This article was downloaded by: [University of Sussex Library]

On: 11 February 2015, At: 07:51

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Applied Neuropsychology: Child

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hapc20

Executive Function and Emotion Regulation Strategy

Use in Adolescents
a a b c a
Crystal Lantrip , Peter K. Isquith , Nancy S. Koven , Kathleen Welsh & Robert M. Roth
a
Neuropsychology Program, Department of Psychiatry, Geisel School of Medicine at
Dartmouth, Lebanon, New Hampshire
b
Neuroscience Program, Bates College, Lewiston, Maine
c
Social Studies Department, Thetford Academy, Thetford, Vermont
Published online: 04 Feb 2015.

Click for updates

To cite this article: Crystal Lantrip, Peter K. Isquith, Nancy S. Koven, Kathleen Welsh & Robert M. Roth (2015):
Executive Function and Emotion Regulation Strategy Use in Adolescents, Applied Neuropsychology: Child, DOI:
10.1080/21622965.2014.960567

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21622965.2014.960567

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 APPLIED NEUROPSYCHOLOGY: CHILD, 0: 1–6, 2015
Copyright # Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 2162-2965 print=2162-2973 online
DOI: 10.1080/21622965.2014.960567

Executive Function and Emotion Regulation

Strategy Use in Adolescents
Crystal Lantrip and Peter K. Isquith
Neuropsychology Program, Department of Psychiatry, Geisel School of Medicine at
Dartmouth, Lebanon, New Hampshire

Nancy S. Koven
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 07:51 11 February 2015

Neuroscience Program, Bates College, Lewiston, Maine

Kathleen Welsh
Social Studies Department, Thetford Academy, Thetford, Vermont

Robert M. Roth
Neuropsychology Program, Department of Psychiatry, Geisel School of Medicine at
Dartmouth, Lebanon, New Hampshire

Development of emotion regulation strategy use involves a transition from reliance

on suppression during childhood to greater use of reappraisal in adolescence and
adulthood—a transition that parallels developmental changes in executive functions.
We evaluated the relationship between emotion regulation strategy use and executive
functioning in the everyday life of 70 typically developing adolescents who completed
the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire for Youth and the Behavior Rating Inventory
of Executive Function-Self-Report. Results indicated that greater reliance on reappraisal
was associated with better executive functions, while reliance on suppression was related
to poorer executive functions. Findings suggest that adolescents who rely on reappraisal
may have more cognitive resources to help them remain attentive and well regulated
in their daily lives. On the other hand, if better executive functions facilitate the use of
reappraisal, adolescents’ ability to regulate their emotions could potentially be enhanced
via supports for executive functions.

Key words: adolescents, cognitive reappraisal, emotion regulation, executive function,

suppression

Emotion regulation involves a strategy to influence the strategies that unfold along a continuum that flows from
experience and expression of emotion (Gross, 1998) cognitive to behavioral reactions to emotion-eliciting
and includes monitoring, evaluating, and modifying stimuli in the environment (Gross, 1998). Two strategies
emotional reactions. Gross’s model of emotion regu- that have received a great deal of attention in the
lation posits that there are several potential regulatory literature are reappraisal and expressive suppression.
Reappraisal, or rethinking negative emotional stimuli
Address correspondence to Crystal Lantrip, Ph.D., Neuropsychol- to interpret them in a more positive=neutral manner,
ogy Program, Department of Psychiatry, Geisel School of Medicine at is theorized to occur at the cognitive level, whereas
Dartmouth, One Medical Center Drive, Lebanon, NH 03756-0001.
expressive suppression, or suppressing emotional facial
E-mail: [email protected]
 2 LANTRIP ET AL.

expressions, occurs at the behavioral level. Research provocation in a laboratory setting (Wilkowski,
has shown that reappraisal is generally a more adaptive Robinson, & Troop-Gordon, 2010). Together, such
emotion regulation strategy, whereas suppression is studies support the hypothesis that better cognitive
associated with more negative outcomes (e.g., John & functioning is related to use of reappraisal (Raftery &
Gross, 2004). Bizer, 2009).
Child- and adolescent-focused research on emotion Although reappraisal and suppression have been
regulation has shown that, like adults, adolescents with associated with differences in cognition on performance-
symptoms of depression and poor coping are more likely based tests, it remains unclear whether emotion regu-
to use suppression and are less likely to use reappraisal lation strategy use is related to executive functions as
relative to control participants (Betts, Gullone, & manifested in everyday life. Concerns regarding the lim-
Sabura, 2009). Hughes, Gullone, Dudley, and Tonge ited ecological validity of performance-based executive
(2010) found that children aged 10 to 14 years old who function measures (Chaytor & Schmitter-Edgecombe,
engaged in school refusal behavior and were diagnosed 2003; Isquith, Roth, & Gioia, 2013) have led to a
with at least one anxiety disorder were more likely to plethora of studies during the past decade examining
report using suppression and less likely to use reappraisal relationships between ‘‘real-world’’ executive functions
compared with their typically developing peers. Gullone, as measured by parent reports, teacher reports, and self-
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 07:51 11 February 2015

