meaning of self regulation essay

• Type 2 Diabetes
• Heart Disease
• Digestive Health
• Multiple Sclerosis
• Diet & Nutrition
• Health Insurance
• Public Health
• Patient Rights
• Caregivers & Loved Ones
• End of Life Concerns
• Health News
• Thyroid Test Analyzer
• Doctor Discussion Guides
• Hemoglobin A1c Test Analyzer
• Lipid Test Analyzer
• Complete Blood Count (CBC) Analyzer
• What to Buy
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Medical Expert Board

What Is Self-Regulation?

• Self-Regulation Issues
• Ways to Improve

Self-regulation refers to the ability to control your behavior and manage your thoughts and emotions in appropriate ways. It’s why you go to school or work even though you don’t always feel like it, or why you don’t eat pizza for every meal.

Self-regulation typically begins with brain development between age 3 and age 7. However, certain neurodevelopmental disorders like attention deficit hyperactivity disorder ( ADHD ) can lead to challenges with self-regulation. Kids can struggle when routines are disrupted, while chronic stress in adults can interfere with self-regulation.

This article will help you to learn more about what self-regulation is and how to strengthen this important skill.

The Good Brigade / Getty Images

Self-regulation involves being aware of your behavior and how it can help you to reach your goals. The American Psychological Association (APA) defines self-regulation as “the control of one’s behavior through self-monitoring, self-evaluation, and self-reinforcement.”

People who develop self-regulation skills are able to assess whether their behavior is appropriate and can redirect themselves as needed.

Self-Regulation vs. Self-Control

While self-regulation may sound a lot like self-control, the two are defined differently. Self-control is about controlling and inhibiting impulses. Self-regulation, meanwhile, is a broader term that refers to the ways people steer their behavior in order to achieve particular goals.

Some models of self-control consider its role in short-term responses, while self-regulation is more of an overarching strategy for achieving and maintaining these goals. Self-control is a day-in, day-out part of self-regulation.

You may want to be healthy and fit, for example, and self-regulation is what sets up the framework so that you routinely choose more fruits and vegetables in your diet. Self-control is what keeps you from eating more chocolate on a specific occasion or skipping a workout on any given day.

Why Self-Regulation Is Important

Self-regulation helps people to handle stress and conflict while strengthening relationships and overall well-being.

Children often have the impulse to lash out physically when they're angry or upset—and sometimes adults do, too. Self-regulation helps us control those impulses and act in more appropriate ways. And being able to calm back down has physical effects, like slowing a pounding heart.

Emotionally

If a person is upset, sad, angry, or excited, self-regulation helps them calm down, regulate their feelings , and then behave in acceptable and productive ways. It also helps control emotions so that they are not overwhelming.

Self-regulation is necessary in order to learn and perform, in school or on the job. It helps people sit still at a desk, listen to what needs to be done, and refocus after completing a task.

Self-regulation allows people to behave in socially acceptable ways and build relationships by not letting strong emotions or impulses dictate their behavior.

Examples of Self-Regulation

At its most basic level, self-regulation is being able to manage your emotions and behaviors in order to function appropriately in everyday life. Examples of self-regulation include:

• Being able to handle intense emotions like frustration, disappointment, or embarrassment
• Being able to calm down after something exciting has happened
• Refocusing attention after finishing one task and starting another
• Controlling impulses
• Behaving appropriately and getting along with other people

Causes of Self-Regulation Problems

Self-regulation failure is common and both the causes and the consequences can be fairly trivial. One study looked at a number of self-regulation goals (healthy eating, saving money, staying calm) and found that in the preceding 24 hours, people experienced failure on about half of the five goals they said, on average, they were trying to meet.

Some setbacks are linked to confidence in the ability to self-regulate, or a specific set of circumstances or stressors. Others can be more chronic and serious. A history of trauma is often a part of self-regulation failure. So are other diagnoses including:

• Eating disorders
• Substance use disorders and addiction
• Chronic stress

In other cases, an impulse control disorder (like oppositional defiant disorder , or ODD) may be at play. This is a common diagnosis in kids and is often co-occurring in those with ADHD. Other conditions that can contribute to problems with self-regulation include:

• Compulsive behaviors and obsessions that override self-regulation
• Problems with executive function (decision-making about behaviors), which often have underlying medical reasons like a stroke or dementia

Researchers continue to explore environmental, genetic, and developmental factors that can contribute to problems with self-regulation.

How to Improve Self-Regulation

Like many coping skills, self-regulation can be strengthened and improved. However, what works for one person may not work for another, so feel free to try different approaches.

Self-Awareness

Self-awareness is being aware of one’s own emotions, behaviors, and thoughts. Being self-aware will help you understand your motivations and behavior choices.

Research suggests that intentional self-awareness programs with young children boost their capacity for self-regulating emotions, attention, and behaviors. One study found that young children exposed to yoga even used more language that reflected awareness of self-regulation skills.

Mindfulness

Mindfulness is a way of thinking that involves staying in the present moment and being aware of your environment, your thoughts, and how your body feels. Practicing mindfulness supports self-regulation by encouraging you to slow down and behave in a more conscious way.

A review of 18 studies in children across five countries found support for using mindfulness techniques to improve self-regulation and limit emotional and behavioral challenges.

Stress Management

Chronic stress can cause mood swings and difficulty concentrating which in turn can interfere with your ability to self-regulate. You can help get stress under control with stress management techniques that include:

• Deep breathing
• Getting enough sleep

One study of healthcare providers focused on how chronic stress affected a part of the brain called the prefrontal cortex , which plays a key role in self-regulation. Exercise, a healthy diet, and improved work-life balance improved their symptoms.

Self-regulation is an essential skill for physical, social, emotional, and mental well-being. Poor self-regulation can impact your life in detrimental ways, potentially causing problems at work or school and keeping you from developing healthy relationships.

It doesn’t always come easily to people, but techniques like self-awareness, mindfulness practices, and stress reduction can help you develop and strengthen your self-regulation abilities. If you find yourself struggling with self-regulation, you may find it helpful to talk to a psychotherapist. They can help you develop coping skills and tools that are specific to your needs.

Bockmann JO, Yu SY. Using Mindfulness-Based Interventions to Support Self-regulation in Young Children: A Review of the Literature . Early Child Educ J . 2023;51(4):693-703. doi:10.1007/s10643-022-01333-2.

Child Mind Institute. How Can We Help Kids With Self-Regulation?

American Psychological Association. APA dictionary of psychology.

Gillebaart M. The 'Operational' Definition of Self-Control .  Front Psychol . 2018;9:1231. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01231

Blair C, Raver CC. School readiness and self-regulation: a developmental psychobiological approach . Annu Rev Psychol . 2015;66:711-731. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015221

Nigg JT. Annual Research Review: On the relations among self-regulation, self-control, executive functioning, effortful control, cognitive control, impulsivity, risk-taking, and inhibition for developmental psychopathology . J Child Psychol Psychiatry . 2017 Apr;58(4):361-383. doi:10.1111/jcpp.12675.

University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Self-Regulation .

Adriaanse MA, Ten Broeke P. Beyond prevention: Regulating responses to self-regulation failure to avoid a set-back effec t. Appl Psychol Health Well Being . 2022 Feb;14(1):278-293. doi:10.1111/aphw.12302.

Arnsten AFT, Shanafelt T. Physician Distress and Burnout: The Neurobiological Perspective . Mayo Clin Proc . 2021 Mar;96(3):763-769. doi:10.1016/j.mayocp.2020.12.027. 

