Emotion regulation: how to manage your emotions and what research says helps

Emotion regulation does not only mean getting rid of feelings or holding them in. The psychologist James Gross defined it as the ways people influence which emotions they have, when they have them, and how they experience and express them (Gross, 1998). Staying away from a situation that would make you angry, seeing a situation differently and keeping anger from showing all count as emotion regulation.

A view widely used in clinical work adds another angle. The model behind the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS) treats four things as the core of emotion regulation: being aware of and understanding your emotions, accepting them, controlling impulses and acting in line with your goals while upset, and feeling you have access to strategies that work for feeling better. In this view, regulating emotions well does not mean the feeling goes away; it means you can keep doing what you set out to do while a hard feeling is there (Gratz & Roemer, 2004; Hallion et al., 2018).

The short answer: no single technique fits every situation. In a meta-analysis of experiments, reinterpreting a situation (reappraisal) had a small-to-medium effect, while trying not to feel the emotion at all had none (Webb et al., 2012). People who habitually hold their emotions in tend to feel more negative emotion and to get on less well with others (Gross & John, 2003), but that link may depend on culture (Soto et al., 2011). Naming and accepting feelings have been studied too, mostly in short experiments. Rumination, dwelling on feelings, had the strongest link with symptoms across mental health problems (Aldao et al., 2010). That is why researchers stress flexibility, switching approaches to fit the situation, over any one technique (Bonanno & Burton, 2013).

This guide covers where emotions can be regulated, how reappraisal and suppression differ, naming and accepting feelings, what you can try on your own and the evidence behind it, treatment when regulating emotions stays hard, and when to talk to a professional. mind.io has no emotion regulation test, and this guide prints no scale items and no cut-off scores. Why moods go up and down a lot is covered in the mood swings guide, and how to deal with anger in How to manage anger.

Gross’s process model holds that emotions can be regulated at five points as they unfold: choosing which situations to enter (situation selection), changing the situation itself (situation modification), deciding where to put your attention (attentional deployment), changing how you interpret the situation (cognitive change) and handling an emotional response once it has arisen (response modulation) (Gross, 1998). If you dread giving a presentation, for example, not taking it on is situation selection, rehearsing beforehand is situation modification, looking at someone who is nodding is attentional deployment, telling yourself “even if I shake, the content gets across” is cognitive change, and steadying your breath or hiding a nervous face is response modulation.

A 2015 review extended the model, splitting emotion regulation into noticing that regulation is needed, choosing a strategy and putting it into practice. It also set out evidence that different strategies have different consequences (Gross, 2015).

Three of the five points (attentional deployment, cognitive change and response modulation) have been compared in experiments. In a meta-analysis of 306 experimental comparisons in which people were instructed to use a strategy, attentional deployment as a whole had no effect (d = 0.00), response modulation a small effect (d = 0.16) and cognitive change a small-to-medium effect (d = 0.36). Within each family the differences were large: shifting attention elsewhere worked (d = 0.27), but concentrating on the feeling did not, and the estimate pointed the other way (d = −0.26) (Webb et al., 2012). These results come from short experiments that measured feelings, behaviour and bodily responses together, so they may not match what happens when a strategy is used for a long time in everyday life.

Situation selection is useful, but taken too far it becomes avoidance. In a meta-analysis of 114 studies (241 effect sizes) on people’s usual ways of regulating emotion and mental health problems, avoidance had a medium-to-large link with symptoms (Aldao et al., 2010). These are associations, so avoidance cannot be called the cause, but a growing list of situations you avoid is worth noticing.

The two strategies compared most often are reappraisal and expressive suppression. Reappraisal means changing how you construe a situation so that it has less emotional impact; expressive suppression means holding back the outward signs of what you feel inside. A 2002 review concluded that, in experiments and in studies of individual differences, reappraisal was often more effective than suppression. Reappraisal reduced both the feeling and its outward expression and did not affect memory, whereas suppression reduced only the expression, did not reduce the feeling, and actually impaired memory. Suppression also raised physiological responses in the person suppressing and in their conversation partner (Gross, 2002).

Studies of everyday habits point the same way. In a 2003 paper made up of five studies, people who often used reappraisal experienced and expressed more positive and less negative emotion, while people who often used suppression experienced and expressed less positive emotion yet experienced more negative emotion. Reappraisal went with better relationships and greater well-being, suppression with worse relationships and lower well-being (Gross & John, 2003). These are associations, so they do not show that reappraisal causes happiness.