Hughes, King, and Tonge (2010) examined emotion reports (Gioia, Kenworthy, & Isquith, 2010) and a broad
regulation strategies in children and adolescents aged 9 spectrum of biological, cognitive, behavioral, emotional,
to 15 years old in a longitudinal study. Results indicated social, and clinical characteristics (for a review, see
that suppression was used less by older participants com- Isquith et al., 2013). Recent studies of emotion regu-
pared with younger participants, less use of suppression lation using this methodology, for example, have shown
was reported over time, and boys overall reported more strong relationships between sleep and emotion regu-
use of suppression as compared with girls. Suppression lation in adolescents (Baum et al., 2014) and that emo-
and poor problem solving were also found to be related tion regulation mediated internalizing and externalizing
to self-injury in a large sample of adolescents (Hasking behavior problems in abused children (Hawkins &
et al., 2010). Haskett, 2014). Given the positive literature on capturing
A potential contributor to the change in emotion emotion regulation via everyday behaviors, examining
regulation strategies over time is the development of the relationship between emotion regulation strategy
executive functions. Executive functions encompass a use and executive functions in the everyday life of adoles-
diverse array of goal-directed functions such as problem cents may be informative.
solving, cognitive flexibility, planning, working memory, The present study evaluated executive functions in
and inhibitory control (e.g., Gioia, Isquith, & Guy, 2001; the everyday lives of adolescents using the Behavior
Goldberg & Bilder, 1987; Roth, Isquith, & Gioia, 2013). Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Self-Report
Maturation of the prefrontal cortex, an ongoing process Version (BRIEF-SR; Guy, Isquith, & Gioia, 2004).
during childhood and adolescence, leads to better execu- The BRIEF-SR includes nine nonoverlapping, theoreti-
tive functioning (Steinberg, 2005). Similarly, emotion cally and empirically derived scales that reflect widely
regulation strategies are thought to rapidly increase in accepted domains of executive function. We hypothe-
number and degree of sophistication during adolescence sized that report of greater use of reappraisal in adoles-
(Yap, Allen, & Sheeber, 2007), paralleling the develop- cents would be associated with better executive
ment of executive functions. Specifically, evidence sup- functioning, while greater reliance on suppression would
ports a shift from reliance on suppression in childhood be related to worse executive functioning. Consistent
to the greater use of reappraisal in adolescence and with previous research, we also hypothesized that boys
adulthood. The use of suppression has been found to would use suppression more than girls and that older
be cognitively demanding, thus diminishing cognitive adolescents would report fewer difficulties with their
resources, and has been associated with poor health executive functions in daily life and rely on reappraisal
and psychological outcomes (Richards & Gross, 2000). more compared with younger adolescents.
Several studies have revealed a relationship between
emotion regulation strategy use and performance on
cognitive tests assessing executive functions in adults.
METHOD
Depression-vulnerable adults with difficulty reappraising
have been observed to have problems with inhibitory
Participants
control (Joormann & Gotlib, 2010). Successful perfor-
mance on a conflict monitoring task was reported to pre- Seventy adolescents from a local high school were
dict successful reappraisal in adults, as operationalized recruited for a study on cognition and behavior. They
by measuring dampened aggressive reactions to anger were aged 12 to 18 years old (M ¼ 15.26 years,
 ADOLESCENT EXECUTIVE FUNCTIONING IN EVERYDAY LIFE 3

SD ¼ 1.73 years), and 68.6% were girls. Written informed of Materials, and Task Completion). The measure has
consent was obtained from a parent or legal guardian, good psychometric properties including internal consist-
followed by written assent of the participant if they were ency and test–retest reliability, and there is considerable
younger than 18 years of age. Written consent was evidence for its usefulness to assess executive function-
obtained from participants who were at least 18 years ing in a variety of adolescent populations (e.g., Mahone,
of age. The experimental protocol was approved by the Zabel, Levey, Verda, & Kinsman, 2002; Rosenthal et al.,
local institutional review board. 2013; Wilson, Donders, & Nguyen, 2011).

