Child Versions of These Questionnaires
Emotion regulation in children has been shown to affect classroom behaviors and behavior control positively. Wyman et al. (2010) found that improving emotion regulation in children resulted in fewer disciplinary incidents, improved behavior control, fewer aggressive-disruptive problems, on-task learning behaviors and peer social skills, and more assertive behaviors.
Additionally, emotion regulation strategies are related to the reporting of symptoms of depression, fearfulness, and worry (Garnefski et al., 2007). It is clear to see that emotion regulation in children is an important skill to assess and develop, as such several self-report measures have been designed to facilitate this process.
The Emotion Regulation Questionnaire for Children and Adolescents (ERQ–CA; Gullone & Taffe, 2011)
The ERQ-CA is a 10-item child-report questionnaire based on the original adult version by Gross & John (2003) deemed suitable for use with children and adolescents aged 10-18 years.
Revisions to the ERQ include the simplification of item language, for instance, “I control my emotions by not expressing them” was considered too complicated for young children and so was reworded to “I control my feelings by not showing them.”
Additionally, the length of the response scale was reduced from a 7-point Likert scale to 5-points from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
The Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire for Children (CERQ-k; Garnefski, Rieffe, Jellesma, Meerum Terwogt, & Kraaij, 2007)
The CERQ-k is an adapted 36-item version of the original CERQ designed to measure cognitive emotion regulation in children and adolescents. The CERQ-k measures nine cognitive emotion regulation strategies that children may use after experiencing negative life events.
While the original CERQ was considered suitable for adults and adolescents aged 12 and older, the CERQ-k was constructed for children of 9-11 years of age to better fit the cognitive abilities of children in this age group (Garnefski et al., 2007). The response format of the CERQ-k is a five-point Likert scale from 1 (almost never) to 5 (almost always) and can be used to obtain regulation strategy scores.
What is the Reliability Like?
A very important question for any questionnaire or scale, below is a quick rehash of each scale’s reliability.
Emotion Regulation Questionnaire
Since its development, the ERQ has been used extensively in studies of emotion regulation and has shown good psychometric properties. In particular, the measure has demonstrated good internal consistency and temporal stability, test-retest reliability, and sound convergent and discriminant validity (Ioannidis & Siegling, 2015).
Furthermore, the criterion validity of the ERQ has been examined, revealing numerous associations with constructs related to adaptive and non-adaptive functioning. For instance, higher cognitive reappraisal is linked to greater positive affect, mood repair, and life satisfaction. In contrast, emotional suppression is positively correlated with negative affect, depression, and inauthenticity (Gross & John, 2003).
Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire
The CERQ has been shown to have good factorial validity, discriminative properties, and construct validity. Additionally, all subscales have demonstrated good internal consistencies (Garnefski, Baan, & Kraaij, 2005).
Principal component analyses provided factorial efficacy and support the allocation of items to subscales, while the test-retest reliability of the scales was good with most alphas exceeding 0.80 (Garnefski & Spinhoven, 2001). The recommended minimum Cronbach alpha coefficient is between 0.65 and 0.80. (Cronbach alpha is a measurement of internal stability.)
The Interpersonal Emotion Regulation Questionnaire
The IERQ shows excellent psychometric properties with Cronbach alpha coefficients between 0.89 and 0.94 for all subscales (Hofmann, Carpenter, & Curtiss, 2016). As with the other questionnaires detailed above, the IERQ has been translated into multiple languages and has shown internal consistency coefficients between 0.81 and 0.89, with strong test-retest correlation coefficients (Gökdağ, Sorias, Kıran, & Ger, 2019).
These findings suggest that the translated versions of IERQ are also reliable and valid scales, with the psychometric properties being similar to those of the original.
Interpretation of the Results
When all is said and done and added up, how should the results be interpreted?
The Emotion Regulation Questionnaire
The higher the score, the greater the use of emotion regulation strategies, conversely lower scores represent less frequent use of such strategies. Gross & John (2003) found that the average scores for each strategy were as follows:
- Cognitive Reappraisal: Men – 4.6, Women – 4.61
- Expressive Suppression: Men – 3.64, Women – 3.14
Certain assumptions can then be made from the results. For instance, using cognitive reappraisal to regulate emotions has been shown to result in more affective, cognitive, and social consequences when compared to expressive suppression.
Cutuli (2014) found that individuals who utilize the cognitive reappraisal strategy are more likely to exhibit interpersonal behavior that is appropriately focused on social interaction. Conversely, those scoring higher for expressive suppression modify the behavioral aspect of emotional responses without reducing the subjective and physiological experience of negative emotion.
The Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire
From the results, various inferences can be made regarding cognitive emotion regulation. For instance, women with high levels of self-blame are 2.7 times more likely to develop depression than those who do not self-blame (Killian, Cacciatore, & Lacasse, 2011).
A greater tendency for rumination has been negatively associated with certain aspects of social interactions, excessive elaboration of negative information, and enhanced recollection memory for negative events (Dias da Silva, Rusz, Postma-Nilsenová, 2018).
Garnefski & Kraaij (2006) found that the highest mean scores were found for the cognitive strategies of ‘Planning’ and ‘Positive Reappraisal.’ ‘Catastrophizing’ and ‘Other-blame’ were reported as being used less often.
As a guide, the average scores for each of the strategies are as follows:
- Self-blame – 2.96
- Acceptance – 3.53
- Rumination – 3.72
- Positive refocusing – 3.53
- Refocus on Planning – 3.89
- Positive Reappraisal – 4.07
- Putting into Perspective – 3.91
- Catastrophizing – 2.43
- Other-blame – 2.69
What our readers think
Hello, I am a Psychology Student and I am currently trying to find Emotion Regulation scales to use for our research study. We have taken interest to The Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire and is hoping if we can access the questionnaire, along with the scoring range interpretations like (high, moderate, low), and examples and guidelines how to apply these interpretations in practical research settings? My research group and I will really appreciate your immediate response and assistance. Thank you.
Hi Jeyah,
This scale is freely available to use and a copy of it with scoring information can be accessed here.
Hope this helps!
Warm regards,
Julia | Community Manager
Guys, can anyone please help me? We’re currently doing our thesis study and questionnaire about Emotion Regulation, and I found this cite very helpful in conducting the survey, can I have a copy of scale and interpretation? Thank you in advance
We are currently having a thesis regarding Emotional regulation. Is there an available level of emotion regulation by Gross.
Hi Nikol,
This scale is freely available to use and a copy of it with scoring information can be accessed here.
Hope this helps!
Warmly,
Julia | Community Manager