 0.442). However, one effect showed a trend toward significance (Group ?tolerance: B = -0.192, SE = 0.110, p = 0.083). In Figure 6 the interactions of Group with the investigatedTable 1 | Correlation coefficients between control variables, stress, emotion regulation skills, and pain ratings. Pain rating on painful pictures SOCIODEMOGRAPHIC Gender (N = 104) Age (N = 90) EMPATHY (TRAIT) - IRI (N = 102) Fantasy Perspective taking Empathic concern Personal distress Reappraisal Suppression Stress vs. Placebo (N = 104) Awareness Body sensations Clarity Understanding Modification Acceptance Tolerance Self-support Readiness to confront*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01,+p-0.15+ 0.02 -0.03 -0.12 -0.08 0.12 -0.05 0.12 -0.15+ 0.02 -0.03 -0.13+ -0.06 -0.07 -0.17* -0.15* -0.02 0.1 -0.01 -0.22** -0.05 -0.26** -0.33** -0.13 0.28** 0.03 -0.32** -0.16+ -0.14 -0.12 0.05 -0.01 0.12 -0.09 -0.13 1 0.12 -0.05 -0.14 0.05 -0.07 0.10 -0.06 -0.06 -0.23** -0.21** -0.20* -0.05 -0.17* -0.09 -0.10 -0.09 1 0.20** 0.32** 0.12 0.03 -0.20** -0.10 0.11 0.07 0.07 0.10 -0.03 0.08 -0.00 0.05 -0.05 1 0.11 -0.13 0.25** -0.04 0.10 0.11 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.25** 0.18* 0.25** 0.24** 0.11 1 0.17* -0.02 -0.30** 0.02 0.22** 0.13 0.04 0.06 -0.02 0.06 -0.05 -0.01 0.00 1 -0.14* -0.17 -0.00 0.06 0.05 -0.06 -0.00 -0.18* -0.19** -0.26** -0.14 -0.16* 1 0.05 0.01 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.25** 0.11 0.14* 0.39** 0.30** 1 -0.10 -0.20** -0.15** PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19906222 -0.21** -0.24** -0.01 -0.16* -0.00 -0.04 0.01 1 0.03 0.06 0.03 -0.07 -0.00 -0.04 -0.01 0.01 0.HABITUAL EMOTION REGULATION – ERQ (N = 102).