ORIGINAL RESEARCH

published: 02 July 2019

doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01486

Emotion Regulation Tendencies and

Leadership Performance: An
Examination of Cognitive and
Behavioral Regulation Strategies
Brett S. Torrence* and Shane Connelly
Department of Psychology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, United States

Emotion regulation is advocated to be an important factor underlying effective leadership

given the task demands and interpersonal stressors facing organizational leaders.
Despite the recognition of emotion regulation processes in leadership literature, there
is a need for additional theorizing and empirical research on the specific cognitive
and behavioral strategies utilized by leaders. This effort attempts to address this
gap by examining individual tendencies in four emotion regulation strategies, situation
modification, attentional deployment, cognitive reappraisal, and suppression, and their
association with leadership task performance. Using an undergraduate student sample,
this correlational study assessed the relationship between emotion regulation tendencies
Edited by:
and performance in emotionally-relevant domains of leadership. Results provide partial
Konstantinos G. Kafetsios, support, suggesting that situation modification and cognitive reappraisal are positively
University of Crete, Greece
related to leadership performance, whereas suppression was found to relate negatively
Reviewed by:
with performance. Emotion regulation strategies were also found to account for
Monica Pellerone,
Kore University of Enna, Italy variance in leadership performance above and beyond other emotion-related individual
Vanessa Urch Druskat, differences. Taken together, these findings suggest that certain regulation processes may
University of New Hampshire,
United States
be more functional for leaders and extend emotion regulation research in the leadership
*Correspondence:
domain. Theoretical and practical implications of this study are discussed.
Brett S. Torrence
Keywords: emotion regulation, leadership, cognitive reappraisal, suppression, attentional deployment, situation
[email protected]
modification

Specialty section:
This article was submitted to INTRODUCTION
Organizational Psychology,
a section of the journal Emotions are a central feature of workplace experiences and the tasks and interpersonal demands
Frontiers in Psychology
faced by leaders often arise in emotion-laden contexts. In leadership settings, leaders may need
Received: 29 August 2018 to deliberately modify their emotional experiences and expressions to exercise influence over
Accepted: 11 June 2019 followers (Humphrey, 2012). Additionally, leaders may need to manage their emotions to facilitate
Published: 02 July 2019
performance on day-to-day tasks (Gooty et al., 2014). In fact, many domains requiring effective
Citation: leadership, including ethical dilemmas, interpersonal conflicts, and organizational crises (Connelly
Torrence BS and Connelly S (2019)
et al., 2014), call for appropriate emotional responses. Given the considerable influence that
Emotion Regulation Tendencies and
Leadership Performance: An
emotions have on judgment and behavior (Weiss and Cropanzano, 1996; Kiefer, 2005; Seo and
Examination of Cognitive and Barrett, 2007), effectively managing emotions is key for successful leadership. Emotion regulation
Behavioral Regulation Strategies. is the “process by which individuals influence which emotions they have, when they have them, and
Front. Psychol. 10:1486. how they experience and express these emotions” (Gross, 1998, p. 275) and, therefore, represents a
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01486 critical competence contributing to leader performance (Haver et al., 2013).

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 1 July 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1486

Torrence and Connelly Emotion Regulation and Leadership

The study of emotion regulation in leadership has developed states (Gross, 2008; Koole, 2009; Webb et al., 2012). Gross
alongside the growing research on leader emotion (e.g., (2008) describes that emotions emerge from “person-situation
Ashkanasy and Tse, 2000). The idea that leaders must display transactions” and that the emotion generative process involves
and use emotions to influence leader and follower outcomes four central features: (a) situations, (b) attention, (c) appraisals,
has led to the study of concepts, such as emotional labor and (d) responses. The process model highlights that emotion
(Ashkanasy and Humphrey, 2011) and emotional intelligence regulation strategies operate by altering these features of the
(George, 2000), in the leadership domain. The emotional labor emotional response (Gross, 1998). Specifically, this model
perspective contends that leaders use tactics such as deep acting describes that emotions can be regulated through antecedent-
and surface acting to control their emotional displays to followers focused strategies, processes used for modifying the emotional
(Gardner et al., 2009) with deep acting being a more effective stimulus (e.g., situation) or altering perceptions of the stimulus
strategy (Humphrey et al., 2008). Similarly, studies on leader (e.g., attention), and response-focused strategies, processes that
emotional intelligence argue that emotion management is critical alter the emotional response (Gross, 1998). The distinction
for effective leadership as leaders often need to manage their own between antecedent-focused and response-focused strategies lies
emotions under the stressful demands of the position (George, in the target(s) these strategies regulate. Antecedent-focused
2000). Despite the recognition that emotion management is a strategies address aspects of the emotional response that occur
part of leadership, our understanding of emotion regulation in before emotional experiences have become fully activated (e.g.,
leadership is still underdeveloped, particularly regarding explicit situations, attention, and meaning, Gross, 2002). For instance,
emotion regulation strategies. individuals may change the situation or direct their attention
Unfortunately, sparse empirical work has examined specific away from the event to prevent the onset of a negative emotion.
cognitive and behavioral regulation strategies used by leaders Conversely, response-focused strategies are implemented once
to manage their own emotions (Gooty et al., 2010). This is an emotion and its responses (e.g., experiential, behavioral) are
unfortunate given that the process by which individuals deal activated (Gross, 2002). An example of a response strategy would
with their emotion influences job performance (Wallace et al., be masking outward expressions of anger during a work conflict
2009) and leader-follower relationships (Glasø and Einarsen, in order not to appear upset with a co-worker.
2008). Fortunately, recent work on emotion regulation (e.g., Prior research demonstrates that five categories of emotion
Diefendorff et al., 2008; Lawrence et al., 2011) suggests that the regulation strategies underlie these two groupings (Gross, 2008).
process model of emotion regulation (Gross, 1998) represents Situation selection refers to actions (e.g., approach or avoidance)
a well-established framework for furthering our understanding that increase the likelihood that individuals will be in a situation
of emotion regulation in the workplace and in leaders. that produces desirable emotions. Situation modification refers
Most importantly, this framework outlines specific behavioral to efforts taken by an individual to modify the emotional impact
and cognitive strategies that are used to manage different of the situation. Attentional deployment involves influencing
aspects of one’s emotional experience, such as situations and emotional responses by refocusing attention to different aspects
thoughts (Webb et al., 2012). of a situation. Cognitive change, or reappraisal, involves altering
In addition to understanding the strategies used by leaders, the emotional meaning of a situation through reappraisal of the
the extent to which leaders rely on specific emotion regulation emotional stimulus. These four emotion regulation strategies
strategies is also a central question given that individuals are characterized as antecedent-focused strategies as each of
display different regulation tendencies and that these tendencies these strategies targets features of an emotional response that
can be adaptive or maladaptive depending on the situation. occur before an emotion is fully activated. Finally, response
Specifically, emotion regulation strategies differ in their ability modulation, or suppression, involves inhibiting emotional
to modify emotion (Gross and John, 2003) and their level of responses after the emotion has been activated and is a response-
effort (Richards and Gross, 2000). Furthermore, the process by focused strategy since its goal is to alter the experiential,
which individuals regulate their emotions is not always deliberate behavioral, or physiological response tendencies of an
(Koole, 2009), suggesting that emotion regulation tendencies experienced emotion.
may be influential in the day-to-day activities of leaders. As Despite the identification of these emotion regulation
such, there is a need to understand the association between strategies, the majority of empirical work has focused extensively
emotion regulation tendencies and leadership effectiveness as on two strategies, cognitive reappraisal and suppression.
research outside the leadership domain shows that regulation Nonetheless, studies comparing these two emotion regulation
tendencies are influential (e.g., Wallace et al., 2009; Liu et al., strategies provide important findings that cognitive reappraisal,
2010). Therefore, the purpose of this study is to examine in general, leads to better affective, cognitive, and social outcomes
how individual differences in behavioral and cognitive emotion when compared to suppression (Richards and Gross, 2000; Gross
regulation strategies relate to leadership performance. and John, 2003; English et al., 2012). However, the central focus
on these two strategies has constrained our view of emotion
regulation processes and limited our understanding of the
PROCESS MODEL OF EMOTION different types of responses individuals may employ in emotion-
REGULATION laden settings and their consequences for workplace outcomes
(Gooty et al., 2010). Based on the nature of leader performance,
Emotion regulation is the process responsible for the initiation, employing a broader taxonomy of emotion regulation processes
maintenance, modification, and redirection of emotional to investigations of leadership is warranted.

