Engagement and Disengagement: From the Basic Science of Emotion Regulation to an Anxiety Spectrum

Emotion regulation strategies vary in depth of processing. For instance, reappraisal requires greater engagement than distraction. This affects short-term and long-term response to stimuli. In this review, I describe how the "engagement-disengagement dimension" improves understanding of emotion regulation in normative contexts and in internalizing psychopathology. Part 1 reviews work from my laboratory and others, suggesting that relatively disengaged emotion regulation strategies (e.g., distraction), may have short-term benefits (e.g., faster implementation), but may come with long-term costs (e.g., increased processing of stimuli at subsequent encounter). Therefore, depending on the desired outcome, the adaptive selection of an emotion regulation strategy will be determined by extent of emotional engagement-disengagement. In Part 2, I describe how individuals with more comorbid internalizing psychopathology (e.g., multiple anxiety and depressive diagnoses) are characterized by disengagement from negative stimuli as measured by the late positive potential (LPP). In addition, I introduce a brain profile I have termed, HARM-A (heightened "alarm" and reduced motivated attention), which is characterized by a combination of heightened "alarm" (i.e., increased amygdala) and emotional disengagement (i.e., blunted LPPs) in response to negative stimuli. HARM-A prospectively predicts worse outcomes over 2 years in a mixed internalizing sample. As such, chronic disengagement from negative stimuli appears to contribute to more comorbid and more severe internalizing psychopathology. Overall, emotional disengagement can be beneficial in the short term but may be poorly suited to emotional coping in the longer term.