Suppression can also affect a conversation. In experiments in which two women who had not met before discussed an upsetting topic, asking one of them to hold back emotional expression disrupted the conversation and increased the other woman’s blood pressure response. In the second experiment, suppression worsened the emotional experience of the person suppressing and raised blood pressure in both women. Suppression also reduced rapport and made it harder for a relationship to form (Butler et al., 2003). Only women meeting for the first time were studied.

The meta-analysis of experiments adds nuance. Holding back the outward expression of an emotion did reduce emotional outcomes (d = 0.32), but trying not to feel the emotion at all (d = −0.04) or suppressing thoughts of the event (d = −0.12) did not. Among forms of reappraisal, reinterpreting the situation itself (d = 0.36) and looking at it from a detached perspective (d = 0.45) worked better than reinterpreting your emotional response (d = 0.23) (Webb et al., 2012). It is worth reading this together with the 2002 review: hiding your face may help for a moment, but it does not reduce what you feel inside.

Still, suppression is not always harmful, because its effects may depend on culture. Among Americans holding Western European values, habitual suppression went with self-protective goals and negative emotion, and in an experiment suppressing made people less responsive in conversation, together with negative perceptions and hostile behaviour; these harmful effects were smaller when people with more Asian values suppressed (Butler et al., 2007). Only women students took part. A comparison of 71 European American and 100 Hong Kong Chinese students found that expressive suppression went with poorer psychological functioning, measured as life satisfaction and depressed mood, only among the European Americans (Soto et al., 2011). In a comparison of 380 students in Seoul and 384 in Miami, the Korean students reported brooding more often and the American students anger suppression more often. The link between reappraisal and depressive symptoms was stronger in the Korean sample, and the link between anger suppression and depressive symptoms stronger in the American sample (Kwon et al., 2013). All of these studied university students and most are association studies, so they cannot simply be applied to everyone in Korea.

Reappraisal is not always good either. In a study of 170 people, those better at reappraisal had lower depression when their stress was uncontrollable, but higher depression when it was something they could change. The authors suggested that when a situation can be changed, reappraisal may not help (Troy et al., 2013). Researchers call the assumption that a strategy is always good or always bad “the fallacy of uniform efficacy”, and name three components of flexibility: sensitivity to the context, having a range of strategies, and changing course in response to feedback (Bonanno & Burton, 2013).

The idea that putting feelings into words takes the edge off them is an old one. In a brain-imaging experiment in which people picked which of two emotion words matched the expression on a face in a photo, the response of the amygdala and other emotion-related areas was smaller than when the pictures were processed in other ways. The researchers suggested that labelling a feeling may dampen the emotional response by way of the prefrontal cortex (Lieberman et al., 2007). A later review concluded that labelling produces effects much like reappraisal on feelings, the autonomic nervous system, the brain and behaviour, but that it may not even feel like regulating an emotion while you do it (Torre & Lieberman, 2018).

It has also been tested in something close to real fear. In an experiment with 88 people who were very afraid of spiders, each was exposed to a live spider while labelling their feelings, reappraising, distracting themselves, or simply being exposed. A week later, facing a different spider in another setting, the labelling group showed a smaller skin conductance response (how much the skin sweats under strain) than the other groups, but self-reported fear did not differ between the groups (Kircanski et al., 2012). It was a small experiment, and the researchers taking the measurements knew which group each person was in.

Accepting feelings rather than pushing them away has been studied as well. In an experiment, 60 people with anxiety or mood disorders were randomly given a rationale for suppressing or for accepting their emotions and then watched an upsetting film. Distress during the film was similar, but the acceptance group showed less negative emotion while recovering afterwards; heart rate rose in the suppression group and fell in the acceptance group (Campbell-Sills et al., 2006). In a meta-analysis of 30 studies comparing acceptance with other strategies, however, acceptance was better for how long people could tolerate pain, with a small-to-medium effect (g = 0.43), but did not differ clearly from other strategies for pain intensity or negative emotion (Kohl et al., 2012). Acceptance was at least as useful as other strategies, but it does not fix everything.