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 2 July 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1486

Torrence and Connelly Emotion Regulation and Leadership

EMOTION REGULATION AND 1998), situation modification, attentional deployment, cognitive

LEADERSHIP PERFORMANCE reappraisal, and suppression represent regulation strategies
of interest to the current effort given that these strategies
The dynamic nature of organizations requires that leaders represent tactics that can be utilized by leaders faced with
manage and meet multiple demands and exert influence emotional events on the job. Situation selection was not
over their followers. The high degree of complexity and examined in the present effort based on the notion that
uncertainty characterizing organizational environments has led leaders may not always have the choice to opt out of, or
to the assumption that emotion regulation is necessary for into, particular situations. Oftentimes, leaders must handle
leaders to deal with negative events, establish better leader- the situation they are dealt, and situation selection represents
member relations, and facilitate job performance (George, a strategy that a leader would deploy before they are in
2000; Ashkanasy and Humphrey, 2011; Humphrey, 2012; Haver a situation, not for managing a specific event. Nonetheless,
et al., 2013). An emotion management framework presented the behavioral and cognitive processes identified in the
by Connelly et al. (2014) identifies several emotion-relevant current study present an expanded view of emotion regulation
domains of leadership that require effective emotion regulation, in leadership and have, potentially, different implications
including conflict resolution, inspirational motivation, ethical for performance.
decision-making, risk taking, and feedback. In these contexts,
leaders must think about what emotions are appropriate for
the situation at hand and how emotions may drive behavior. SITUATION MODIFICATION
Leaders need to remain calm during crises, display enthusiasm
and a sense of challenge to garner follower support around a new Situation modification involves direct efforts taken to change
vision, and portray disappointment when follower performance a situation in order to alter its emotional impact (Gross,
is lacking, for example. 2008). This emotion regulation strategy deals with modifying
Even so, emotion regulation is not only needed for external characteristics of the situation causing the emotion,
altering emotional displays, but for managing the intrinsic not managing the emotion itself. For example, if a conflict
impact of emotion on leader decision-making given that breaks between two team members during a meeting, a leader
emotions influence cognitive processes (Shiv et al., 2005; may choose to separate the workers or change the topic of
Seo and Barrett, 2007). Judgment and decision making are conversation to lessen the emotions of the event. Additionally, a
fundamental components of leadership (George, 2000) as leaders leader may interject humor into a stressful situation to lighten the
are often required to formulate and implement decisions tension of the situation. Unfortunately, there is a lack of research
that solve social problems in their organization (Mumford on the effects of situation modification (Gross, 2015). However,
et al., 2000). Furthermore, it has been argued that the most this strategy is viewed as a process synonymous to problem-
pressing situations requiring leader cognition are characterized focused coping, which involves managing the problem causing
as ill-defined and uncertain (Mumford et al., 2000) and the emotion (Gross, 2002). Research concerning problem-
such situations are likely to elicit emotional responses in focused coping demonstrates that this strategy is used when
leaders. Therefore, the efforts taken by leaders to manage situations are viewed as malleable and an individual has control
their emotions are critical for ensuring that leaders improve over a situation (Folkman and Moskowitz, 2000). Situation
their emotional states and successfully address the problem modification, therefore, is likely a viable strategy for leaders
at hand. given their position of influence and level of control over
Two central reasons as to how emotion regulation processes workplace situations, such as feedback sessions and team settings.
impact leadership performance are (a) the relative efficacy of Additionally, problem-focused coping is negatively associated
the regulation strategy and (b) the level of effort required to with stress symptoms and positively related to adjustment, as
deploy that strategy. First, regulation strategies are differentially well as increases in positive moods (Riley and Park, 2014).
effective in their influence of emotional experiences with These findings suggest that situation modification may represent
strategies, such as cognitive reappraisal and perspective-taking, an adaptive strategy for leaders in managing their emotional
showing better outcomes (Webb et al., 2012). Second, regulation response. However, this emotion regulation strategy likely
strategies require different resources (e.g., effort and attention) requires that a leader recognize the potential paths of a situation
to implement. For instance, expressive suppression is associated which suggests that a requisite level of emotional knowledge and
with poorer memory compared to reappraisal (Richards and emotion understanding is needed (Joseph and Newman, 2010;
Gross, 2000). Emotion regulation strategies that entail less Connelly et al., 2014). For instance, understanding elements that
cognitive effort, in turn reducing off-task attentional pull (Beal give rise to emotional responses may improve a leader’s ability
et al., 2005), will allow leaders to allocate additional resources to effectively alter the emotional event. Nonetheless, in general,
toward task performance. having the tendency to modify situations in order to alter its
Taken together, emotion regulation tendencies may display emotional impact is likely an effective strategy for leaders. Thus,
varying relationships with leadership performance given that our first hypothesis:
these processes are associated with different consequences. Hypothesis 1: Situation modification is positively related to
Based on the process model of emotion regulation (Gross, performance on leadership tasks.

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 3 July 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1486

Torrence and Connelly Emotion Regulation and Leadership

ATTENTIONAL DEPLOYMENT understanding through reinterpretation and perspective-taking.