Materials Procedures
The Emotion Regulation Questionnaire for Children Students were provided with a packet of questionnaires
and Adolescents (ERQ-CA; Gullone & Taffe, 2012; including a consent=assent form and a Brief History
MacDermott, Gullone, Allen, Tonge, & King, 2010) is Questionnaire (pertaining to demographics, psychiatric
a revised version of the Emotion Regulation Question- history, and medical history) for their parents to com-
naire (Gross & John, 2003) and includes 10 items plete and return to the investigators. Adolescents were
assessing the emotion regulation strategies of cognitive provided with a separate set of questionnaires for them
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 07:51 11 February 2015

reappraisal (6 items) and expressive suppression (4 to complete and return to the investigators; these ques-
items). Items are rated on a 7-point Likert-type response tionnaires included the ERQ-CA (MacDermott et al.,
scale. Higher scores on each scale indicate greater use 2010) and the BRIEF-SR (Guy et al., 2004). We hoped
of the corresponding emotion regulation strategy. The to ensure in this manner that the adolescents felt confi-
children and adolescent version was revised to include dent that their questionnaire responses were kept confi-
simplification of item wording (e.g., ‘‘I control my dential from their parents, thus increasing the likely
emotions by not expressing them’’ was reworded to ‘‘I validity of the study findings.
control my feelings by not showing them’’) and reduction
of the response length to 5 points (1 ¼ strongly disagree,
2 ¼ disagree, 3 ¼ half and half, 4 ¼ agree, 5 ¼ strongly RESULTS
agree). The example suppression item from the adult
scale ‘‘I keep my feelings to myself’’ was reworded for Table 1 presents partial correlations, controlling for age,
the child and adolescent scale to say, ‘‘When I am happy, between the ERQ-CA and the BRIEF-SR. Greater use of
I am careful not to show it.’’ The example reappraisal reappraisal was negatively correlated with the BRIEF-
item, ‘‘When I want to feel happier, I think about some- SR Emotional Control Scale (r ¼  .37, p < .01) and
thing different,’’ was reworded to say, ‘‘When I want to the Behavioral Regulation Index (r ¼ .32, p < .01),
feel happier about something, I change the way I’m reflecting better emotion and behavior regulation in
thinking about it.’’ The range of scores for each scale is adolescents who rely more on reappraisal strategies. In
6 to 30 (Reappraisal) and 4 to 20 (Suppression). The mea- contrast, greater reliance on suppression strategies was
sure has demonstrated good internal consistency and associated with greater difficulties on the Organization
adequate 4-week test–retest reliability (MacDermott of Materials (r ¼ .32, p < .01), Working Memory
et al., 2010). Confirmatory factor analysis reproduced (r ¼ .30, p < .05), and Task Completion (r ¼ .27,
the two factors proposed by Gross and John (2003). p < .05) Scales, as well as worse scores on the Behavioral
Validity has been demonstrated through correlations Regulation Index (r ¼ .25, p < .05), Metacognition
in the expected directions between the two emotion Index (r ¼ .32, p < .01), and Global Executive Composite
regulation (ER) scales and a variety of measures such (r ¼ .34, p < .01). A greater emphasis on suppression was
as temperament (Betts et al., 2009). also associated with a trend for more problematic scores
The BRIEF-SR (Guy et al., 2004) is an 80-item self- on the Shift (r ¼ .18, p ¼ .10) and Monitor (r ¼ .19,
report rating scale for older children and adolescents p ¼ .13) Scales.
ages 11 to18 years. Items are rated on a 3-point scale Sex differences were not observed for the BRIEF-SR,
(never, sometimes, often), with higher scores reflecting but there was a main effect for sex on the ERQ-CA.
greater difficulty with executive function. The BRIEF- Analysis of variance indicated that boys scored signifi-
SR yields an overall score (Global Executive Composite) cantly higher on the Suppression subscale than did girls,
composed of two index scores (Behavioral Regulation F(1, 67) ¼ 4.08, p < .05, with no sex effect being observed
Index and Metacognition Index). The Behavioral in the use of reappraisal, F(1, 67) ¼ 0.55, p ¼ .47. With
Regulation Index is composed of four clinical scales regard to age, the sample was split into two groups:
(Inhibit, Shift, Emotional Control, and Monitor), and younger adolescents aged 12 to 15 years old (N ¼ 40)
the Metacognition Index is composed of four clinical and older adolescents aged 16 to 18 years old (N ¼ 29).
scales (Working Memory, Plan=Organize, Organization The division of the sample into these two age groups
 4 LANTRIP ET AL.