A habit of dwelling on feelings is a warning sign. In the meta-analysis above, rumination had the strongest link with symptoms of the six strategies (a large effect size), while the links for reappraisal and acceptance, which are central to many treatments, were small to medium; the authors themselves called this surprising (Aldao et al., 2010). In a study in which 233 high school students reported on episodes of 27 emotions, why some emotions lasted longer than others was partly explained by how important the event was and how much people ruminated (Verduyn & Lavrijsen, 2015). Ways to ease rumination are covered in detail in Overthinking.

Most of the evidence for the approaches below comes from lab studies or small trials. Rather than treating one of them as the answer, pick what fits the situation.

1. Notice and name it. When a feeling rises, put it into words, spoken or written, such as “right now I feel hurt and angry”. In lab studies, labelling dampened emotional responses (Lieberman et al., 2007; Torre & Lieberman, 2018), but it did not always reduce what people said they felt (Kircanski et al., 2012).

2. When a feeling is overwhelming, shift your attention for a while. In experiments, distraction worked (Webb et al., 2012). Always looking away can turn into avoidance, though, so it helps to come back to the matter once the feeling has settled. What you can do right away when anger flares is covered in How to manage anger.

3. Step back and look again. Reinterpreting the situation and looking at it from a detached perspective were among the more effective strategies in experiments (Webb et al., 2012). You might ask: “Will this matter as much a year from now?” or “How would this scene look to someone passing by?” How to check whether a thought leans to the worst on little evidence is covered in the cognitive distortions guide.

4. First ask whether you can change it. When stress was something people could change, those better at reappraisal were actually more depressed (Troy et al., 2013). If you can change it, start with action to solve the problem; if you cannot, start with accepting it and seeing it differently.

5. Write about your feelings. Expressive writing means writing your thoughts and feelings about a hard experience. In a 1986 experiment, writing about both the event and the feelings helped more than writing about the feelings alone (Pennebaker & Beall, 1986; Baikie & Wilhelm, 2005). An early meta-analysis of 13 studies with healthy participants reported a medium-sized effect across health outcomes such as physical health and psychological well-being (d = 0.47) (Smyth, 1998; Baikie & Wilhelm, 2005), but a larger meta-analysis of 146 randomised studies found an effect that was real but very small (r = 0.075) (Frattaroli, 2006). Findings for emotional health have been less robust and consistent than for physical health (Baikie & Wilhelm, 2005). A meta-analysis of 39 randomised trials in physically healthy adults under stress found no significant long-term effect on depressive symptoms, although effects were larger with more sessions and more specific topics (Reinhold et al., 2018). Distress often rises briefly right after writing (Smyth, 1998). If you try it, write on three or four occasions for about 20 minutes each, and leave 10 minutes afterwards to settle. You can stop at any time, and it does not replace treatment (Baikie & Wilhelm, 2005). A few small studies found it harmful for adult survivors of childhood abuse and for people with PTSD, so for a major trauma, try it with a professional rather than alone (Baikie & Wilhelm, 2005).

6. Protect your sleep. In a meta-analysis of 154 studies (5,717 participants) that cut healthy people’s sleep experimentally, every form of sleep loss reduced positive emotion and increased anxiety symptoms; results for negative emotion and depressive symptoms were mixed (Palmer et al., 2024). There is a reason feelings seem harder to handle after a short night. If sleep problems continue, see insomnia: what helps.

7. Be kind to yourself. In a review of five studies on self-compassion, emotion regulation and mental health, emotion regulation mediated the link between self-compassion and mental health. All of the studies measured everything at a single point in time, so they cannot show cause and effect, and the evidence is preliminary (Inwood & Ferrari, 2018). Ways to practise are in How to build self-compassion, and research on mindfulness meditation is in the meditation guide.

Difficulty regulating emotions is studied as a shared factor across many problems, including depression, anxiety, substance use, eating problems and borderline personality disorder. In a systematic review of 67 studies of psychological treatment for these problems, whatever the treatment or diagnosis, emotion regulation difficulties fell significantly after treatment in all but two studies, and symptoms fell alongside them (Sloan et al., 2017). These are before-and-after comparisons, so they cannot show on their own that better emotion regulation is what reduced symptoms. CBT and acceptance-based treatments also give reappraisal and acceptance a central place (Aldao et al., 2010).