This process not only serves to moderate leaders’ emotional
Attentional deployment refers to the process by which experiences but improves their ability to address the situation
individuals attend to different aspects of a situation to influence at hand. Furthermore, cognitive reappraisal is classified as a
emotions (Gross, 2008). Two potential avenues of attentional goal-oriented strategy indicating that these actions are likely to
deployment include distraction and concentration. Distraction be aligned with task and interpersonal priorities (Koole, 2009).
involves redirecting attention away from emotional aspects of Thus, we predict the following:
the situation (Webb et al., 2012). Distraction may include a Hypothesis 3: Cognitive reappraisal is positively related to
leader thinking about something positive in order to distract performance on leadership tasks.
themselves from negative emotions elicited from a feedback
session. On the other hand, concentration involves focusing on
emotional elements of a situation (Gross, 2008). In the ethical SUPPRESSION
dilemmas, leaders may concentrate on their emotions to think
Suppression, the most common form of response modulation,
about causes of the situation and their feelings. The concept
refers to efforts that inhibit experiences and expressions
of concentration is closely tied to rumination, a process which
of emotion (Gross, 2008). Employed after an emotion is
involves focusing on thoughts and feelings associated with an
generated, suppression targets experiential and/or behavioral
emotion-laden situation (Gross, 2008).
responses (Webb et al., 2012). For example, when dealing
In leadership settings, attentional deployment could serve
with an angry subordinate, a leader may choose to maintain
leaders adaptively if used in a manner that suits situational
a neutral expression and mask their frustration. In terms of
demands. While meta-analytic work by Webb et al. (2012) found
effectiveness, suppression is often considered maladaptive
that distraction was effective in changing emotional experiences
given its relationship with adverse outcomes. Suppression
and concentration was not, in terms of producing positive effects
is ineffective in decreasing one’s experience of emotions
on leadership outcomes both distraction and concentration could
(Gross, 1998), negatively impacts social functioning
lead to beneficial effects. Attentional deployment, in the form of
(Butler et al., 2003), requires more effortful processing
distraction and/or concentration, may allow a leader to operate
(Richards and Gross, 2000), and is negatively related to task
within emotional settings. When resources are low and on-task
performance (Wallace et al., 2009).
attention is needed, attentional deployment can allow a leader to
Similar to reappraisal, suppression has been defined as a
operate within stressful environments without being susceptible
goal-oriented strategy, frequently employed to facilitate the
to a strong emotional pull. While emotions can serve adaptive
attainment of goals. However, instead of targeting knowledge-
functions for decision making processes (Lerner et al., 2015), the
related responses, suppression focuses on emotional expressions
effective management of organizational issues requires attending
(Koole, 2009). Even though leader emotional expressions can
to other components as well. Therefore, we predict the following:
impact follower outcomes (Van Kleef et al., 2009), suppression
Hypothesis 2: Attentional deployment is positively related to
fails to target other performance elements impacted by emotional
performance on leadership tasks.
responses. Given that suppression does not address emotional
targets that have a more direct impact on performance, such as
COGNITIVE REAPPRAISAL knowledge, suppression is likely to be a poor strategy for leaders.
Therefore, our next hypothesis:
Cognitive reappraisal strategies target thoughts surrounding an Hypothesis 4: Suppression is negatively related to performance
event by changing the way the situation and/or the emotional on leadership tasks.
demands are perceived (Gross, 2008). Reinterpretation and
perspective-taking comprise two core elements of cognitive
reappraisal (Webb et al., 2012). For example, when facing a crisis, EMOTION-RELATED INDIVIDUAL
a leader may modify the meaning of the situation to alter its DIFFERENCES
emotional impact. Empirical research on cognitive reappraisal
has found that this strategy is associated with several functional Emotion regulation tendencies should also account for unique
outcomes (Gross, 2013, 2015). Cognitive reappraisal is associated variance in leadership performance beyond other emotion-
with the experience of more positive emotions and decreased related individual differences, such as empathy and trait affect.
levels of negative emotions (Gross and John, 2003). Additionally, Empathy, the ability to perceive and experience others’ emotion,
studies on cognitive reappraisal demonstrate improved cognitive demonstrates positive relationships with perceptions of task
functioning (e.g., memory; Richards and Gross, 2000), better and relational leadership (Kellett et al., 2006) and is argued
social functioning (Gross and John, 2003), and higher task to be indicative of a leader’s perspective taking ability (Wolff
performance (Wallace et al., 2009). et al., 2002). Trait affect, or the tendency to experience
Cognitive reappraisal appears to be a particularly functional positive or negative emotions, also displays modest relationships
emotion regulation strategy for leaders on the basis that this form with leadership outcomes (e.g., effectiveness, emergence; Joseph
of regulation targets evaluations and judgments of emotion-laden et al., 2015) and, therefore, may explain variance in leader
events (Koole, 2009). Broadening one’s perspective on a situation performance. However, given that emotion regulation is argued
can allow a leader to increase their situational awareness and to have a more direct influence on performance (Joseph and

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 4 July 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1486