Ghosh A, Ray A, Basu A.  Oppositional defiant disorder: current insight .  Psychol Res Behav Manag . 2017;10:353-367. doi:10.2147/PRBM.S120582

Karlsson Linnér R, Mallard TT, Barr PB, Sanchez-Roige S, Madole JW, Driver MN, et al . Multivariate analysis of 1.5 million people identifies genetic associations with traits related to self-regulation and addiction . Nat Neurosci . 2021 Oct;24(10):1367-1376. doi:10.1038/s41593-021-00908-3.

Rashedi RN, Schonert-Reichl KA. Yoga and willful embodiment: A new direction for improving education .  Educational Psychology Review.  2019;31:725–734. doi:10.1007/s10648-019-09481-5.

National Alliance on Mental Illness. Managing stress.

By Jaime R. Herndon, MS, MPH Herndon is a freelance health/medical writer with a graduate certificate in science writing from Johns Hopkins University.

21 Self-Regulation Examples

Dave Cornell (PhD)

Dr. Cornell has worked in education for more than 20 years. His work has involved designing teacher certification for Trinity College in London and in-service training for state governments in the United States. He has trained kindergarten teachers in 8 countries and helped businessmen and women open baby centers and kindergartens in 3 countries.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Chris Drew (PhD)

This article was peer-reviewed and edited by Chris Drew (PhD). The review process on Helpful Professor involves having a PhD level expert fact check, edit, and contribute to articles. Reviewers ensure all content reflects expert academic consensus and is backed up with reference to academic studies. Dr. Drew has published over 20 academic articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education and holds a PhD in Education from ACU.

Self-regulation is the ability to control one’s emotions and behavior. That can include being able to control our thoughts, impulses , and even instinctual drives like our appetite and sexual urges.

When faced with a stressful situation, or one that could make us angry, some people are able to convert their initial reaction into a more constructive response. They can inhibit their impulse to react with the expression of strong emotion or engage in a negative action.

There are many examples of self-regulation in our daily lives. Not overeating even though we are looking at a delicious meal on the table is one. Forcing ourselves to hit the gym even though we feel tired is another. Not ramming our car into the person that just cut us off in traffic is one for sure.

Definition of Self-Regulation

Self-regulation can help us maintain our focus on a task, reach long-term goals , form healthy habits, and get along with others.

A scholarly definition of self-regulation is:

“The process by which a system [i.e. a person] uses information about its present state to change that state toward greater conformity with a desired end state or goal.” (McCullough & Carter, 2013)

There has been a tremendous amount of research on self-regulation. Research has shown how it can facilitate chronic pain management (Sauer et al., 2010), increase academic achievement (Kizilcec et al., 2017), and improve athletic performance (Toering et al., 2009).

Modern life is full of so many temptations. There are a lot of things out there that can distract us.

Developing self-regulation is important now more than ever. In fact, some of the most successful people are very good at self-regulation.

Examples of Self-Regulation

1. studying for exams.

Self-regulation is a necessity for successful students. When it comes to test time, most people feel anxiety, which can be a demotivating factor. This is normal and expected. What’s important is how you implement self-regulation activities to ensure you study regularly.

One way to self-regulate while studying is to create a study diary. This will mean you have clear and exact dates when you need to sit down to study, which can prevent procrastination.

Another great self-regulation method for students is the Pomodoro technique. This technique involves setting a timer for 25 minutes and working on one task until the timer goes off. Then you take a five-minute break. After four rounds of this, you take a longer break of 20 or 30 minutes. This technique can help you stay focused and prevent burnout.

2. Being Mindful

Mindfulness is about being present in the moment and observing your thoughts and feelings without judgment. This sounds easy, but it’s actually quite difficult to do.

When we are mindful, we are aware of our surroundings and our own inner state without getting lost in thought. We are able to be present in the moment and not get pulled into past memories or future worries.

Being mindful requires self-regulation because it is easy to get lost in our thoughts. We have to be aware of when our mind starts to wander and bring it back to the present moment.

One way to practice mindfulness is to focus on your breath. Breathe in and out slowly and pay attention to the sensations of your breath going in and out of your body. If your mind wanders, gently bring it back to your breath.

3. Holding your Tongue

Sometimes the best form of self-regulation is to keep your mouth shut. When we are angry or upset, it’s easy to say something we might later regret. If we can learn to control our words, we can avoid a lot of hurt feelings and conflict.

The next time you’re feeling angry or frustrated, try counting to 10 before you speak. This will give you a moment to calm down and think about what you want to say. Try to choose your words carefully and avoid saying anything that could be interpreted as an insult.

In these situations, it’s good to listen to your mother’s advice: “if you’ve got nothing good to say, don’t anything at all!” Similarly, I like the Stoic mantra: “Say less than is necessary.” This mantra means that you should be very conservative about what you say so you don’t say things you’ll regret!

4. Going to Bed

This is my cryptonite. I will sometimes stay awake very late because I’m terrible at self-regulating my sleep cycles. So, I have to learn to have the discipline to go to bed when it’s my bed time!

This is easier said than done, I know. But there are things you can do to make it easier on yourself.

First, try to avoid using screens (phones, laptops, etc.) for at least an hour before bedtime. The blue light from screens can disrupt our sleep cycles and make it harder to fall asleep.

Second, establish a bed-time routine and stick to it as much as possible. This could involve taking a warm bath, reading a book, or doing some light stretching.

Third, create a comfortable sleeping environment by ensuring your bedroom is dark, quiet, and cool. This will help your body to relax and prepare for sleep.

5. Not Throwing a Tantrum!

Children are terrible at self-regulation. They will cry and throw a tantrum if things don’t go their own way. As we become older, we learn to self-regulate so that we don’t appear strange. It’s against social norms to go around having tantrums as an adult!

Self-regulation is, therefore, one of the first skills we try to teach our children. Even when they’re toddlers and they don’t fully understand what is going on around them, we try to show them right from wrong and discourage tantrums.

As children get older, we move onto teaching our children the virtues of persistence, resilience, and self-control . By the time they’re in their late teens, hopefully most tantrums have disappeared, and our children learn that it’s not okay to lash out when we haven’t gotten our way.

6. Regulating your Tone and Volume of Voice

Some people don’t seem to be able to keep their voice volume low. I have a friend who talks REALLY loud whenever she is telling a story and she says she doesn’t even realize it!

But regulating the volume of our voice is just as important as the words we use. If we’re shouting, it puts people on edge and makes them less likely to listen to what we’re saying. Other people may just find it annoying and uncomfortable.

Similarly, regulating our tone of voice is equally important. Even when you’re angry, keeping a calm tone of voice can make a big difference in how people perceive you and whether they’re willing to listen to what you have to say.

7. Personal Hygiene

Keeping yourself clean and well-groomed is a form of self-regulation that’s necessary for both our health and social participation. It’s important to shower regularly, brush your teeth, and wear clean clothes, so we don’t get sick or smelly!

Personal hygiene also extends to our homes and workplaces. It’s important to keep these spaces clean and organized so that we can feel relaxed and comfortable in them.

We learn personal hygiene from our parents. In childhood, they teach use how to take care of ourselves and our bodies. We’re taught to clean our teeth before jumping into bed and clip our toenails when they get long. As we get older, we learn how to take care of our homes and work spaces.