TABLE 1
Correlations Between the ERQ-CA and BRIEF-SR

BRIEF-SR

Emotional Working Organization Task

ERQ-CA Inhibit Shift Control Monitor Memory Plan=Organize of Materials Completion BRI MI GEC

Reappraisal –.22 –.11 –.37 –.19 –.06 –.14 –.12 –.04 –.32 –.11 –.23
Suppression .22 .18 .15 .20 .30 .22 .32 .27 .25 .32 .34

ERQ-CA ¼ Emotion Regulation Questionnaire for Children and Adolescents; BRIEF-SR ¼ Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-
Self-Report-Version; BRI ¼ Behavior Regulation Index; MI ¼ Metacognition Index; GEC ¼ Global Executive Composite.

p < .05.  p < .01.

was based on the use of this cutoff for early- to behavior, requiring effortful self-monitoring and
mid-adolescent and late-adolescent samples in prior self-focus and decreasing cognitive resources (Ellis &
studies (e.g., Lee et al., 2013). Results indicated that these Ashbrook, 1988). In contrast, reappraisal reduces the
two groups did not significantly differ on any of the need to focus attentional resources on inhibiting
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 07:51 11 February 2015

BRIEF-SR scales (all p > .05) or for either reappraisal, emotional expression and thus results in a greater avail-
F(1, 67) ¼ 0.154, p ¼ .70, or suppression, F(1, 67) ¼0.52, ability of cognitive resources for other tasks. The results
p ¼ .47. of the present study provide some support for the
hypothesis that suppression may deplete cognitive
resources and limit executive functions in the everyday
DISCUSSION environment. An alternate theory, however, may be that
those who have less well-developed executive functions
In the current study, better self-reported executive have more difficulty applying the reappraisal strategy
functions were associated with greater use of reappraisal and thus tend to rely more on suppression to regulate
strategies for emotion regulation in the daily lives of their emotions.
adolescents. Greater reliance on the use of reappraisal Consistent with previous research (Gullone et al.,
was associated with fewer difficulties with emotion 2010), in our sample of adolescents, boys endorsed using
control (e.g., fewer outbursts, greater stability) and with more suppression as an emotion regulation strategy as
behavior regulation more generally. Trends were also compared with girls. We found no difference, however,
observed for reappraisal to be related to better inhibitory between younger and older adolescents in either execu-
control and executive functioning in general. Conversely, tive functions or emotion regulation strategy use. This
adolescents who described themselves as relying more on is inconsistent with neuroimaging work that showed
suppression reported greater difficulty with executive greater activation in the ventral prefrontal cortex during
functions in everyday life. This was reflected in associa- self-regulation of negative emotion in younger as com-
tions with index scores on the BRIEF-SR and individual pared with older adolescents. This finding is interpreted
scales reflecting problems with working memory, main- as suggesting that as adolescents mature, they have more
taining an organized environment, and completing tasks efficient prefrontal cortical functioning resulting in more
in a timely manner. Use of suppression also tended to be efficient regulation of emotions (Lamm & Lewis, 2010).
associated with poorer inhibitory control, poorer ability Our lack of age-related differences may be due to the
to monitor task performance, poorer ability to plan and sample consisting of typically developing adolescents
organize tasks, and poorer problem solving. who generally reported little difficulty with executive
Previous studies have shown that suppression is asso- functions in their everyday lives on the BRIEF-SR.
ciated with negative psychological, physiological, and The present findings should be interpreted in the
cognitive outcomes in childhood, adolescence, and adult- context of the limitations of the study. In particular,
hood. In adults, suppression has been reported to be the sample size of the adolescents was modest, and thus,
related to poorer cognitive abilities (Richards & Gross, replication in a larger sample is needed. The study is cor-
2000), while reappraisal has been associated with success- relational and shows only that there are relationships
ful cognitive performance (e.g., Joormann & Gotlib, between everyday executive functions and emotion
2010; Raftery & Bizer, 2009; Wilkowski et al., 2010). It regulation strategy use in adolescents. These findings
has been suggested that suppression is a cognitively do not imply a causal relationship in either direction.
demanding form of self-regulation (Hagemann, Leven- In addition, it is unknown whether the relationships
son, & Gross, 2006; Richards & Gross, 2000). It may observed here between executive functions and emotion
be that suppression interferes with cognitive functioning regulation in typically developing adolescents generalize
due to the conscious inhibition of emotion-expressive to clinical populations such as adolescents with mood
 ADOLESCENT EXECUTIVE FUNCTIONING IN EVERYDAY LIFE 5