Torrence and Connelly Emotion Regulation and Leadership

Newman, 2010), we expect emotion regulation strategies to emotion regulation research to ensure that each item adequately
account for variance beyond empathy and trait affect. Thus, our reflected its intended construct. To assess the factor structure of
final hypothesis: the emotion regulation measure, a series of confirmatory factor
Hypothesis 5: Emotion regulation tendencies will account for analyses were conducted. Results provide moderate support
unique variance in performance on leadership tasks above and for the proposed four-factor model; however, four items with
beyond empathy and trait affect. significant cross-loadings were removed. The four-factor solution
provided mediocre fit (χ 2 = 354.89, df = 146, CFI = 0.87,
METHOD RMSEA = 0.09, SRMR = 0.08) and the standardized factor
loading for all items exceeded 0.40. The theoretical model
Sample and Procedures provided better fit than a single-factor model (χ 2 = 797.99, df
A total of 226 undergraduates (77% female, 23% male) from = 152, CFI = 0.59, RMSEA = 0.15, SRMR = 0.14) and two-
a large, southwestern university participated in this study for factor model (χ 2 = 512.35, df = 151, CFI = 0.77, RMSEA = 0.11,
course credit during Fall 2015. Participants were recruited using a SRMR = 0.14). However, the four-factor model fit as well as the
university-based online research website and were required to be three-factor model (χ 2 = 363.41, df = 149, CFI = 0.87, RMSEA
18 years of age or older to participate. On average, participants = 0.09, SRMR = 0.08). The four-factor solution was retained for
were 18.8 years old (SD = 1.40) and had 2.28 years of work conceptual and theoretical clarity. These measures are described
experience. Thirteen percent (n = 26) of participants had no in the subsequent paragraph.
working experience, but of those reporting work experience only Situation modification, or the extent to which an individual
5% had <6 months of experience. Participants reported several engages in direct action to modify an emotional situation (Gross,
types of work experience as well with ∼56% having worked in 2015), was assessed with three items (i.e., “When I want to feel
service/retail industries, 8% in administrative roles, and 7% in more positive emotion, I can change aspects of the situation
teaching and coaching roles. Thirty participants were dropped in order to do that,” “I can change the emotional nature
from the final analyses for careless responding (i.e., failing bogus of a situation by injecting humor into the situation,” and “I
items; Meade and Craig, 2012) or failing to complete the relevant manage my emotions by changing aspects of the situation”;
survey measures. The final sample consisted of 196 students. α = 0.61). Attentional deployment, or the extent to which
Participants completed the survey using an online-based an individual redirects or shifts their attention in emotional
data collection system. This study was approved by the situations, was assessed via four items (i.e., “I am able to
Institutional Review Board (IRB) for the Protection of Human distract myself from strong emotions,” “When I am in an
Subjects at the University of Oklahoma prior to data collection. emotional situation, I manage my emotions by focusing on
Participants provided unsigned online consent in accordance non-emotional aspects of the situation,” “It is hard for me
with the guidelines established by the IRB at the University to stop thinking about the emotions I am feelings” (reverse-
of Oklahoma before beginning the study. After providing scored), “When experiencing negative emotions, I am unable
consent, participants completed a series of self-report measures to think about anything but that emotion” (reverse-scored);
including a questionnaire of emotion regulation tendencies. α = 0.73). Cognitive reappraisal, or the extent to which one
Next, participants were asked to take on the role of a leader changes their appraisal of an emotional situation (Gross and
in hypothetical scenarios and make explicit decisions to three John, 2003), was assessed via seven items (i.e., “When I want
different performance situations. Appendix A presents the to feel more positive emotions, I can change my perspective
leadership scenarios. These scenarios reflected diverse domains on the situation,” “When I want to feel less negative emotions,
of leadership performance identified as relevant to emotional I can change my perspective on the situation,” “I can control
responses and regulation: ethical decision-making, negative my negative emotions by changing the way I think about the
feedback, and high-stakes situations (Connelly et al., 2014). After situation,” “I can control my positive emotions by changing the
responding to these vignettes, participants completed another way I think about the situation,” “I manage my emotions by
series of measures and a demographics questionnaire. changing my perspective on the situation I am in,” “I can increase
my feelings of positive emotions by thinking about different
Measures aspects of the situation,” “I can decrease my feelings of negative
Emotion Regulation Strategies emotions by thinking about different aspects of the situation”;
The development of emotion regulation scales began with an α = 0.88). Items for this scale were drawn or adapted from
extensive review of the emotion regulation literature (e.g., Gross, the ERQ (Gross and John, 2003). Suppression, or the extent
1998, 2008; Koole, 2009; Lawrence et al., 2011; Webb et al., 2012) to which attempts to inhibit their emotional expressions, was
as well as a review of existing self-report measures (e.g., Emotion assessed via five items (i.e., “I generally try not to show my
Regulation Questionnaire, Gross and John, 2003). Following this negative emotions,” “I keep my emotions to myself,” “I manage
review, the first and second author created or adapted items to my emotions by not expressing them,” “I do not express my
represent the four proposed emotion regulation strategies using negative emotions,” “I generally try not to show my positive
deductive procedures (Hinkin, 1998). In total, 24 items were emotions”; α = 0.78). Items for this scale were also drawn or
written to tap onto the definitions for situation modification, adapted from the ERQ (Gross and John, 2003). All scales were
attentional deployment, cognitive reappraisal, and suppression. rated using a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 =
Following item development, items were reviewed by an expert in strongly agree).

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 5 July 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1486

Torrence and Connelly Emotion Regulation and Leadership

Performance assess the relationship between emotion regulation tendencies

Between-person differences in leadership task performance were and performance on leadership tasks. In support of Hypothesis
assessed using constructed scenarios. Participants responded 1, situation modification was found to be positively associated
to three written vignettes describing an ethical dilemma, with performance (β = 0.14, t (194) = 2.04, p = 0.04). Attentional
negative feedback, and a high-stakes situation, respectively (see deployment was unrelated to performance (β = −0.03, t (194)
Appendix A). These domains of leadership were selected based = −0.44, p = 0.66), providing no support for Hypothesis
on prior research suggesting that these domains represent 2. Cognitive reappraisal displayed a positive relationship with
emotionally-relevant tasks performed by leaders (Kligyte et al., performance (β = 0.19, t (194) = 2.76, p = 0.006) supporting
2013; Connelly et al., 2014; Johnson and Connelly, 2014). Hypothesis 3. Finally, in support of Hypothesis 4, suppression
Given that a student sample was used in the current study, was found to be negatively related to performance (β = −0.18,
vignettes were developed to match the knowledge and abilities t (194) = −2.56, p = 0.01). These results support the overarching
of an undergraduate sample (Wason et al., 2002; Aguinis idea that habitual tendencies in emotion regulation strategies
and Bradley, 2014). To enhance scenario realism and improve play a role in leadership performance. Specifically, situation
the generalizability of the study, the situations were ground modification and cognitive reappraisal appear to be beneficial
in leadership contexts familiar with students (i.e., on-campus emotion regulation strategies given their positive association
groups, service industry). with performance, whereas suppression appears to be harmful
Given the applicability of vignettes for assessing decisions as a tendency to suppress emotions and was negatively related
and judgments (Aguinis and Bradley, 2014), performance on to performance.
the constructed scenarios was evaluated in terms of social Next, hierarchical regression analyses were performed
judgment skills, a key determinant of leadership performance regressing performance on situation modification, cognitive
(Connelly et al., 2000; Mumford et al., 2000). Social judgement reappraisal, and suppression controlling for gender, trait affect,
represents a leader’s ability to make a decision that is workable and empathy. Attentional deployment was excluded from these
within the goals, demands, and constraints of the social setting analyses given its null relationship with performance. Table 2
(Mumford et al., 2000), therefore, responses were rated on displays results from the hierarchical regression analyses. As
quality (r∗wg = 0.85), considering others’ perspective (r∗wg = shown in Table 2, negative affect and empathy were significantly
0.80), social perceptiveness (r∗wg = 0.84), and good judgment related to performance on the leadership tasks. Specifically,
under uncertainty (r∗wg = 0.81). Trained raters coded participant higher levels of negative affect were associated with lower
responses on these dimensions. Raters received frame-of- performance scores and higher levels of empathy were associated
reference training (Bernardin and Buckley, 1981) and were with higher performance scores. These findings indicate that
provided benchmark ratings scales that reflected high, medium, a propensity to experience negative affect was associated with
and low levels of each dimension. Construct definitions and decreased performance, whereas individuals higher in empathy
benchmark responses are shown in Appendix B. A general factor displayed better performance across these tasks. Next, the
accounted for 98% of the variance in the leadership outcome inclusion of situation modification, cognitive reappraisal,
variables, so scores were aggregated across scenarios to create a and suppression in the model explained unique, incremental
composite performance score (r∗wg = 0.83). variance above the covariates. Suppression was a significant
predictor of leader performance, whereas situation modification
Covariates and cognitive reappraisal were not significant predictors of
Covariates were included to account for individual differences performance above and beyond the other variables in the model.
that may influence leadership performance. The Positive and These results suggest that individuals who tend to suppress their
Negative Affect Schedule—Modified (Hepler and Albarracin, emotions may perform less effectively in emotionally-relevant
2013) measured positive (19-item; α = 0.93) and negative leadership domains. Furthermore, a potential explanation for
(19-items; α = 0.82) trait affectivity on 7-point scale (1 the lack of incremental variance accounted for by situation
= very slightly or not at all; 7 = extremely). Empathy modification and cognitive reappraisal with performance,
(α = 0.89) was measured via 16-items on a 5-point scale respectively, is the strong correlation (r = 0.67) between the
(0 = never; 4 = always) using the Toronto Empathy two emotion regulation strategies. As such, partial support was
Questionnaire (Spreng et al., 2009). Demographics, including found for Hypothesis 5 as suppression was the only emotion
gender, were also measured given potential gender differences in regulation strategy to relate to performance above and beyond
leadership (Eagly et al., 2003). the emotion-related traits of positive affect, negative affect,
and empathy.
RESULTS
Hypothesis Testing DISCUSSION
Table 1 displays the means, standard deviations, correlations,
and reliabilities for all variables. As shown in Table 1, Leaders deal with a variety of emotion-laden events in
situation modification, cognitive reappraisal, and suppression their day-to-day workplace activities. From managing conflict
demonstrate correlations with performance in the expected among followers to planning under conditions of crisis,
direction. Additionally, regression analyses were conducted to leaders frequently perform in situations that give rise to