8. Cleaning up After Yourself

Another way we teach our children self-regulation is by telling them they need to put one set of toys away before they get the next set out. By being persistent about this, we’re teaching our children to care for and respect their environment.

As we enter adulthood, we learn that it’s important to clean up after ourselves, both at home, in public, and in the workplace.

This helps us to keep the environment clean, prevent hygiene issues, and prevent clutter that can cause us to trip on things or even lose important valuables. We also learn that it’s important to respect other people’s property and not to leave a mess for them to deal with because that’s, simply, rude!

9. Self-Regulated Learning

By the time we reach university, the majority of our learning is self-regulated. We may attend lectures and seminars, but during the week we need to study the learning materials ourselves.

Therefore, many high school teachers try to teach and encourage self-regulated learning for students. It’s an important university-readiness skill.

There are a few things we can do to help us with self-regulated learning. First, we need to have a clear goal that we’re working towards. This could be getting good grades, passing an exam, or completing a project. Second, we need to break down this goal into smaller, more manageable tasks.

For example, if our goal is to write an essay, we need to break it down into smaller tasks such as brainstorming ideas, doing research, writing a draft, editing, and proofreading. Third, we need to create a timeline for completing these tasks so that we don’t leave everything to the last minute.

And fourth, we need to create a study plan and stick to it!

I also find giving students freedom of choice and control over their work motivates them to be self-regulated.

10. Being Punctual

One of the most important things we learn as we become more self-regulated is how important it is to be punctual. This means arriving on time or early for appointments, meetings, and events.

Being punctual is a sign of respect. It shows that we value other people’s time and that we’re organized and capable of planning ahead.

Personally, I struggle with punctuality. I haven’t mastered the ability to regulate my own time. I need to more effectively predict how much time I need to get ready and travel to the next appointment I have.

I’ve been working on the mantra: “If you’re not early, you’re late!” This makes me aim to be a little early to everything, so at worst, I’ll turn up on time!

11. Knowing Your “Hot-Button” Issues

Self-regulation is a lot about self-awareness. When a person knows what their “hot-button” issues are then they can do a lot to control their emotional reactions in those situations.

For example, if there is one person that seems to always disagree with you at meetings, then you can take steps to help regulate your response. Preparing yourself mentally before the meeting can help mute your initial impulse when they start to disagree. Their words will be less impactful because they have been anticipated.

If you are someone that knows yourself well, what you like and what really gets on your nerves, then you are a living example of self-regulation.

12. When You Don’t Send that Email, Yet

The invention of the internet has been a great thing for work. It makes researching any topic super easy and makes it possible to find information on just about anything in just a matter of seconds.

It has also made communication very convenient. Maybe a little too convenient. An email can be written and delivered to the entire office in minutes. Unfortunately, that is not always a good thing. Emails can be written in the heat of the moment, and that can mean trouble later.

Practicing the habit of not sending an email right away that involves a dispute is an example of self-regulation that can be good for your career.  

13. Exercising on a Regular Basis

Being diligent and keeping a firm schedule at the gym is a perfect example of persistent self-regulation. Some people just seem to be very self-disciplined . They hit the gym three times a week, no matter what. You will see them at every Zumba class, in full gear and ready to go.

Others, however, may be a bit less consistent. They can always find a good reason to skip a workout that day: feeling too tired, have a sore shoulder from the last workout, or really need to get those emails sent by the end of the night. One excuse may be as good as another, but they are all examples of low self-regulation.

14. Avoiding the Fast-food Drive Thru

If you are able to drive right past the golden arches when you are in a hurry and super hungry, then congratulations, you have just demonstrated self-regulation.  

It can be a real challenge. It is just so convenient to take a quick turn into the parking lot, place an order in the drive-thru, and then be on the way. The temptation is hard to resist. Hunger is a hard feeling to ignore and meeting a client on an empty stomach is never a good idea.

This can be avoided by planning your meals well or keeping a healthy snack in the glove-box. Protein bars can be very filling and nutritious as well.

15. Avoiding Social Media

Although the smartphone has been one of the world’s most remarkable gadgets, it has also facilitated one of the world’s easiest ways to be lazy. It is just too easy to lay down and watch a few short videos, or maybe a few dozen.

Before you know it, two hours have passed. In the meantime, that essay you need to start writing still awaits the first sentence typed and the gym has already closed for the day. Oh, and your laundry is not going to put itself in the washing machine.

Being able to keep yourself on-task and resist the temptations of social media is another example of excellent self-regulation.

16. Practicing Meditation

Meditation is a great example of self-regulation. By making a conscious decision to slow your breathing, you are exerting direct control over your respiratory system. Some forms of meditation also involve focusing your attention on a specific mantra or a visualized object.

Not only is meditation an example of self-regulation, but it is also an exercise that will improve your ability to self-regulate. It can increase your awareness of inner feelings and thoughts, which will then in turn, increases your chances of being able to control those feelings and thoughts.

Many of us have days that are filled with tasks and stress. Our To-Do lists can dominate our lives and be a constant reminder of work. Even though we might not feel like we have time to take 20-minutes out of the day to sit and breath slowly, it is an excellent way to instill calm and control anxiety.   

17. Not Hitting the Snooze Button  

This may be the best example of extreme self-regulation of all on our list. After sleeping for not enough hours to begin with, when that alarm goes off far too early in the morning, the temptation to just tap that snooze button is all too strong.

It takes a lot of discipline to resist not sleeping just a little bit longer. Controlling the urge to go back to sleep is a true exercise in self-regulation.

Fortunately, this kind of self-regulation will be good for our career. Getting to work on time is a big deal in a lot of workplace cultures.  

18. Engaging in Positive Self-Talk

One facet of self-regulation is psychological. That can be both emotional and cognitive. For example, when encountering a stressful experience, it can be useful to use positive statements to help calm yourself down.

Likewise, when you feel like quitting something, using positive self-talk can help us push forward.

For example, exercising can be particularly difficult to get through. It is easy to quit or take a break when feeling exhausted. Statements such as “keep going” and “you can do it” can help you get through those moments when it seems that you just can’t go any further.

If you don’t have a personal trainer or coach, relying on yourself will have to do. Using self-talk is a great self-regulation technique to persevere.

19. Practicing Hara Hachi Bu  

The Japanese have a practice of eating until they feel about 80% full. Then they stop. This helps them avoid overeating. There is no need to count calories and deal with all that anxiety.

It starts with not putting so much on your plate to begin with and trying to estimate what you need, realistically. So, you have to exert a little self-regulation at this point. Then, while you are eating, the goal is to only eat until you no longer feel hungry, but not yet full. This requires having an acute awareness of your hunger state and stopping just a little bit shy of being totally satisfied.

It is hard to do for sure, but the benefits are very healthy. Overeating can lead to a lot of unhealthy outcomes, but the Japanese have one of the lowest rates of heart disease in the world.

20. Taking a Much-Needed Vacation

Everyone needs a break. In some countries employees are required to work 50-weeks a year. But then, when it is time to take a vacation, they work some more. This is a perfect example of a double-sided self-regulation trap.

On the one hand, being so disciplined about work that you forgo vacation time can be good for one’s career. On the other hand, not being self-aware enough to recognize the need for down-time is bad for one’s mental health. All work and no play makes for a burnout victim waiting to happen.

In Japan, some people even work themselves to death. It happens so frequently that the Japanese even have a term for it, it’s called karoshi.  