The best-known treatment that teaches emotion regulation skills directly is dialectical behaviour therapy (DBT). It was developed for borderline personality disorder; standard DBT combines a skills training group, individual therapy, telephone consultation and a therapist consultation team, and the skills cover mindfulness, interpersonal effectiveness, emotion regulation and distress tolerance (May et al., 2016). In a trial comparing standard DBT, skills training without DBT individual therapy, and DBT individual therapy without skills training in 99 women with borderline personality disorder and recent suicide attempts and self-harm, suicide attempts and suicidal thoughts improved similarly in all three treatments, while the treatments that included skills training reduced self-harm and depression more than DBT without skills training during the treatment year (Linehan et al., 2015). If you have thoughts of hurting yourself, do not carry them alone: call or text 988 in the US and Canada, or call Samaritans on 116 123 in the UK and Ireland, right away. Borderline personality disorder and its treatment are covered in detail in the borderline personality disorder guide.

DBT skills have also been tested in people without borderline personality disorder. In a pilot trial, 44 anxious or depressed adults with high emotion dysregulation were randomised to 16 weeks of DBT skills training or an activities-based support group. Skills training reduced emotion dysregulation (d = 1.86) and anxiety (d = 1.37) more, but was not superior for depression, where the difference was not significant (d = 0.73). It was a small trial in which 32% of the skills group and 59% of the support group dropped out, so feasibility needs more study (Neacsiu et al., 2014). A review of 17 trials using skills training on its own found preliminary evidence, but methodological limitations that rule out firm conclusions (Valentine et al., 2015). Which treatment fits depends on the kind and severity of the problem, so decide with a professional.

Having feelings, and sometimes finding them hard to handle, is not an illness. But if emotions often shake your work, studies or relationships, or you find yourself drinking, binge eating or hurting yourself to get through them, it is time to get help. A review of 18 studies on self-harm found converging evidence that it serves to regulate emotions: strong negative feelings come before it, and those feelings ease and relief follows afterwards (Klonsky, 2007). It may seem to bring relief in the moment, but it injures your body. If you have thoughts of hurting yourself, do not carry them alone: call or text 988 in the US and Canada, or call Samaritans on 116 123 in the UK and Ireland, right away. Self-harm and what helps are covered in the self-harm guide.

Difficulty regulating emotions shows up alongside many problems. If your mood changes a lot, see the mood swings guide; if your emotions and relationships have been unstable for a long time, the borderline personality disorder guide; if anger often explodes, How to manage anger; and if you have long held anger in until your chest feels tight, the hwabyung guide.

If your mood is low and things have lost their interest, the depression check-in (PHQ-9), and if worry and tension keep going, the anxiety check-in (GAD-7) can show where you are now. A self-check is not a diagnosis. If you score 10 or more on the PHQ-9 or GAD-7, or if you answer PHQ-9 item 9 (thoughts of death or of hurting yourself) with anything other than “Not at all”, whatever your total, talk to a professional; mind.io suggests doing so in each of these cases. If you have thoughts of hurting yourself, do not carry them alone: call or text 988 in the US and Canada, or call Samaritans on 116 123 in the UK and Ireland, right away.

In Korea you can go to a psychiatric clinic or a local mental health welfare centre; elsewhere, start with a family doctor or a local mental health service. What a first appointment involves is described in seeing a psychiatrist for the first time. If you have thoughts of ending your life, do not carry them alone: call or text 988 in the US and Canada, or call Samaritans on 116 123 in the UK and Ireland, right away. If you are in immediate danger, contact your local emergency services.

Q. Is holding feelings in always bad? A. No. Keeping an emotion from showing reduced emotional outcomes in experiments (Webb et al., 2012), and the harmful effects of suppression differed between cultures (Butler et al., 2007; Soto et al., 2011). Suppression does not reduce the feeling itself, though, and it can impair memory and raise physiological responses (Gross, 2002), so rather than always holding things in, it is better to use other approaches too, depending on the situation (Bonanno & Burton, 2013).

Q. Is it true that an emotion passes in 90 seconds? A. That is not a rule research has confirmed. In a study that asked 233 high school students how long recent episodes of 27 emotions had lasted, the median for shame, the shortest emotion, was 30 minutes whether an emotion was counted as over when it was first no longer felt or when the person had fully recovered, while sadness, the longest, lasted a median of 48 or 120 hours depending on that definition. The differences were partly explained by how important the event was and how much people ruminated (Verduyn & Lavrijsen, 2015). The study relied on memory and included only high school students.