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 6 July 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1486

Torrence and Connelly Emotion Regulation and Leadership

TABLE 1 | Descriptive statistics and correlations of emotion regulation, performance, and covariate measures.

M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1. Gender 0.78 0.42 −−

2. SM 4.71 1.04 −0.12 (0.61)
3. AD 3.50 1.11 −0.14* 0.43** (0.73)
4. CR 4.94 1.03 0.04 0.67** 0.38** (0.89)
5. Suppression 3.78 1.23 −0.16* −0.07 0.32** −0.13 (0.78)
6. Empathy 3.99 0.53 0.33** 0.15* −0.10 0.26** −0.25** (0.89)
7. Positive affect 4.73 0.88 −0.07 0.43** 0.28** 0.46** −0.21** 0.25** (0.93)
8. Negative affect 3.04 0.91 0.09 −0.33** −0.41** −0.39** −0.10 −0.09 −0.53** (0.82)
9. Performance 2.99 0.49 0.15* 0.14* −0.03 0.19** −0.18* 0.19** 0.03 −0.14* (0.83)

N = 196. *p < 0.05. **p < 0.01. For gender, 0 = male, 1 = female.
SM, situation modification; AD, attentional deployment; CR, cognitive reappraisal. Reliabilities are presented along the diagonals.

reappraisal, and performance on leadership tasks, respectively.

TABLE 2 | Hierarchical regression analysis of leadership performance on emotion
regulation strategies.
On the other hand, individuals reporting higher levels of
suppression performed worse on these tasks. Interestingly,
Variables Model 1 Model 2 attentional deployment was found to be unrelated to
performance. Taken together, these results extend common
Gender 0.10 0.10
findings in the emotion regulation domain to the leadership
PA −0.11 −0.20*
context. Specifically, preliminary evidence from this study
NA −0.20* −0.16
suggests that there may be a benefit for leaders in using
Empathy 0.16* 0.11
situation modification and/or cognitive reappraisal when
Situation modification 0.10 managing emotional workplace demands. Leaders with a
Cognitive reappraisal 0.10 preference modifying emotional situations are likely to possess
Suppression −0.15* the knowledge needed to understand how emotions operate
F 3.71** 3.48** and have the skills necessary to change the emotions in the
1F 3.02* present context making them effective emotion managers.
R2 0.07** 0.11** Similarly, cognitive reappraisal, which alters emotion through
1R2 0.04* reinterpretation and perspective-taking, is a beneficial strategy
N = 196. * p < 0.05. ** p < 0.01. Standardized beta coefficients are presented. for leaders as engaging in reappraisal may facilitate processes
that improve a leader’s understanding of the situation as a whole,
emotional experiences. Responses to these events are critical for its meaning, and other people’s (e.g., followers) perspective. This
performance based on research suggesting that certain emotion finding is supported by a long line of research assessing habitual
regulation strategies are more adaptive than others. Given that use of cognitive reappraisal (Gross, 2013).
our understanding of specific strategies for regulating emotions In contrast, a tendency to suppress emotional experiences
in leadership contexts is underdeveloped, this study sought to may hinder performance in emotion-laden events. In terms of
explore the relationship between emotion regulation tendencies habitual use, suppression has long demonstrated detrimental
and performance on leadership tasks. Building on recent work effects with various criteria of interest (Gross, 2015). Even
on emotion regulation in the workplace (Lawrence et al., 2011), though suppression is effective for masking emotional responses,
we investigated specific strategies that leaders may rely on once this process fails to address emotional elements directly
in an emotion-eliciting event: situation modification, attentional underlying leader judgment and performance. As opposed
deployment, cognitive reappraisal, and suppression. Compared to cognitive reappraisal which targets knowledge, suppression
to other emotion regulation perspectives, the process model of solely addresses responses (Koole, 2009). While potentially
emotion regulation (Gross, 1998) provides a range of specific useful in certain interpersonal contexts, leaders who continually
emotion regulation strategies for managing different aspects of suppress their emotions are likely to be less effective and may
emotion-laden events. Specifically, this model highlights different experience higher levels of stress and burnout (Brotheridge
strategies that address different targets, namely situation, and Grandey, 2002). Lastly, attentional deployment did not
attention, appraisals, and expressions, surrounding an emotional help or hurt performance on these leadership tasks. To better
response. This perspective better captures the range of actions understand the role of attentional deployment strategies in
leaders use to deal with their emotions, an area currently lacking leadership performance, future research should assess the
in leadership research (Gooty et al., 2010). different dimensions of attentional deployment, distraction, and
Findings from the current study suggest that there is a concentration (Webb et al., 2012), as these strategies may have
positive relationship between situation modification, cognitive differential effects for leaders (Little et al., 2012).

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 7 July 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1486