21. Having Great Self-Awareness

Becoming more aware of our internal emotional states is a key step in regulating our reactions. This self-awareness can grow over time as we practice becoming more in tune with our inner state.

This starts with developing an emotional vocabulary. In addition to the basic words for emotions such as angry or sad, we can create our own lexicon for our feelings. This will make the labels have more meaning to us and our unique selves. Using terminology that has personal meaning can increase effectiveness of a task or accomplishing a goal (Miller & Brickman, 2004).

Having self-awareness is a component of self-regulation that will help us control our impulses. When we are on the verge of losing it with an annoying colleague or reaching for a third serving of dessert, a little self-regulation can go a long way.

Go Deeper: Self-Awareness Examples

What is Self-Regulated Learning?

Self-Regulated learning is a specific type of self-regulation that is applied in educational contexts. It involves giving learners responsibility for their own learning in order to encourage personal agency and accountability.

We generally begin to encourage self-regulated learning from about the age of 8-10. During this time, we encourage students to take more control of their own learning in order to promote hidden curriculum soft skills such as self-regulation , personal accountability, and positive self-esteem.

According to Zimmerman and Schunk (2011), self-regulation is a three-step process:

• Planning: In the planning stage, students make decisions about their learning in order to regulate it. For example, in the planning stage they may choose that their project will involve oral rather than written presentation in order to improve their public speaking skills.
• Monitoring: As students go through the learning process, they monitor their progress. This ongoing self-assessment . They are encourage to make regular changes to their work in order to stay on track and react to new and emerging challenges.
• Reflection: Students engage in self-reflection in order to see how well they went at self-regulation. Through the process of reflection, they come up with new strategies for self-regulation in future tasks.

Self-regulation is a valuable skill in modern times. Developing an awareness of our inner feelings will help us recognize anxiety before it gets out of control; not be impulsive and send those email rants to our boss; and keep those hot-button issues in check.

With the temptations we encounter so often, self-regulation can also help us avoid wasting time on social media; talk ourselves in to not quitting when we feel exhausted from exercise; and not taking the “easy-way-out drive-thru” when we feel starved.

Self-regulation is one of the most essential skills a person can develop to achieve success, whether in life or profession.

Kabat-Zinn, J., Lipworth, L., & Burney, R. (1985). The clinical use of mindfulness meditation for the self-regulation of chronic pain. Journal of Behavioral Medicine , 8 (2), 163-190. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00845519

Kizilcec, R. F., Pérez-Sanagustín, M., & Maldonado, J. J. (2017). Self-regulated learning strategies predict learner behavior and goal attainment in Massive Open Online Courses. Computers & Education , 104 , 18-33. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.10.001

Miller, R. B., & Brickman, S. J. (2004). A model of future-oriented motivation and self-regulation. Educational Psychology Review , 16 (1), 9-33. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDPR.0000012343.96370.39

Panadero, E. (2017). A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for research. Frontiers in Psychology, 8 , 422. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3389%2Ffpsyg.2017.00422

Sauer, S., Burris, J., and Carlson, C. (2010). New directions in the management of chronic pain: Self-regulation theory as a model for integrative clinical psychology practice. Clinical Psychology Review, 30 , 805-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2010.06.008

Toering, T., Elferink-Gemser, M., Jordet, G. and Visscher, C. (2009). Self-regulation and performance level of elite and non-elite youth soccer players. Journal of Sports Sciences, 27 , 1509-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640410903369919

Vohs, K. D., & Baumeister, R. F. (2004). Understanding self-regulation. Handbook of Self-regulation , 19 .

Zimmerman B. J., Schunk D. H. (2011).  Handbook of Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance.  New York, NY: Routledge. 

• Dave Cornell (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/dave-cornell-phd/ 23 Achieved Status Examples
• Dave Cornell (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/dave-cornell-phd/ 25 Defense Mechanisms Examples
• Dave Cornell (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/dave-cornell-phd/ 15 Theory of Planned Behavior Examples
• Dave Cornell (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/dave-cornell-phd/ 18 Adaptive Behavior Examples

• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 23 Achieved Status Examples
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 15 Ableism Examples
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 25 Defense Mechanisms Examples
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 15 Theory of Planned Behavior Examples

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

• Sign up and Get Listed

Be found at the exact moment they are searching. Sign up and Get Listed

• For Professionals
• Worksheets/Resources
• Get Help 
• Learn 
• For Professionals 
• About 

Find a Therapist

• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Marriage Counselor
• Find a Child Counselor
• Find a Support Group
• Find a Psychologist
• If You Are in Crisis
• Self-Esteem
• Sex Addiction
• Relationships
• Child and Adolescent Issues
• Eating Disorders
• How to Find the Right Therapist
• Explore Therapy
• Issues Treated
• Modes of Therapy
• Types of Therapy
• Famous Psychologists
• Psychotropic Medication
• What Is Therapy?
• How to Help a Loved One
• How Much Does Therapy Cost?
• How to Become a Therapist
• Signs of Healthy Therapy
• Warning Signs in Therapy
• The GoodTherapy Blog
• PsychPedia A-Z
• Dear GoodTherapy
• Share Your Story
• Therapy News
• Marketing Your Therapy Website
• Private Practice Checklist
• Private Practice Business Plan
• Practice Management Software for Therapists
• Rules and Ethics of Online Therapy for Therapists
• CE Courses for Therapists
• HIPAA Basics for Therapists
• How to Send Appointment Reminders that Work
• More Professional Resources
• List Your Practice
• List a Treatment Center
• Earn CE Credit Hours
• Student Membership
• Online Continuing Education
• Marketing Webinars
• GoodTherapy’s Vision
• Partner or Advertise
• GoodTherapy Blog >

What Is Self-Regulation and Why Is It So Important?

Self-regulation of biological creatures (such as you and me) occurs on many different levels. For example, someone who has good emotional self-regulation has the ability to keep their emotions in check. They can resist impulsive behaviors that might worsen their situation, and they can cheer themselves up when they’re feeling down. They have a flexible range of emotional and behavioral responses that are well matched to the demands of their environment. Thanks to neuroplasticity , the adaptability of our nervous systems, humans are fortunately able to improve their emotional self-regulation over time.

Our bodies also have the capacity for self-regulation. There are many examples. On a purely biological level, a well-functioning pancreas keeps our blood sugar in the range our body needs in order to function optimally. Our heart rate speeds up when we exercise, and our muscles need more oxygen and sugar. The heart rate slows when we are in a state of rest, and the muscles need fewer supplies from the bloodstream.

Similarly, the autonomic nervous system works to keep order below the level of our awareness. It regulates and balances many automatic functions of our bodies, including emotions. One of the most important (and frequently overlooked!) functions it regulates is our automatic, instinctive response to perceived threats in the environment. Our threat response system determines whether we are angry and want to fight , or scared and want to flee, or hunker down until the threat passes ( freeze ). This is known as the fight, flight, or freeze response.

When these responses are out of balance with our environment, we are not self-regulating well and we experience symptoms. This is why self-regulation is so important.

The fundamental goal of somatically based psychotherapy is to restore healthy self-regulation, resilience, and the capacity to be fully present in the moment. By integrating somatic tools into therapy, it is possible to work directly with symptoms “where they live”—in the person’s body and nervous system.

When our fear response is out of proportion to the current situation, we call that anxiety . It would be appropriate to experience a pounding heart, rapid breath, jitteriness, and intense fear if a grizzly bear were trying to attack us. On the other hand, these same physical symptoms are excessive if we are grocery shopping, conversing with a friend, or at home reading a book.

