People may often attempt to support a loved one by changing how that loved one interprets a stressful situation (i.e., other-focused cognitive reappraisal). However, there are many specific ways in which a situation can be reframed, and while some reappraisal tactics may be effective, other tactics may be inert or possibly backfire-even when used with good intentions. We propose that it is useful to distinguish between decommitment tactics that involve decommitting from a previously held perspective (e.g., reducing severity: "It is not as bad as it seems"; situational acceptance: "It is out of your hands") and commitment tactics that involve committing to an alternative perspective (e.g., finding benefits: "This will help you grow"; enhancing controllability: "You can handle this"). Across a pilot study (N = 963, collected in 2022), a longitudinal study (N = 261, collected in 2021), and a round-robin study (N = 344, collected in 2024), we investigated how regulators' use of different tactics to manage loved ones' (i.e., recipients') emotions predicted recipient and relationship outcomes in diverse samples. Across studies, people commonly used each tactic to regulate recipients' emotions. However, only the commitment tactics (enhancing controllability and finding benefits) consistently predicted better outcomes across three studies-improved recipient emotional experience and feelings of being supported and, in turn, better recipient well-being and relationship quality-while both decommitment tactics (reducing severity and situational acceptance) were inert and sometimes linked to worse interpersonal outcomes. These findings highlight the complex implications of managing loved ones' emotions using reappraisal. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).
Zhao et al. (2026) studied this question.