Torrence and Connelly Emotion Regulation and Leadership

IMPLICATIONS regulation, the results of the present effort should be taken

with caution given measurement issues of the scale. Specifically,
From a leadership perspective, this effort provides empirical the situational modification scale exhibited low reliability (α
support to prior conceptual work on the role of emotion = 0.61) indicating low internal consistency and modest levels
regulation in leadership and organizations (Riggio and Reichard, of variance attributable to error. The use of three items for
2008; Ashkanasy and Humphrey, 2011; Lawrence et al., 2011). assessing situation modification likely contributes to the low
A predominant assumption is that emotion management is a reliability as well. Further measure development is needed to
necessary component of effective leadership. However, results correct these issues. Alternatively, the low reliability of this scale
from this study indicate that certain emotion regulation strategies suggests that individuals may exhibit more variability in their
may be more advantageous than others. Specifically, situation use of situation selection strategies. Another limitation is the
modification and cognitive reappraisal appear to be to functional strong correlations displayed between the cognitive reappraisal,
strategies for managing emotion-laden events in the workplace. situation modification, and attentional deployment scales. This
Furthermore, given that emotion regulation responses can issue suggests that responses on these scales may influenced
occur implicitly (Gross, 2008), identifying the influence of by standing on a higher-order factor (e.g., antecedent-focused
individual differences in emotion regulation on leadership strategies) or that the items assessing these constructs were not
outcomes seems appropriate. Leaders with a tendency to employ distinct enough. The Gross (1998) model of emotion regulation
adaptive regulation strategies are likely to be better suited for categorizes situation modification, cognitive reappraisal, and
handling the task and interpersonal demands associated with attentional deployment under the dimension of antecedent-
leadership positions. focused strategies, as such, positive correlations between these
Furthermore, findings from this study lend support to the strategies is not unexpected. However, given this study’s interest,
use of the Gross (1998) process-model of emotion regulation in the level of abstraction was kept at the specific families of emotion
leadership settings. The vast majority of research on emotion regulation strategies. Furthermore, the measurement model for
management in leadership has investigated this construct from the four-factor emotion regulation measure displayed mediocre
the perspective of emotional labor (Humphrey, 2012) and fit compared to the recommended cutoff scores (Hu and Bentler,
emotional intelligence (Kerr et al., 2006). Even though these 1999). However, Chen et al. (2008) show that small sample sizes
approaches have provided supporting evidence for the role (n < 200) have an influence on model fit estimates. Future
of emotion regulation at work, the broader set of strategies work will need to cross-validate this four-factor model using a
outlined in this model provides a more fine-grained picture of larger sample.
the emotion regulation process. As opposed to simply managing Another limitation is that this study was conducted with an
their emotional expressions, leaders may control their emotions undergraduate sample limiting its generalizability to a leadership
be modifying situations, changing their thoughts, or diverting sample. A sample with more leadership experience may
their attention. Given that situations, situational elements, demonstrate better performance in feedback, ethical decision-
meanings, and expressions all represent different components making, and high-stakes situations. However, the low-fidelity
of emotion-laden events, incorporating theory that encompasses performance tasks were ground in leadership situations familiar
these aspects into our understanding of emotion regulation in to undergraduate students. Furthermore, a more experienced
leadership is warranted. leadership sample may display differences in emotion regulation
From a practical perspective, understanding individual given that emotion regulation tendencies vary over one’s lifetime.
differences in emotion regulation appears to be important for Although the developmental nature of emotion regulation
informing training interventions aimed at improving leader suggests that strategy usage varies with age (Gross, 2013),
emotion regulation capabilities. Connelly et al. (2014) discuss the relationships found with these strategies are consistent
that getting leaders to recognize the regulation strategies they with prior research and appear to hold across age groups
rely on as well as the relative effectiveness of these strategies is (Nolen-Hoeksema and Aldao, 2011). Also, the paper-and-pencil
critical for improving emotion regulation usage. By recognizing nature of the vignettes is another potential limitation. The use
their emotion regulation tendencies, leaders can focus on of a low-fidelity simulation may not accurately capture the
improving and building upon their effective strategies in addition emotionally-laden nature of real-world workplace situations.
to developing alternative emotion management approaches. While this method allowed for the assessment of decisions
For instance, helping leaders who are prone to suppression across different situations, participants responses may differ
understand the detrimental effects of this strategy and assisting when facing these issues in actual organizational settings.
them in developing alternative regulation strategies may be more Another limitation may be the manner in which leadership
effective than simply training them on the different types of performance was evaluated. Participant decisions were rated on
regulation strategies (Connelly et al., 2014). quality, considering others’ perspective, social perceptiveness,
and good judgment under uncertainty. However, the process
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH of considering another person’s perspective or being socially
perceptive may be intertwined with cognitive reappraisal as it
Several limitations of this study should be noted despite requires the ability to consider alternative perspectives of a
its potential implications. First, while the pattern of results situation, for example. Nonetheless, effective leadership calls for
uncovered here does align with prior research on emotion the development of decisions that work within the interpersonal

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 8 July 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1486

Torrence and Connelly Emotion Regulation and Leadership

and organizational setting (Mumford et al., 2000) and emotion well-being, leader-follower relationships, and performance is
regulation strategies, such as cognitive reappraisal, may serve worthy of future research.
to inform leader decisions by facilitating these processes. Still,
additional research assessing emotion regulation strategies with CONCLUSION
other leader performance outcomes is needed.
This study was concerned with emotion regulation tendencies In this study, we investigated the relationship between individual
and its relationship with leadership performance. However, differences in emotion regulation strategies and performance
certain individual differences may also contribute to a leader’s on leadership tasks. Incorporating strategies from the Gross
ability to regulate emotion. Emotion recognition, the ability (1998) process-model of emotion regulation, we examined four
to identify emotions, may be a precursor to effective emotion strategies that leaders may use once they find themselves in
regulation (Joseph and Newman, 2010). On the other hand, an emotion-laden event: situation modification, attentional
personality constructs such as alexithymia, which reflects the deployment, cognitive reappraisal, and suppression. The
inability to identify and describe emotions (Lennartsson et al., effectiveness of these strategies was determined by performance
2017), are likely to have detrimental effects on a leader’s on leadership tasks. Results from this effort demonstrate that
ability to properly regulate their emotions in the workplace. situation modification and cognitive reappraisal are positively
Future research should examine individual differences that associated with performance, suppression is negatively related to
benefit and hinder leader emotion regulation (Gooty et al., performance, and attentional deployment has no relationship.
2010). Additionally, the effectiveness of strategies may depend Furthermore, suppression accounted for performance in
on context. While research demonstrates that certain emotion leadership tasks above and beyond gender, trait affectivity, and
regulation strategies are more habitually functional (Aldao et al., empathy. From a practical standpoint, these results suggest that
2010), that does not negate the idea that maladaptive strategies the certain emotion regulation strategies may be more functional
may be functional in the right settings. Future studies on for leaders and the emotion regulation strategy relied on by a
leader emotion regulation should assess the role contextual leader may facilitate or hinder their effectiveness.
factors and emotion regulation choice (Sheppes et al., 2014) on
interpersonal and performance outcomes. Stress, uncertainty, ETHICS STATEMENT
and crisis contexts represent different organizational events that
leaders must face, and the emotion regulation strategy leaders This study was carried out in accordance with the
choose to use likely influences their ability to successfully deal recommendations of the University of Oklahoma Institutional
with the event. Review Board with informed consent from all subjects.
Finally, this study looked at the individual effect of each
strategy on performance. However, leaders are likely to use AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
emotion regulation strategies conjointly or rely on multiple
regulation strategies to alter their emotional experiences. Recent All authors listed made substantial, intellectual contributions to
work on emotional labor by Gabriel et al. (2015) suggests that the work, and approved it for publication.
individuals exhibit different profiles of emotional labor use
and shows that these profiles exhibit differential outcomes on SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL
exhaustion, satisfaction, and authenticity. Given that leaders
are likely to utilize different emotion regulation strategies The Supplementary Material for this article can be found
throughout their worklife, investigating the influence of emotion online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.
regulation patterns effects on leadership outcomes such as 2019.01486/full#supplementary-material