Here’s another example: When Jill was a little girl, her father often had bouts of rage. Since Jill was very small, she was incapable of standing up to him to actively protect herself. Had she tried, his rage likely would have increased, and she would have been physically overpowered. As a small child, she was dependent on her parents; she couldn’t flee by getting a job and moving. She learned that becoming still and quiet was usually effective in avoiding his attention and anger. As an adult, she still tends to “freeze” in many situations where being more active and assertive would be a more effective response. She also may experience fear and anxiety when there is no actual threat to her safety. We can say that because of Jill’s early upbringing, her capacity for self-regulation was disrupted. Now she needs support to develop improved self-regulation skills so she can function better and increase her enjoyment of life.

Whether or not it’s overtly stated, the goal of most therapy is to restore balance—self-regulation—in an individual, couple, or family. Since the threat response and related emotions are biological in nature, it is often useful to include awareness of the person’s bodily responses during the therapy session. For example, a person who has learned to notice when their heart rate is increasing and their jaw is clenching can take specific actions to stop a rage or panic attack before it really gets rolling.

In somatic psychotherapy, the therapist and person in therapy attend to the latter’s history, thoughts, emotions, and relationships, and the relationship between person in therapy and therapist ( therapeutic relationship ), just like in “regular” therapy. However, they also include a moment-to-moment awareness of what the person’s autonomic nervous system and body are “saying.” The person learns to have two-way communication between mind and body, which is often effective in restoring self-regulation and relief from symptoms.

The fundamental goal of somatically based psychotherapy is to restore healthy self-regulation, resilience , and the capacity to be fully present in the moment. By integrating somatic tools into therapy, it is possible to work directly with symptoms “where they live”—in the person’s body and nervous system. Over time, these efforts to restore self-regulation allow the person to move on with their life, stronger and more resilient than ever.

References:

• Cook, J. L., & Cook, G. (2009). Child development principles and perspectives (352-355) . New York, NY: Pearson.
• Definition of neuroplasticity. (n.d.). MedicineNet.com.  Retrieved from http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=40362
• Perry, B. D. (n.d.). Self-regulation: The Second Core Strength.  Early Childhood Today.  Retrieved from http://teacher.scholastic.com/professional/bruceperry/self_regulation.htm
• Self-regulation. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.dictionary.com/browse/self-regulation

© Copyright 2016 GoodTherapy.org. All rights reserved.

The preceding article was solely written by the author named above. Any views and opinions expressed are not necessarily shared by GoodTherapy.org. Questions or concerns about the preceding article can be directed to the author or posted as a comment below.

Please fill out all required fields to submit your message.

Invalid Email Address.

Please confirm that you are human.

Leave a Comment

Important because who wants to be around someone who can’t control their emotions?

I somehow feel that much of what is wrong is that some people never learn these skills as children so then they certainly don’t have them as an adult. Sorry but no one benefits when you let a child down in that way.

Often there are these things that happen to us in our everyday lives and if you are unable to self regulate then quite frankly they will probably make you flip your lid. If you have the necessary coping skills then these are not things that will send you over the edge. But of you don’t have those skills and you are unable to manage them in a healthy way then it could be very likely that someone will get injured or hurt because of the steady steam of emotions that you can’t control.

important for your own health too

You gotta have some self control if you expect other people to ever want to be around you.

Self regulation with emotions is extremely important. Impulse control is a must and i truly believe this all should be taught in schools K-12. Resilience needs to be taught, it is not innate and adults/parents need to understand and take lessons on this also.

Great site.

By commenting you acknowledge acceptance of GoodTherapy.org's  Terms and Conditions of Use .

* Indicates required field.

Search Our Blog

Browse by category.

• Uncategorized
• GoodTherapy.org Announcements
• Find Therapist
• For Therapists by Therapist
• FAQ/What to Expect in Therapy
• Personal Growth
• Self-Concept
• Myths in Therapy
• Topic Expert Roundup
• Women's Issues
• Sex/Sexual Concerns
• Grief and Loss
• social media

Notice to users

• Visit the University of Nebraska–Lincoln
• Apply to the University of Nebraska–Lincoln
• Give to the University of Nebraska–Lincoln

Search Form

• Self-Regulation

What is Self Regulation?

The ability to self-regulate has been viewed as a desirable quality throughout history because of its positive affects on behavior and the acquisition of skills (Reid, 1993). The appeal of self-regulation and its positive effects on behavior and educational outcomes has prompted much research in this area. "Self-Regulation refers to the self-directive process through which learners transform their mental abilities into task related skills" (Zimmerman, 2001). This is the method or procedure that learners use to manage and organize their thoughts and convert them into skills used for learning. Self-regulation is the process of continuously monitoring progress toward a goal, checking outcomes, and redirecting unsuccessful efforts (Berk, 2003). In order for students to be self-regulated they need to be aware of their own thought process, and be motivated to actively participate in their own learning process (Zimmerman, 2001). 

Why use Self-Regulation?

Self-regulation is desirable because of the effects that it has on educational and behavioral outcomes. The use of Self-Regulation techniques are a way to actively engage otherwise passive students in their academic instruction. Students need to view learning as an activity that they do for themselves in a proactive manner, rather than viewing learning as a covert event that happens to them as a result of instruction (Zimmerman, 2001). Allowing students to take a more active role in their education puts students in the driver's seat and in charge. 

Who is Self-Regulation good for?

Self-regulation techniques are widely used. Successful people and learners use self-regulation to effectively and efficiently accomplish a task. They will regulate different strategies and monitor the effectiveness of that strategy while evaluating and determining the next course of action. Generally, successful learners already utilize various forms of self-regulation. Instruction in the use of self-regulation is typically directed towards students who are not currently using such techniques, and consequently are not successful in educational settings. Through the use of strategies and self-regulation, performance can be greatly improved. The use of self-regulation techniques assists students in performing tasks more effectively and independently. For example, successful learners will constantly check their comprehension. When successful learners read a passage, and realize that they do not understand what they have read, they will go back and reread, and question or summarize what is that they need to understand. On the other hand, when a student with learning disabilities reads a passage, and realizes that they do not understand what they have read, they tend to shut down, or just continue to read because they do not recognize the goal of reading the passage. Students with learning disabilities tend to be passive learners, often failing to evaluate and monitor their own learning, in order to compensate they allow others to regulate their learning or rely on the assistance of others to successfully complete a task. They lack these essential executive control functions, which are necessary to complete complex academic tasks independently. Components of Executive Control Process: 

1. Coordinating metacognitive knowledge - Regulating cognitive and metacognitive knowledge, understanding one's own knowledge, and thought process. 

2. Planning - Using a deliberate and organized approach to attack a task.

3. Monitoring - Assessing comprehension while progressing through a task, and checking for effectiveness, testing, evaluating and revising strategies.

4. Failure detection - While progressing through a task, detecting when there is a misunderstanding or an error is made. 

5. Failure correction - When an error is detected, going back and correcting any mistakes. Through instruction in various self-regulation techniques students with learning disabilities can be successful at "the self-directive process through which learners transform their mental abilities into task related skills" (Zimmerman, 2001). 