disorders. Future studies would benefit from examining and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85,
the relationships longitudinally and experimentally to 348–362.
Gullone, E., Hughes, E., King, N., & Tonge, B. (2010). The normative
clarify the developmental course and directionality of development of emotion regulation strategy use in children and
executive function and emotion regulation relationships. adolescents: A 2-year follow-up study. Journal of Child Psychology
Evaluating the association between emotion regulation and Psychiatry, 51, 567–574. doi:10.1177=0272431611432712
strategy use and both performance-based and rating Gullone, E., & Taffe, J. (2012). The Emotion Regulation Question-
scale measures of executive function in the same sample naire for Children and Adolescents (ERQ-CA): A psychometric
evaluation. Psychological Assessment, 24, 409–417. doi:10.1037=
would also help inform the extent to which method vari- a0025777
ance accounts for observed relationships. Guy, S. C., Isquith, P. K., & Gioia, G. A. (2004). Behavior Rating
Inventory of Executive Function–Self-Report Version. Lutz, FL:
Psychological Assessment Resources.
CONCLUSIONS Hagemann, T., Levenson, R., & Gross, J. (2006). Expressive sup-
pression during acoustic startle. Psychophysiology, 43, 104–112.
The present study observed that emotion regulation doi:10.1111=j.1469–8986.2006.00382.x
Hasking, P. A., Coric, S. J., Swannell, S., Martin, G., Thompson,
strategy use is associated with self-report ratings of
H. K., & Frost, A. D. (2010). Brief report: Emotion regulation
executive function in the everyday, real-world environ- and coping as moderators in the relationship between personality
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 07:51 11 February 2015