REFERENCES Beal, D. J., Weiss, H. M., Barros, E., and MacDermid, S. M. (2005). An episodic
process model of affective influences on performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 90,
Aguinis, H., and Bradley, K. J. (2014). Best practice recommendations for 1054–1068. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1054
designing and implementing experimental vignette methodology studies. Org. Bernardin, H. J., and Buckley, M. R. (1981). Strategies in rater training. Acad.
Res. Methods 17, 351–371. doi: 10.1177/1094428114547952 Manag. Rev. 6, 205–212. doi: 10.5465/amr.1981.4287782
Aldao, A., Nolen-Hoeksema, S., and Schweizer, S. (2010). Emotion-regulation Brotheridge, C. M., and Grandey, A. A. (2002). Emotional labor and burnout:
strategies across psychopathology: a meta-analytic review. Clin. Psychol. Rev. comparing two perspectives of “people work”. J. Vocat. Behav. 60, 17–39.
30, 217–237. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2009.11.004 doi: 10.1006/jvbe.2001.1815
Ashkanasy, N. M., and Humphrey, R. H. (2011). “A multi-level view of leadership Butler, E. A., Egloff, B., Wlhelm, F. H., Smith, N. C., Erickson, E. A., and Gross, J.
and emotions: leading with emotional labor,” in Sage Handbook of Leadership, J. (2003). The social consequences of expressive suppression. Emotion 3, 48–67.
eds A. Bryman, D. Collinson, K. Grint, B. Jackson, and M. Uhl-Bien (London: doi: 10.1037/1528-3542.3.1.48
Sage), 363–377. Chen, F., Curran, P. J., Bollen, K. A., Kirby, J., and Paxton, P. (2008). An
Ashkanasy, N. M., and Tse, B. (2000). “Transformational leadership as empirical evaluation of the use of fixed cutoff points in RMSEA test
management of emotion: a conceptual review,” in Emotions in the Workplace: statistic in structural equation models. Sociol. Methods Res. 36, 462–494.
Research, Theory, and Practice, eds N. M. Ashkanasy, C. E. Härtel, doi: 10.1177/0049124108314720
and W. J. Zerbe (Westport, CT: Quorum Books/Greenwood Publishing Connelly, M. S., Gilbert, J. A., Zaccaro, S. J., Threlfall, K. V., Marks, M.
Group), 221–235. A., and Mumford, M. D. (2000). Exploring the relationship of leadership

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 9 July 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1486