Self-Monitoring

Different theories of self-regulation exist, but for our purposes the guidelines that these theories provide to direct interventions are more important. These guidelines are consistent with the various self-regulation interventions. The two major guidelines derived from theoretical perspectives are: 1. The behavior to be targeted has to have value to the individual intended to self-regulate that behavior. If the target behavior was not seen as valuable there would be no reason to self-regulate that behavior, it would serve no purpose. It is also important to keep in mind that the particular behavior itself may not be valuable or rewarding, but the effect that the behavior produces or the individuals' perception of the behavior may be valuable. 2. The target behavior needs to be both definable and observable. Defining the behavior specifically and objectively is essential. If the behavior is not defined in detail, it will be difficult or impossible to self-regulate. The behavior needs to be well articulated so that anyone would be able to understand the behavior being targeted, and the occurrence of that behavior can easily be observed. It does not need to be overt and observable to outside individuals, but it does need to be observable to the individual intended to self-regulate. Harris, Reid, and Graham (in press), describe four cornerstones of self-regulation: self-monitoring, self-instruction, goal setting, and self-reinforcement. We will define and describe each independently, however they are all interrelated and can be used independently or in combination. -Self-Monitoring of Attention

-Self-monitoring of Performance

-Self-Monitoring of Strategy Performance

-Implementing Self-Monitoring

-Common Questions

Self-Instruction

We often talk to ourselves. This spontaneous speech of this is referred to as private speech and serves no communicative function. It is part of normal early childhood development and tends to peak around age eight and to disappear by around age ten. Researchers realized that this private speech often served to help individuals perform tasks. These researchers utilized this phenomenon as an intervention called self-instruction in which individuals are literally taught to "talk themselves" through a task. Self-instruction uses induced self-statements. Self-instruction serves many purposes. It may aid in orienting, organizing, and/or structuring behavior. Children will use private speech to consciously understand or focus on a problem or situation and to overcome difficulties. The goal of self-instruction is to go from modeled, induced, strategic, task-relevant, private speech to covert, strategic, task-relevant, private speech.

-Functions of Self-Instruction

-Variables Which Affect Self-Instruction

-Types of Self-Instruction

-Self-Instruction Training

Goal Setting

Goal setting is a common practice among successful learners. Goals allow us to see progress that is made, enhance motivation, provide structure and focus attention, and serve an informational function. Goal setting also provides a logical "rule of thumb" for attacking a problem. In research and practice goal setting has been shown to be an influential and valuable means for improving performance. The expected and anticipated fulfillment gained by reaching or making progress toward a goal provides motivation to continue until the goal is reached or exceeded (Harris, Reid, Graham, in press). 

Properties of Goals

To use goal setting, it is important to consider the properties of effective goals. There are three critical properties of goals: 1. Specificity - Goals should be well defined and set clear standards. This provides the student with a thorough understanding of what is expected. This will also make it easier for them to gauge their progress. 2. Difficulty - This refers to how challenging the goal is for the individual. It is important to set goals at a moderate level of difficulty for the student. Goals should be set at a level of difficulty so that the student has to put forth effort and utilize resources, but are still attainable. Setting goals that can be achieved with little or no effort will not increase a student's motivation; setting goals that are too difficult will be overwhelming for students. 3. Proximity - Proximal goals are goals that can be completed in the near future. Distal goals are goals set to be completed only in the future (i.e. long-term goals). Proximal goals produce greater performance because they are more immediately attainable. Distal goals should be broken down into to several proximal goals set to reach that long-term goal.

Self-Reinforcement

Self-reinforcement occurs when a student chooses a reinforcer and self-administers it when criterion for performance is reached. For self-reinforcement to be successful, students should anticipate providing themselves with the reinforcer when they have reached an acceptable level of performance (after I get all my math homework done, I can go outside and play.) The reinforcer must also be readily accessible for the student to access, at least eventually. There are four steps involved in teaching children in self-reinforcement. 1. Determining standards and setting evaluative criteria - Students need to be able to understand when they have met the requirements necessary to be able to self-reinforce. For example, a student may set a goal of writing two pages of a report and when those two pages are complete they can play a video game for 15 minutes. They will need to determine their standards for writing two pages (organization, writing, revision, editing, or whatever it may be). 2. Selecting a reinforcer to be earned, and controlling access to that reward, making it only attainable after performance of the target behavior has occurred - The reinforcer needs to be something that the student can only receive after they perform the target behavior and are not able to obtain it otherwise. It cannot be readily accessible. 3. Performance evaluation to determine whether the set criterion was met - They need to be able to evaluate their performance against the set standards. For instance, using the writing example, they need to be able to evaluate their writing performance and decide if they have successfully met the standards of writing two pages. 4. Self-administration of the reward - The students need to be able to dispense, or provide themselves with, the reinforcer. This is crucial if the process is to be a successful "self"-reinforcement.

Bibliography

Zimmerman, B.J. (2001). Theories of Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: An Overview and Analysis. In Zimmerman, B.J. & Schunk, D.H. (Ed.), Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: Theoretical Perspectives (pp. 1-65). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Reid, R. (1993). Implementing self-monitoring interventions in the classroom: Lessons from research. Monograph in Behavior Disorders: Severe Behavior Disorders in Youth, 16, 43-54. Reid, R. (1996). Research in self-monitoring with students with learning disabilities: The present, the prospects, the pitfalls. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29, 317-331. Schunk, D.H. (1990). Goal setting and self-efficacy during self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 25, 71-86. Braswell, L. (1998). Self-regulation training for children with ADHD: A reply to Harris and Schmidt. ADHD Report, 6(1), 1-3. Harris, K. R., Reid, R., & Graham, S. (in press). Self-regulation among children with LD and ADHD. In B. Wong (Ed.), Learning about learning disabilities. San Diego, CA: Elsevier. Harris, K.R. & Schmidt, T. (1997). Learning self-regulation in the classroom. ADHD Report, 5(2), 1-6. Harris, K.R. & Schmidt, T. (1998). Developing self-regulation does not equal self-instructional training: Reply to Braswell. ADHD Report, 6(2), 7-11. Harris, K.R. (1990). Developing self-regulated learners: The role of private speech and self-instructions. Educational Psychologist, 25, 35-49. Berk, L.E. (2003). Child development. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

• Printer-friendly version

Cognitive Strategy Instruction

• Teaching Strategies
• Lesson Plans
• Mathematics
• Study Skills

About The Education Hub

• Course info
• Your courses
• ____________________________
• Using our resources
• Login / Account

The importance of self-regulation for learning

• Curriculum integration
• Health, PE & relationships
• Literacy (primary level)
•   Practice: early literacy
• Literacy (secondary level)
• Mathematics

Diverse learners

• Gifted and talented
• Neurodiversity
• Speech and language differences
• Trauma-informed practice
• Executive function
• Movement and learning 
• Science of learning
• Self-efficacy
• Self-regulation
• Social connection
• Social-emotional learning
• Principles of assessment
• Assessment for learning
• Measuring progress
• Self-assessment

Instruction and pedagogy

• Classroom management
• Culturally responsive pedagogy
• Co-operative learning
• High-expectation teaching
• Philosophical approaches
• Planning and instructional design
• Questioning

Relationships

• Home-school partnerships
• Student wellbeing NEW
• Transitions

Teacher development

• Instructional coaching
• Professional learning communities
• Teacher inquiry
• Teacher wellbeing
• Instructional leadership
• Strategic leadership

Learning environments

• Flexible spaces
• Neurodiversity in Primary Schools
• Neurodiversity in Secondary Schools

Self-regulation is the process by which students monitor and control their cognition, motivation, and behaviour in order to achieve certain goals. There are several interweaving theories of self-regulation, but most common models conceptualise self-regulation in terms of a series of steps involving forethought or planning, performance, and reflection [i] [ii] . These steps can be explicitly taught and, while self-regulation increases to some extent with age, the research is clear that self-regulation can be improved and that the role of the teacher is crucial in supporting and promoting self-regulated learning. What is more, students’ emotions and their beliefs about their own ability play a key role in the development and exercise of self-regulation, and teachers can further support self-regulation by teaching students about growth mindset and the role of the emotions in learning .

