Some people, especially those in public service, do admirable things, like healthcare workers saving lives or first responders in car crashes. However, the emotional strain can lead to mental health issues, including PTSD. How can they handle such stress and stay well?
A new study from MIT‘s McGovern Institute found that focusing on social good can help people cope with distressing events. This strategy was as effective as other known methods, providing a new way to deal with challenging situations.
John Gabrieli, a professor at MIT and senior author of the study, said, “How you think can improve how you feel. This research suggests that focusing on social good can help those exposed to emotional stress improve their well-being.”
The study, published in PLOS ONE, is the first to test this strategy. Nancy Tsai, a postdoc in Gabrieli’s lab, is the lead author.
Emotion regulation is the ability to change how we experience emotions, which is crucial for good mental health. It helps people feel better during tough times. It positively affects emotional, social, cognitive, and physical health.
One emotion regulation strategy is “distancing,” in which a person imagines an adverse event as far away or from a third-person view. While helpful, this strategy may be less effective in socially charged situations, like a firefighter rescuing a family.
“In these cases, the ‘social good’ approach can be powerful,” said Tsai. This method involves seeing a negative situation as a chance to help others or prevent harm. For example, a firefighter might focus on saving lives to cope with distress. Tsai and her team, including Gabrieli, decided to study this idea scientifically.
MIT researchers recruited adults to complete a questionnaire about their demographics, personality, well-being, and how they handle stress. The participants were divided into two groups: one using the distancing strategy and the other using the social good strategy. In an online study, they were shown neutral images (like fruit) and disturbing images (like injuries). Participants were warned about the content and could opt out at any time.
Each group used their assigned strategy for half of the negative images. For example, the distancing group might imagine a distressing image was from a movie. In contrast, the social good group might imagine being a first responder helping others. They were asked to observe and note their emotions for the other half of the negative images. Researchers then asked participants how they felt after viewing each image.
The MIT team found that distancing and social good approaches reduced negative emotions. Participants felt better using these strategies than when they did not and found both methods easy to use.
While distancing had a more substantial overall effect, Tsai and Gabrieli believe the study shows that social good is instrumental in situations where distancing is impossible, such as rescuing someone.
They also found that people who effectively used the social good approach were likelier to see stress as enhancing rather than harmful. This suggests a link between emotion regulation and stress response.
Older adults were better at using these strategies due to their excellent life experience and better emotion regulation skills. Successful emotion regulation requires cognitive flexibility and adapting to different situations.
Gabrieli notes that this doesn’t mean professionals like physicians should detach from negative situations entirely but suggests the social good approach is a potent strategy to handle emotional demands in certain professions.
The team calls for further studies to validate these findings and develop new cognitive tools to help individuals care for themselves while caring for others.
Journal reference:
- Nancy Tsai, Jade Hawkesworth, et al., Social good reappraisal as a novel and effective emotion regulation strategy. PLOS ONE. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0305756.