Torrence and Connelly Emotion Regulation and Leadership

skills and knowledge to leader performance. Leadersh. Q. 11, 65–86. Joseph, D. L., Dhanani, L. Y., Shen, W., McHugh, B. C., and McCord,
doi: 10.1016/S1048-9843(99)00043-0 M. A. (2015). Is a happy leader a good leader? a meta-analytic
Connelly, S., Friedrich, T., Vessey, W. B., Klabuza, A., Day, E. A., and Ruark, investigation of leader trait affect and leadership. Leadersh. Q. 26, 557–576.
G. (2014). “A conceptual framework of emotion management in leadership doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.04.001
contexts,” in Leader Interpersonal and Influence Skills: The Soft Skills of Joseph, D. L., and Newman, D. A. (2010). Emotional intelligence: an
Leadership eds R. E. Riggio and S. J. Tan (New York, NY: Routledge), 101–137. integrative meta-analysis and cascading model. J. Appl. Psychol. 95, 54–78.
Diefendorff, J. M., Richard, E. M., and Yang, J. (2008). Linking emotion regulation doi: 10.1037/a0017286
strategies to affective events and negative emotions at work. J. Vocat. Behav. 73, Kellett, J. B., Humphrey, R. H., and Sleeth, R. G. (2006). Empathy and
498–508. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2008.09.006 the emergence of task and relations leaders. Leadersh. Q. 17, 146–162.
Eagly, A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., and Van Engen, M. L. (2003). doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.12.003
Transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles: a Kerr, R., Garvin, J., Heaton, N., and Boyle, E. (2006). Emotional intelligence
meta-analysis comparing women and men. Psychol. Bull. 129, 569–591. and leadership effectiveness. Leadersh. Org. Dev. J. 27, 265–279.
doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.129.4.569 doi: 10.1108/01437730610666028
English, T., John, O. P., Srivastava, S., and Gross, J. J. (2012). Emotion regulation Kiefer, T. (2005). Feeling bad: antecedents and consequences of negative
and peer-rated social functioning: a 4-year longitudinal study. J. Res. Pers. 46, emotions in ongoing change. J. Organ. Behav. 26, 875–897. doi: 10.1002/
780–784. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2012.09.006 job.339
Folkman, S., and Moskowitz, J. T. (2000). Positive affect and the other side of Kligyte, V., Connelly, S., Thiel, C., and Devenport, L. (2013). The influence of
coping. Am. Psychol. 55, 647–654. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.6.647 anger, fear, and emotion regulation on ethical decision making. Hum. Perfor.
Gabriel, A. S., Daniels, M. A., Diefendorff, J. M., and Greguras, G. J. (2015). 26, 297–326. doi: 10.1080/08959285.2013.814655
Emotional labor actors: a latent profile analysis of emotional labor strategies. Koole, S. L. (2009). The psychology of emotion regulation: an integrative review.
J. Appl. Psychol. 100, 863–879. doi: 10.1037/a0037408 Cogn. Emot. 23, 4–41. doi: 10.1080/02699930802619031
Gardner, W. L., Fischer, D., and Hunt, J. G. J. (2009). Emotional labor Lawrence, S. A., Troth, A. C., Jordan, P. J., and Collins, A. L. (2011). “A review of
and leadership: a threat to authenticity? Leadersh. Q. 20, 466–482. emotion regulation and development of a framework for emotion regulation
doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.03.011 in the workplace,” in The Role of Individual Differences in Occupational
George, J. M. (2000). Emotions and leadership: the role of emotional intelligence. Stress and Well Being, eds P. L. Perrewé and D. C. Ganster (Bingley:
Hum. Relat. 53, 1027–1055. doi: 10.1177/0018726700538001 Emerald Group Publishing), 197–263. doi: 10.1108/S1479-3555(2011)0000
Glasø, L., and Einarsen, S. (2008). Emotion regulation in leader– 009010
follower relationships. Eur. J. Work Org. Psychol. 17, 482–500. Lennartsson, A. K., Horwitz, E. B., Theorell, T., and Ullén, F. (2017). Creative
doi: 10.1080/13594320801994960 artistic achievement is related to lower levels of alexithymia. Creat. Res. J. 29,
Gooty, J., Connelly, S., Griffith, J., and Gupta, A. (2010). Leadership, affect 29–36. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2017.1263507
and emotions: a state of the science review. Leadersh. Q. 21, 979–1004. Lerner, J. S., Li, Y., Valdesolo, P., and Kassam, K. S. (2015).
doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.10.005 Emotion and decision making. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 66, 799–823.
Gooty, J., Gavin, M. B., Ashkanasy, N. M., and Thomas, J. S. (2014). The doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115043
wisdom of letting go and performance: the moderating role of emotional Little, L. M., Kluemper, D., Nelson, D. L., and Gooty, J. (2012). Development
intelligence and discrete emotions. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 87, 392–413. and validation of the interpersonal emotion management scale. J.
doi: 10.1111/joop.12053 Occup. Organ. Psychol. 85, 407–420. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8325.2011.
Gross, J. J. (1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: an integrative review. 02042.x
Rev. Gen. Psychol. 2, 271–299. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.271 Liu, Y., Prati, L. M., Perrew,é, P. L., and Brymer, R. A. (2010). Individual differences
Gross, J. J. (2002). Emotion regulation: affective, cognitive, and social in emotion regulation, emotional experiences at work, and work-related
consequences. Psychophysiology 39, 281–291. doi: 10.1017/S0048577201393198 outcomes: a two-study investigation. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 40, 1515–1538.
Gross, J. J. (2008). “Emotion regulation,” in Handbook of Emotions, eds M. Lewis, J. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2010.00627.x
M. Haviland-Jones, and L. F. Barrett (New York, NY: Guilford Press), 497–513. Meade, A. W., and Craig, S. B. (2012). Identifying careless responses in survey data.
Gross, J. J. (2013). Emotion regulation: taking stock and moving forward. Emotion Psychol. Methods 17, 437–455. doi: 10.1037/a0028085
13, 359–365. doi: 10.1037/a0032135 Mumford, M. D., Zaccaro, S. J., Harding, F. D., Jacobs, T. O., and Fleishman, E. A.
Gross, J. J. (2015). Emotion regulation: current status and future prospects. Psychol. (2000). Leadership skills for a changing world: solving complex social problems.
Inq. 26, 1–26. doi: 10.1080/1047840X.2014.940781 Leadersh. Q. 11, 11–35. doi: 10.1016/S1048-9843(99)00041-7
Gross, J. J., and John, O. P. (2003). Individual differences in two emotion regulation Nolen-Hoeksema, S., and Aldao, A. (2011). Gender and age differences
processes: implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. J. Pers. Soc. in emotion regulation strategies and their relationship to depressive
Psychol. 85, 348–362. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.348 symptoms. Pers. Individ. Dif. 51, 704–708. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2011.
Haver, A., Akerjordet, K., and Furunes, T. (2013). Emotion regulation and its 06.012
implications for leadership: an integrative review and future research agenda. Richards, J. M., and Gross, J. J. (2000). Emotion regulation and memory: the
J. Leadersh. Org. Stud. 20, 287–303. doi: 10.1177/1548051813485438 cognitive costs of keeping one’s cool. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 79, 410–424.
Hepler, J., and Albarracin, D. (2013). Attitudes without objects: Evidence for doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.79.3.410
a dispositional attitude, its measurement, and its consequences. J. Pers. Soc. Riggio, R. E., and Reichard, R. J. (2008). The emotional and social intelligences of
Psychol. 104, 1060–1076. doi: 10.1037/a0032282 effective leadership: an emotional and social skill approach. J. Manag. Psychol.
Hinkin, T. R. (1998). A brief tutorial on the development of measures 23, 169–185. doi: 10.1108/02683940810850808
for use in survey questionnaires. Org. Res. Methods 1, 104–121. Riley, K. E., and Park, C. L. (2014). Problem-focused vs. meaning-focused coping as
doi: 10.1177/109442819800100106 mediators of the appraisal-adjustment relationship in chronic stressors. J. Soc.
Hu, L. T., and Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance Clin. Psychol. 33, 587–611. doi: 10.1521/jscp.2014.33.7.587
structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Seo, M. G., and Barrett, L. F. (2007). Being emotional during decision making—
Model. 6, 1–55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118 good or bad? An empirical investigation. Acad. Manag. J. 50, 923–940.
Humphrey, R. H. (2012). How do leaders use emotional labor? J. Organ. Behav. 33, doi: 10.5465/amj.2007.26279217
740–744. doi: 10.1002/job.1791 Sheppes, G., Scheibe, S., Suri, G., Radu, P., Blechert, J., and Gross, J. J. (2014).
Humphrey, R. H., Pollack, J. M., and Hawver, T. (2008). Leading with emotional Emotion regulation choice: a conceptual framework and supporting evidence.
labor. J. Manag. Psychol. 23, 151–168. doi: 10.1108/02683940810850790 J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 143, 163–181. doi: 10.1037/a0030831
Johnson, G., and Connelly, S. (2014). Negative emotions in informal feedback: the Shiv, B., Loewenstein, G., Bechara, A., Damasio, H., and Damasio, A. R. (2005).
benefits of disappointment and drawbacks of anger. Hum. Relat. 67, 1265–1290. Investment behavior and the negative side of emotion. Psychol. Sci. 16, 435–439.
doi: 10.1177/0018726714532856 doi: 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.01553.x

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 10 July 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1486

Torrence and Connelly Emotion Regulation and Leadership

Spreng, R. N., McKinnon, M. C., Mar, R. A., and Levine, B. (2009). The toronto Weiss, H. M., and Cropanzano, R. (1996). “Affective events theory: a theoretical
empathy questionnaire: scale development and initial validation of a factor- discussion of the structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at
analytic solution to multiple empathy measures. J. Pers. Assess. 91, 62–71. work,” in Research in Organizational Behavior: An Annual Series of Analytical
doi: 10.1080/00223890802484381 Essays and Critical Reviews, eds B. M. Staw and L. L. Cummings (Greenwich,
Van Kleef, G. A., Homan, A. C., Beersma, B., Van Knippenberg, CT: JAI Press), 1–74.
D., Van Knippenberg, B., and Damen, F. (2009). Searing Wolff, S. B., Pescosolido, A. T., and Druskat, V. U. (2002). Emotional intelligence
sentiment or cold calculation? The effects of leader emotional as the basis of leadership emergence in self-managing teams. Leadersh. Q. 13,
displays on team performance depend on follower epistemic 505–522. doi: 10.1016/S1048-9843(02)00141-8
motivation. Acad. Manag. J. 52, 562–580. doi: 10.5465/amj.2009.413
31253 Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare that the research was
Wallace, J. C., Edwards, B. D., Shull, A., and Finch, D. M. (2009). conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could
Examining the consequences in the tendency to suppress and reappraise be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
emotions on task-related job performance. Hum. Perfor. 22, 23–43.
doi: 10.1080/08959280802540957 Copyright © 2019 Torrence and Connelly. This is an open-access article distributed
Wason, K. D., Polonsky, M. J., and Hyman, M. R. (2002). Designing vignette under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The
studies in marketing. Aust. Market. J. 10, 41–58. doi: 10.1016/S1441-3582(02) use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the
70157-2 original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original
Webb, T. L., Miles, E., and Sheeran, P. (2012). Dealing with feeling: a meta-analysis publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice.
of the effectiveness of strategies derived from the process model of emotion No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these
regulation. Psychol. Bull. 138, 775–808. doi: 10.1037/a0027600 terms.

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 11 July 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1486