The first step in self-regulated learning is to plan and set goals . Goals are guideposts that students use to check their own progress. Setting goals involves activating prior knowledge about the difficulty of the task and about one’s own ability in that content area. Students may weigh in their mind how long an activity may take and set a time management plan in place. They may also think about particular learning strategies (such as asking themselves questions as they read) that they will use in reaching their goal/s.

Students self-regulate by focusing their energy and attention on the task at hand. This next step involves exercising control. Control can be exercised by implementing any of the learning strategies (such as rehearsal, elaboration, summarising or asking themselves questions) chosen in the first step. Help-seeking can also be a form of control, but only when the learner uses it to develop their own skill or understanding: help-seeking is not considered self-regulatory behaviour when it is used as a crutch to arrive at the answer without the hard work. Control can also take the form of using attention-focusing strategies such as turning off all music, sitting alone, or going to the library, and it involves postponing enjoyable activities in order to make progress towards one’s goals. Simply put, control is general persistence to stick with the strategies that work.

Next, self-regulated learners monitor progress towards their goal. Individuals can monitor their own understanding, motivation, feelings, or behaviour towards a goal. For example, by using the metacognitive strategy they decided to use in the goal-setting stage (asking themselves questions), students can clarify for themselves what they do and do not yet know. Other ways of self-monitoring include keeping track of how much studying truly gets done with a study group, or noticing which contexts and environments allow them to focus on their work.

Finally, students use the information gathered through the previous self-evaluation to metacognitively reflect and respond . A student’s confidence in their own abilities will shape how they reflect on their progress or lack thereof. For example, a student with a stable, high belief that they are capable will attribute a low grade on a math test to their lack of sleep the night before or their minimal study time as opposed to a lack of intelligence. Responding to a self-evaluation functions like a thermostat, either turning up the dial on effort to increase progress towards one’s goals or easing back to focus on other tasks. This adjustment can manifest as help-seeking behaviour, persistence, or shifting learning strategies.

Why is self-regulation important?

It is increasingly important that students are able to proactively evaluate and improve upon their own learning. In a rapidly changing world, successful individuals must be life-long learners who are metacognitive about and able to effectively evaluate their learning. Within the education system, students without the ability to focus their attention and maintain perseverance will be constantly pulled left and right by their immediate impulses. Furthermore, students who fail to learn self-evaluation strategies will not be able to effectively direct their attention towards the areas that need it the most. While some students may find poor study conditions, confusing lessons or difficult texts to be insurmountable obstacles, self-regulation allows learners to navigate these conditions by discovering solutions that work.

In addition to developing personal responsibility about learning, self-regulation also solidifies the content of learning. Self-regulation practices improve the encoding of knowledge and skills in memory, especially in reading comprehension and writing. [iii] Research has also identified that self-regulation strategies are associated with increased student effort and motivation, improved scores on standardised tests and general preparedness for class.

How do we cultivate self-regulation?

As discussed above, the self-regulation process is composed of a series of steps. These steps are not rigid in their order. In actuality, self-regulated learners engage in many of these processes simultaneously or shift the steps as they become adept self-regulators. To teach and develop student self-regulation as a whole, teachers can support each of the underlying stages. It is also important to support students’ self-efficacy, encourage them to adopt a growth mindset and prioritise learning over grades and marks.

Match the form of learning with appropriate strategies

In this first stage, students identify particular learning strategies that fit with their goals. Basic learning tasks such as encoding information for memory recall are best learned through rehearsal, organisation or categorisation, mnemonic devices, or paraphrasing the information. However, more elaborate strategies are used when students are asked to make information meaningful. In building connections between new concepts and a learner’s existing knowledge, students may choose to list underlying causes or themes, outline the structure of the process or paper, or diagram spatial relationships to create a network of ideas. This is not a comprehensive catalogue of learning strategies but serves to illustrate the value in carefully choosing a learning strategy to align with goals. It is important for teachers to explicitly teach a range of learning strategies, and to enable and support students to determine which form of learning strategy is most appropriate for the type of work.

Always include positive feedback

Maintaining attention throughout a task takes practice. However, teachers can support students’ focus through positive feedback. Students often adopt their teacher’s evaluations of their work as their own, which means that teachers can highly influence a student’s persistence in engaging with a task or giving up. In addition, developing a culture around celebrating mistakes as opportunities to learn is crucial. Authentically discussing areas of improvement allows room for growth, and an inclusion of positive feedback should not be interpreted as giving exclusively positive feedback. Teachers can also use their expertise to differentiate their level of positive and negative feedback according to student self-efficacy in a particular task.

Maintain an environment conducive to focus

Teachers can ensure that the study environment is conducive to focus, as a relatively quiet space for individual work is invaluable. Beyond this, students learn how to regulate their own attention and impulses best through sustained and regular practice, increasing in duration each session. While collaboration and discussion are an important part of learning, self-regulation becomes much more challenging in a noisy environment. In secondary education this is particularly important, as the higher critical thinking skills required by adolescents are severely inhibited by distractions. Teachers can further support the development of self-regulation by providing complex, open-ended tasks that give students the opportunity to practise managing distractions and maintaining focus while tackling increasingly challenging academic work.

Guide students to track their progress

At the heart of monitoring understanding lies the question: ‘what do I know, and how can I improve?’ Students can push themselves to become aware of the limits of their own knowledge through recall, practice and extension, depending on the nature of the goal. One monitoring strategy might be summarising the main points of a lesson following direct instruction. A student trying to increase her reading comprehension may pause to ask herself questions about the text (at varying levels of complexity).

Some students may wish to improve their time management skills. These students would benefit from keeping a record of how they spend their time and then comparing it with their task goals. For example, I may believe that two hours of studying with a study group each week is a strong plan in preparing for a test at the end of the term. However, I may in fact find that one of the two hours is generally spent socialising. This new information can then be used to shift my behaviour moving forward.

Practise evaluating ‘like a detective’

In the reflection and response stage, students utilise feedback from the monitoring stage to inform their shift in learning strategies or effort moving forward. This requires a high level of resilience in order to bounce back from the inevitable highs and lows in learning. Similarly, it also necessitates metacognition to dig into why certain strategies may not work, and why others might be more effective moving forward. These metacognitive strategies can be taught explicitly through talking with students about how to be a detective in reflecting on their areas of strength or growth. In addition, resilience can be fostered through conversations surrounding growth mindset, and context- rather than person-specific attribution of failure. Encouraging students to attribute poor performance on a test to lack of preparation rather than unintelligence, and supporting students to respond to feedback with an understanding that achievement is variable based on effort rather than stable personality traits, are highly predictive of the development of positive self-regulation in students.

For example, a student who has failed a maths test may feel like giving up completely in maths. However, she demonstrates emotional resilience and decides to reflect on which particular problems gave her trouble in order to shift her learning strategies. On reflection, she realises that during the previous term she never went to the library by herself, summarised the material to herself following a lesson, or asked the teacher for help. She considers the merit of these changes, how she will implement them, and makes a plan to manage her time accordingly.

