Abstract
Strong evidence indicates a bi-directional relationship between trauma and emotion regulation. A traumatic event often leads to heightened emotional responses and dysregulation; these responses may in turn affect post-trauma outcomes, promoting or preventing both distress and growth (O’Bryan et al., 2015; Mennin et al., 2015). Individual differences in gender, gender role, proximity to the event and trauma history have shown significant, independent influences on both emotion regulation tendencies and post-trauma outcomes. This study examines the effects of gender, gender role, proximity to the event and trauma history on emotion regulation strategies, and their subsequent effects on post-trauma outcomes in individuals exposed to the events of the 2013 Boston Marathon. Self-report measures and an experimental manipulation of emotion flexibility were completed by a sample of college student EMTs, medical professionals, emergency responders and community members (N=257, 65.8% male and 34.2% female) through an online, Qualtrics-based survey. Results indicated that both adaptive and maladaptive regulatory strategies were positively associated with distress and growth; and distress and growth were strongly correlated. Exploratory models for both growth and distress demonstrate that the impact of adaptive and maladaptive regulation depend on moderating and mediating factors. Individuals high in adaptive regulation, low in maladaptive regulation, low in event proximity and high in trait femininity reported less distress following a trauma. They also reported experiencing less growth. Among the individuals who did experience high levels of distress (likely those high in maladaptive regulation, coping flexibility and event proximity), high adaptive regulation and high coping flexibility predicted higher growth, particularly for females. When all factors were considered, emotional flexibility was independently protective of distress. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.