When less is more: Effects of the availability of strategic options on regulating negative emotions

Yochanan E. Bigman*, Gal Sheppes, Maya Tamir

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

11 Scopus citations


Research in several domains suggests that having strategic options is not always beneficial. In this paper, we tested whether having strategic options (vs. not) is helpful or harmful for regulating negative emotions. In 5 studies (N = 151) participants were presented with 1 or more strategic options prior to watching aversive images and using the selected strategic option. Across studies, we found that people reported less intense negative emotions when the strategy they used to regulate their emotions was presented as a single option, rather than as 1 of several options. This was regardless of whether people could choose between the options (Studies 3-5) or not (Studies 1, 2, and 4), and specific to negative (but not neutral) images (Study 5). A sixth study addressed an explanation based on demand characteristics, showing that participants expected to feel more positive when having more than 1 option. The findings indicate that having strategic options for regulating negative emotions can sometimes be costly.

Original languageAmerican English
Pages (from-to)993-1006
Number of pages14
Issue number6
StatePublished - Sep 2017

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 American Psychological Association.


  • Choice
  • Decision making
  • Emotion regulation
  • Option availability


Dive into the research topics of 'When less is more: Effects of the availability of strategic options on regulating negative emotions'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this