Q. What are people who regulate their emotions well like? A. One view sees them not as people who feel nothing, but as people who notice and accept their emotions and keep doing what they set out to do while a hard feeling is there (Gratz & Roemer, 2004; Hallion et al., 2018). Flexibility is also stressed: reading the situation, choosing a fitting approach from several, and switching when it does not work (Bonanno & Burton, 2013).

Q. Is there a test of emotion regulation? A. Research and clinical work use questionnaires such as the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS). The original has 36 items and there are several short forms, but in a study of 427 adults seeking treatment for problems such as anxiety and depression, the “awareness” subscale, unlike the others, did not show strong internal consistency (Hallion et al., 2018). mind.io has no emotion regulation test. The self-compassion test can show how you treat yourself when things are hard.

Q. My feelings are so overwhelming that I don’t want to be alive. A. Please do not carry this alone. Reach out to a crisis line right away: call or text 988 in the US and Canada, call Samaritans on 116 123 in the UK and Ireland, or find a line at findahelpline.com elsewhere. If you are in immediate danger, contact your local emergency services.

References: Gross, J. J. (1998), The emerging field of emotion regulation: an integrative review, Review of General Psychology 2(3), 271-299, https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.271; Gross, J. J. (2015), Emotion regulation: current status and future prospects, Psychological Inquiry 26(1), 1-26, https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2014.940781; Gratz, K. L., & Roemer, L. (2004), Multidimensional assessment of emotion regulation and dysregulation: development, factor structure, and initial validation of the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale, Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment 26(1), 41-54, https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JOBA.0000007455.08539.94; Hallion, L. S., Steinman, S. A., Tolin, D. F., & Diefenbach, G. J. (2018), Psychometric properties of the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS) and its short forms in adults with emotional disorders, Frontiers in Psychology 9, 539, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00539; Webb, T. L., Miles, E., & Sheeran, P. (2012), Dealing with feeling: a meta-analysis of the effectiveness of strategies derived from the process model of emotion regulation, Psychological Bulletin 138(4), 775-808, https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027600; Aldao, A., Nolen-Hoeksema, S., & Schweizer, S. (2010), Emotion-regulation strategies across psychopathology: a meta-analytic review, Clinical Psychology Review 30(2), 217-237, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2009.11.004; Gross, J. J. (2002), Emotion regulation: affective, cognitive, and social consequences, Psychophysiology 39(3), 281-291, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0048577201393198; Gross, J. J., & John, O. P. (2003), Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: implications for affect, relationships, and well-being, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 85(2), 348-362, https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.348; Butler, E. A., Egloff, B., Wilhelm, F. H., Smith, N. C., Erickson, E. A., & Gross, J. J. (2003), The social consequences of expressive suppression, Emotion 3(1), 48-67, https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.3.1.48; Butler, E. A., Lee, T. L., & Gross, J. J. (2007), Emotion regulation and culture: are the social consequences of emotion suppression culture-specific?, Emotion 7(1), 30-48, https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.7.1.30; Soto, J. A., Perez, C. R., Kim, Y.-H., Lee, E. A., & Minnick, M. R. (2011), Is expressive suppression always associated with poorer psychological functioning? A cross-cultural comparison between European Americans and Hong Kong Chinese, Emotion 11(6), 1450-1455, https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023340; Kwon, H., Yoon, K. L., Joormann, J., & Kwon, J.-H. (2013), Cultural and gender differences in emotion regulation: relation to depression, Cognition and Emotion 27(5), 769-782, https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2013.792244; Troy, A. S., Shallcross, A. J., & Mauss, I. B. (2013), A person-by-situation approach to emotion regulation: cognitive reappraisal can either help or hurt, depending on the context, Psychological Science 24(12), 2505-2514, https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613496434; Bonanno, G. A., & Burton, C. L. (2013), Regulatory flexibility: an individual differences perspective on coping and emotion regulation, Perspectives on Psychological Science 8(6), 591-612, https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691613504116; Lieberman, M. D., Eisenberger, N. I., Crockett, M. J., Tom, S. M., Pfeifer, J. H., & Way, B. M. (2007), Putting