The Relationship Between Cognitive Reappraisal, Gender and Perceived Stress
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63331/upasw/33/25Keywords:
perceived stress, cognitive reappraisal, gender differences, university transition, first-year studentsAbstract
The transition to university is a significant life adjustment, often associated with increased stress and mental health challenges. This study investigated the relationship between cognitive reappraisal, gender, and perceived stress in first-year university students. It explored whether women report lower levels of perceived stress than men, whether higher levels of cognitive reappraisal predict lower levels of perceived stress, and whether gender moderated this relationship. Participants completed two questionnaires measuring perceived stress and cognitive reappraisal. The results showed no significant main effects of gender or cognitive reappraisal on perceived stress, and no significant interaction. However, an exploratory analysis focusing exclusively on women revealed that higher cognitive reappraisal was associated with lower perceived stress. These findings suggest that although gender did not significantly moderate the relationship between cognitive reappraisal and perceived stress, cognitive reappraisal may still be an important strategy for reducing perceived stress, particularly among women. This emphasizes the complexity of stress and emotion regulation during life transitions and highlight the importance of addressing sample imbalances.
References
Aldao, A., S. Nolen-Hoeksema, and S. Schweizer. 2010. “Emotion-Regulation Strategies across Psychopathology: A Meta-Analytic Review.” Clinical Psychology Review 30, no. 2: 217–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2009.11.004
Beiter, R., R. Nash, M. McCrady, D. Rhoades, M. Linscomb, M. Clarahan, and S. Sammut. 2015. “The Prevalence and Correlates of Depression, Anxiety, and Stress in a Sample of College Students.” Journal of Affective Disorders 173: 90–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2014.10.054
Brody, L. R., and A. H. Fischer. 2000. “The Socialization of Gender Differences in Emotional Expression: Display Rules, Infant Temperament, and Differentiation.” In Gender and Emotion: Social Psychological Perspectives, 24–47. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511628191.003
Chaplin, T. M. 2015. “Gender and Emotion Expression: A Developmental Contextual Perspective.” Emotion Review 7, no. 1: 14–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073914544408
Cohen, S., T. Kamarck, and R. Mermelstein. 1983. “A Global Measure of Perceived Stress.” Journal of Health and Social Behavior 24, no. 4: 385–396. https://doi.org/10.2307/2136404
Conley, C. S., L. V. Travers, and F. B. Bryant. 2013. “Promoting Psychosocial Adjustment and Stress Management in First-Year College Students: The Benefits of Engagement in a Psychosocial Wellness Seminar.” Journal of American College Health 61, no. 2: 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/07448481.2012.754757
Feng, G., X. Xu, and J. Lei. 2023. “Tracking Perceived Stress, Anxiety, and Depression in Daily Life: A Double-Downward Spiral Process.” Frontiers in Psychology 14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1114332
Ford, B. Q., P. Lam, O. P. John, and I. B. Mauss. 2018. “The Psychological Health Benefits of Accepting Negative Emotions and Thoughts: Laboratory, Diary, and Longitudinal Evidence.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 115, no. 6: 1075–1092. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000157
Garnefski, N., and V. Kraaij. 2006. “Relationships between Cognitive Emotion Regulation Strategies and Depressive Symptoms: A Comparative Study of Five Specific Samples.” Personality and Individual Differences 40, no. 8: 1659–1669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.12.009
Gross, J. J., and O. P. John. 2003. “Individual Differences in Two Emotion Regulation Processes: Implications for Affect, Relationships, and Well-Being.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 85, no. 2: 348–362. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.348
Kashdan, T. B., V. Barrios, J. P. Forsyth, and M. F. Steger. 2006. “Experiential Avoidance as a Generalized Psychological Vulnerability: Comparisons with Coping and Emotion Regulation Strategies.” Behaviour Research and Therapy 44, no. 9: 1301–1320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2005.10.003
Lee, E. H. 2012. “Review of the Psychometric Evidence of the Perceived Stress Scale.” Asian Nursing Research 6, no. 4: 121–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anr.2012.08.004
Moore, S. A., L. A. Zoellner, and N. Mollenholt. 2008. “Are Expressive Suppression and Cognitive Reappraisal Associated with Stress-Related Symptoms?” Behaviour Research and Therapy 46, no. 9: 993–1000. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2008.05.001
Nolen-Hoeksema, S. 2012. “Emotion Regulation and Psychopathology: The Role of Gender.” Annual Review of Clinical Psychology 8: 161–187. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032511-143109
Podsakoff, P. M., S. B. MacKenzie, J.-Y. Lee, and N. P. Podsakoff. 2003. “Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies.” Journal of Applied Psychology 88, no. 5: 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
Shields, G. S., A. Fassett-Carman, Z. J. Gray, J. E. Gonzales, H. R. Snyder, and G. M. Slavich. 2023. “Why Is Subjective Stress Severity a Stronger Predictor of Health than Stressor Exposure? A Preregistered Two-Study Test of Two Hypotheses.” Stress and Health: Journal of the International Society for the Investigation of Stress 39, no. 1: 87–102. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.3165
Troy, A. S., A. J. Shallcross, and I. B. Mauss. 2013. “A Person-by-Situation Approach to Emotion Regulation: Cognitive Reappraisal Can Either Help or Hurt, Depending on the Context.” Psychological Science 24, no. 12: 2505–2514. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613496434
Underwood, M. K., J. D. Coie, and C. R. Herbsman. 1992. “Display Rules for Anger and Aggression in School-Age Children.” Child Development 63, no. 2: 366. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131485
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Anuarul Universitatii "Petre Andrei" din Iasi & POLIS BOOKS Publishing House
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant this journal right of first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work, with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g. post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g. in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as an earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
