(PS2-B32) Daily Emotion Regulation Strategies and Fluctuations in Suicidal Ideation: An Experience Sampling Study in High-risk Adults from a Marginalized Community

Emotion dysregulation is consistently associated with individual differences in suicide risk in cross-sectional research (Colmenero-Navarrete et al., 2021), but much less is known whether emotion regulation (ER) strategies are useful idiographic (i.e., within-person) predictors of acute changes in suicide risk. This is particularly true for racial minority groups, which continue to be severely underrepresented in suicide research (Cha et al., 2017). The current study used experience sampling methods (ESM) to examine the day-to-day associations of suicide ideation (SI) and ER strategies in response to negative emotions in a group of racially diverse New Yorkers.

Sixty adults who attempted suicide or engaged in nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) in the past month were recruited from the Bronx, NY (56% female, 85% people of color, Mage=36.2 years). Participants reported on SI 4 times/day, and ER strategies used in response to their most intense negative emotional experience of the day 1 time/day, for 10 days. We hypothesized that days with greater adaptive ER engagement (talking to friends/family, acceptance, distraction, reappraisal), relative to one’s normative level over the ESM period, would be associated with lower same- and next-day SI, relative to one’s norm; while maladaptive ER strategies (rumination, suppression, substance use, NSSI) would be associated with higher SI.

Multilevel modeling revealed that, at the within-person level, no strategy showed any significant association with same- or next-day SI (rs = -.044 to .085). The between-person correlations were larger (rs = -.132 to .377), but only one was statistically significant (reappraisal; r=.377, p = .002).

Overall, on days when people engaged in more adaptive ER strategies, their SI was not any lower than their own average level of SI; and on days when they used more maladaptive ER strategies, their SI was not any higher than their average. Individual differences in tendencies to use specific ER strategies were also mostly unrelated to individual differences in average level of SI over the 10 days. The exception was the tendency to reappraise, which was unexpectedly related to higher than average SI. It is possible that engaging in reappraisal (more than one’s peers) does not equate to effectively implementing reappraisal to regulate emotions (Perchtold et al., 2019).

Both within- and between-person results were counter to our hypotheses. This may reflect a need for more nuanced understandings of ER strategies, such as considering effectiveness in implementing adaptive strategies, and effectiveness of maladaptive strategies in the short-term despite their long-term ineffectiveness as suggested by cross-sectional studies (Franz et al., 2021). It is also possible that, rather than using specific strategies, using a wide variety of strategies might be related to SI (Grommisch et al., 2019). These strategies might also operate differently in racially diverse groups compared to the majority-White samples that are typical in studies on SI. Our study highlights the importance of using micro-longitudinal methods to disentangle the effects of individual differences vs. daily fluctuations in ER strategies use and SI–particularly in underrepresented populations.