ment of adolescents. These findings suggest that adoles- and self-injury. Journal of Adolescence, 33, 767–773. doi:10.1016=
cents who rely more on reappraisal than suppression j.adolescence.2009.12.006
may have more cognitive resources to help them remain Hawkins, A. L., & Haskett, M. E. (2014). Internal working models
and adjustment of physically abused children: The mediating
attentive and well regulated in their daily lives. In
role of self-regulatory abilities. Journal of Child Psychology &
addition, if better executive functions facilitate the use Psychiatry, 55, 135–143. doi:10.1111=jcpp.12118
of reappraisal, then adolescents’ ability to regulate their Hughes, E. K., Gullone, E., Dudley, A., & Tonge, B. (2010). A case-
emotions could potentially be enhanced via supports for control study of emotion regulation and school refusal in children
executive functions. and adolescents. Journal of Early Adolescence, 30, 691–706.
doi:10.1177=0272431609341049
Isquith, P. K., Roth, R. M., & Gioia, G. (2013). Contribution of rating
scales to the assessment of executive functions. Applied Neuropsy-
REFERENCES chology: Child, 2, 125–132. doi:10.1080=21622965.2013.748389
John, O. P., & Gross, J. J. (2004). Healthy and unhealthy emotion
Baum, K. T., Desai, A., Field, J., Miller, L. E., Rausch, J., & Beebe, regulation: Personality processes, individual differences, and life
D. W. (2014). Sleep restriction worsens mood and emotion regu- span development. Journal of Personality, 72, 1301–1333.
lation in adolescents. Journal of Child Psychology & Psychiatry, doi:10.1111=j.1467–6494.2004.00298.x
55, 180–190. doi:10.1111=jcpp.12125 Joormann, J., & Gotlib, I. H. (2010). Emotion regulation in
Betts, J., Gullone, E., & Sabura, A. (2009). An examination of emotion depression: Relation to cognitive inhibition. Cognition and Emotion,
regulation, temperament, and parenting style as potential predictors 24, 281–298. doi:10.1080=02699930903407948
of adolescent depression risk status: A correlational study. British Lamm, C., & Lewis, M. (2010). Developmental change in the neuro-
Journal of Developmental Psychology, 27, 473–486. physiological correlates of self-regulation in high- and low-emotion
Chaytor, N., & Schmitter-Edgecombe, M. (2003). The ecological conditions. Developmental Neuropsychology, 35, 156–176.
validity of neuropsychological tests: A review of the literature on doi:10.1080=87565640903526512
everyday cognitive skills. Neuropsychology Review, 13, 191–197. Lee, N. C., de Groot, R. H. M., Boschloo, A., Dekker, S.,
Ellis, H. C., & Ashbrook, P. W. (1988). Resource allocation model of Krabbendam, L., & Joles, J. (2013). Age and educational track
the effects of depressed mood states on memory. In K. Fiedler & influence adolescent discounting of delayed rewards. Frontiers in
J. Forgas (Eds.), Affect, cognition, and social behavior (pp. 25–43). Psychology, 4, 993. doi:10.3389=fpsyg.2013.00993
Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Hogrete. MacDermott, S. T., Gullone, E., Allen, J. S., Tonge, B., & King, N. J.
Gioia, G. A., Isquith, P. K., & Guy, S. C. (2001). Assessment of (2010). Emotion Regulation Index for Children and Adolescents
executive function in children with neurological impairments. In (ERICA): A psychometric investigation. Journal of Psychopathology
R. Simeonsson & S. Rosenthal (Eds.), Psychological and develop- and Behavioral Assessment, 32, 301–314. doi:10.1007=s10862–
mental assessment (pp. 317–356). New York, NY: Guilford. 009-9154–0.
Gioia, G. A., Kenworthy, L., & Isquith, P. K. (2010). Executive Mahone, E. M., Zabel, T. A., Levey, E., Verda, M., & Kinsman, S.
function in the real world: BRIEF lessons from Mark Ylvisaker. (2002). Parent and self-report ratings of executive function in
Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 25(6), 433–439. adolescents with myelomeningocele and hydrocephalus. Child
doi:10.1097=HTR.0b013e3181fbc272 Neuropsychology, 8, 258–270. doi:10.1076=chin.8.4.258.13510
Goldberg, E., & Bilder, R. M. (1987). The frontal lobes and hierarch- Raftery, J., & Bizer, G. (2009). Negative feedback and performance:
ical organization of cognitive control. In E. Perecman (Ed.), The The moderating effects of emotion regulation. Personality and Indi-
frontal lobes revisited (pp. 159–187). New York, NY: IRBN Press. vidual Differences, 47, 481–486. doi:10=1037=a0034483
Gross, J. J. (1998). Antecedent- and response-focused emotion Richards, J., & Gross, J. (2000). Composure at any cost? The cognitive
regulation: Divergent consequences for experience, expression, consequences of emotion suppression. Personality and Social
and physiology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, Psychology Bulletin, 25, 1033–1944. doi:10.1037=0022–3514.79.3.410
224–237. Rosenthal, M., Wallace, G. L., Lawson, R., Wills, M. C., Dixon, E.,
Gross, J. J., & John, O. P. (2003). Individual differences in two Yerys, B. E., & Kenworthy, L. (2013). Impairments in real-world
emotion regulation processes: Implications for affect, relationships, executive function increase from childhood to adolescence in autism
 6 LANTRIP ET AL.

spectrum disorders. Neuropsychology, 27, 13–18. doi:10.1037= of conflict monitoring and forgiveness processes. Journal of Person-
a0031299 ality and Social Psychology, 98, 830–840. doi:10.1037=a0018962
Roth, R. M., Isquith, P. K., & Gioia, G. A. (2013). Executive function: Wilson, K. R., Donders, J., & Nguyen, L. (2011). Self and parent
Assessment and intervention. In G. P. Koocher, J. C. Norcross, & ratings of executive functioning after adolescent traumatic brain
B. A. Greene (Eds.), Psychologists’ desk reference (3rd ed., pp. injury. Rehabilitation Psychology, 56, 100–106. doi:10.1037=
105–109). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. a0023446
Steinberg, L. (2005). Cognitive and affective development in Yap, M., Allen, N., & Sheeber, L. (2007). Using an emotion regulation
adolescence. Trends in Cognitive Science, 9, 69–74. doi:10.1016= framework to understand the role of temperament and family
j.tics.2004.12.005 processes in risk for adolescent depressive disorders. Clinical Child
Wilkowski, B. M., Robinson, M. D., & Troop-Gordon, W. (2010). and Family Psychology, 10, 180–196. doi:10.1007=s10567-
How does cognitive control reduce anger and aggression? The role 006-0014-0
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 07:51 11 February 2015