feelings into words: affect labeling disrupts amygdala activity in response to affective stimuli, Psychological Science 18(5), 421-428, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01916.x; Torre, J. B., & Lieberman, M. D. (2018), Putting feelings into words: affect labeling as implicit emotion regulation, Emotion Review 10(2), 116-124, https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073917742706; Kircanski, K., Lieberman, M. D., & Craske, M. G. (2012), Feelings into words: contributions of language to exposure therapy, Psychological Science 23(10), 1086-1091, https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612443830; Campbell-Sills, L., Barlow, D. H., Brown, T. A., & Hofmann, S. G. (2006), Effects of suppression and acceptance on emotional responses of individuals with anxiety and mood disorders, Behaviour Research and Therapy 44(9), 1251-1263, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2005.10.001; Kohl, A., Rief, W., & Glombiewski, J. A. (2012), How effective are acceptance strategies? A meta-analytic review of experimental results, Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry 43(4), 988-1001, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbtep.2012.03.004; Verduyn, P., & Lavrijsen, S. (2015), Which emotions last longest and why: the role of event importance and rumination, Motivation and Emotion 39(1), 119-127, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-014-9445-y; Pennebaker, J. W., & Beall, S. K. (1986), Confronting a traumatic event: toward an understanding of inhibition and disease, Journal of Abnormal Psychology 95(3), 274-281, https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-843X.95.3.274; Baikie, K. A., & Wilhelm, K. (2005), Emotional and physical health benefits of expressive writing, Advances in Psychiatric Treatment 11(5), 338-346, https://doi.org/10.1192/apt.11.5.338; Smyth, J. M. (1998), Written emotional expression: effect sizes, outcome types, and moderating variables, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 66(1), 174-184, https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.66.1.174; Frattaroli, J. (2006), Experimental disclosure and its moderators: a meta-analysis, Psychological Bulletin 132(6), 823-865, https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.6.823; Reinhold, M., Bürkner, P.-C., & Holling, H. (2018), Effects of expressive writing on depressive symptoms: a meta-analysis, Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice 25(1), e12224, https://doi.org/10.1111/cpsp.12224; Palmer, C. A., Bower, J. L., Cho, K. W., Clementi, M. A., Lau, S., Oosterhoff, B., & Alfano, C. A. (2024), Sleep loss and emotion: a systematic review and meta-analysis of over 50 years of experimental research, Psychological Bulletin 150(4), 440-463, https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000410; Inwood, E., & Ferrari, M. (2018), Mechanisms of change in the relationship between self-compassion, emotion regulation, and mental health: a systematic review, Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being 10(2), 215-235, https://doi.org/10.1111/aphw.12127; Sloan, E., Hall, K., Moulding, R., Bryce, S., Mildred, H., & Staiger, P. K. (2017), Emotion regulation as a transdiagnostic treatment construct across anxiety, depression, substance, eating and borderline personality disorders: a systematic review, Clinical Psychology Review 57, 141-163, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2017.09.002; May, J. M., Richardi, T. M., & Barth, K. S. (2016), Dialectical behavior therapy as treatment for borderline personality disorder, Mental Health Clinician 6(2), 62-67, https://doi.org/10.9740/mhc.2016.03.62; Linehan, M. M., Korslund, K. E., Harned, M. S., Gallop, R. J., Lungu, A., Neacsiu, A. D., McDavid, J., Comtois, K. A., & Murray-Gregory, A. M. (2015), Dialectical behavior therapy for high suicide risk in individuals with borderline personality disorder: a randomized clinical trial and component analysis, JAMA Psychiatry 72(5), 475-482, https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2014.3039; Neacsiu, A. D., Eberle, J. W., Kramer, R., Wiesmann, T., & Linehan, M. M. (2014), Dialectical behavior therapy skills for transdiagnostic emotion dysregulation: a pilot randomized controlled trial, Behaviour Research and Therapy 59, 40-51, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2014.05.005; Valentine, S. E., Bankoff, S. M., Poulin, R. M., Reidler, E. B., & Pantalone, D. W. (2015), The use of dialectical behavior therapy skills training as stand-alone treatment: a systematic review of the treatment outcome literature, Journal of Clinical Psychology 71(1), 1-20, https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22114; Klonsky, E. D. (2007), The functions of deliberate self-injury: a review of the evidence, Clinical Psychology Review 27(2), 226-239, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2006.08.002