Measuring self-regulation

Periodically evaluating students’ social-emotional learning serves the dual purpose of informing the teacher of their students’ progress and wellbeing, and prompting students to practise self-awareness. While formal school-wide social-emotional assessments are valuable for collecting comprehensive data, these measures are time-consuming and cannot practically be implemented more than once or twice each year. For these formal assessments, one reliable measure with strong evidence of validity is the Panorama Social-Emotional Learning Survey. However, on a fortnightly or monthly basis, teachers can informally gauge student self-regulation by asking the following questions:

• When you get stuck while learning something new, how likely are you to try a different strategy? (Not at all likely/Quite likely/Likely/Highly likely)
• Before you start on a challenging project, how often do you think about the best way to approach the project? (Almost never/Sometimes/Fairly often/Almost always)
• Overall, how well do your learning strategies help you learn and focus more effectively? (Not at all well/Quite well/Well/Very well)
• How often do you stay focused on the same goal for several months at a time? (Almost never/Sometimes/Fairly often/Almost always)
• When you are working on a project that matters a lot to you, how focused can you stay when there are lots of distractions? (Not at all focused/Quite focused/Focused/Very focused)
• If you have a problem while working towards an important goal, how well can you keep working? (Not at all well/Quite well/Well/Very well)
• How consistently do you pay attention and resist distractions? (Not at all consistently/Quite consistently/Consistently/Very consistently)
• When you work independently, how often do you stay focused? (Almost never/Sometimes/Fairly often/Almost always)
• How often do you follow through in completing the goals you set for yourself? (Almost never/Sometimes/Fairly often/Almost always)
• How do you keep yourself motivated when a concept or lesson is not inherently interesting to you? _
• When you feel yourself becoming distracted, do you try to counteract this effect? How? ________
• The last time you experienced a setback in school, how did you respond? _______

Boekaerts, M. (1999). Self-regulated learning: Where we are today. International Journal of Educational Research , 31 (6), 445-457.

Murray, D. W., & Rosanbalm, K. (2017). Promoting self-regulation in adolescents and young adults: A practice brief. OPRE Report #2015-82. Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Panadero, E. (2017). A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for research. Frontiers in Psychology , 8 , 422.

Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekarts, P.R. Pintrich & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Regulation (pp. 451-502). San Diego & London: Academic Press.

Weinstein, C. E., Husman, J., & Dierking, D. R. (2000). Self-regulation interventions with a focus on learning strategies. In M. Boekarts, P.R. Pintrich & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Regulation (pp. 727-747). San Diego & London: Academic Press.

Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. F. (1998). Studying as self-regulated learning. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 277-304). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Zimmerman, B. J. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview. Educational Psychologist , 25 (1), 3-17.

Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice , 41 (2), 64-70.

[i] Pintrich (2000).

[ii] Zimmerman (2002).

[iii] Zimmerman (2002).

PREPARED FOR THE EDUCATION HUB BY

Claire Chuter

Claire is a Ph.D. student at Johns Hopkins University – School of Education. Her primary interest lies in improving students’ empathy through virtual reality perspective-taking activities. Previously, Claire conducted research as a consultant for the non-profit organization Opportunity Education, as well as teaching in K-12 settings for four years. She holds a B.A. in Italian Studies, a B.S. in Human Development, and an M.A. in Education from the University of California, Davis. Claire enjoys developing guides with The Education Hub for teachers as they support students in their personal and academic lives.

Download this resource as a PDF

Please provide your email address and confirm you are downloading this resource for individual use or for use within your school or early childhood education centre only, as per our Terms of Use . Other users should contact us to ask about for permission to use our resources.

Interested in * —Please choose an option— Early childhood education (ECE) Schools Both ECE and schools I agree to abide by The Education Hub's Terms of Use.

Did you find this article useful?

If you enjoyed this content, please consider making a charitable donation.

Become a supporter for as little as $1 a week – it only takes a minute and enables us to continue to provide research-informed content for teachers that is free, high-quality and independent.

Become a supporter

Get unlimited access to all our webinars

Buy a webinar subscription for yourself, your school or centre and enjoy savings of up to 25%, the education hub has changed the way it provides webinar content, to enable us to continue creating our high-quality content for teachers., an annual subscription of just nz$60+gst per person provides access to all our live webinars for a whole year, plus the ability to watch any of the recordings in our archive. alternatively, you can buy access to individual webinars for just $9.95+gst each., we welcome group enrolments, and offer discounts of up to 25%. simply follow the instructions to indicate the size of your group, and we'll calculate the price for you. , unlimited annual subscription.

• All live webinars for 12 months
• Access to our archive of over 80 webinars
• Personalised certificates
• Group savings of up to 25%

The Education Hub’s mission is to bridge the gap between research and practice in education. We want to empower educators to find, use and share research to improve their teaching practice, and then share their innovations. We are building the online and offline infrastructure to support this to improve opportunities and outcomes for students. New Zealand registered charity number: CC54471

We’ll keep you updated

Click here to receive updates on new resources.

Interested in * —Please choose an option— Early childhood education (ECE) Schools Both ECE and schools

Follow us on social media

Like what we do please support us.

© The Education Hub 2024 All rights reserved | Site design: KOPARA

• Terms of use
• Privacy policy

Privacy Overview

Thanks for visiting our site. To show your support for the provision of high-quality research-informed resources for school teachers and early childhood educators, please take a moment to register.

Thanks, Nina

Self-Control

What self-regulation is and how to build it, everything you want to know about controlling your behavior..

Posted January 23, 2023 | Reviewed by Michelle Quirk

• What Is Self-Control?
• Take our Anger Management Test
• Find a therapist to help with self-control
• Self-regulation may involve control over our thoughts, emotions, impulses, appetites, or task performance.
• Some behaviors can be stopped simply by making it really unpleasant or impossible to engage in these behaviors.
• By regularly working toward building new skills, we hone our ability to regulate our behavior.

Do you ever wonder why we humans act differently than each other? Why do some people indulge in sweet treats when they're on a diet while others seem to manage not eating junk food on a diet? Well, it all comes down to self-regulation —or how well we control our own behavior. In this post, we’ll talk about the science behind self-regulation and offer some strategies to help you regulate your behavior.

Self-regulation may involve control over our thoughts, emotions , impulses, appetites, or task performance. Self-regulation is often thought to be the same thing as self-control (Vohs & Baumeister, 2004), and it usually involves stopping or inhibiting an action although it sometimes involves initiating an action (Baumeister, 2014).

Self-regulation may be behavioral or cognitive (or both).

• ​Behavioral self-regulation involves controlling behavior. We might opt not to punch someone in the face or we might opt to practice the violin in preparation for a recital. We are engaging (or not engaging) in a behavior.
• Cognitive self-regulation involves the control of thoughts. Maybe we try not to think about our romantic partner who just broke up with us or we try to shift our thoughts to being grateful for our bosses even when they stress us out . Often, cognitive self-regulation precedes behavioral self-regulation. That’s because shifting our thoughts is often a key step in changing our behavior.

Conscious Self-Regulation Versus Unconscious Self-Regulation

Self-regulation can also be conscious or nonconscious. For example, we might consciously control our anxiety by engaging in a technique like deep breathing. Or, we might unconsciously regulate our anxiety by having an inherent habit of focusing on other things that make us less anxious. It’s also possible that self-regulation can fall somewhere between conscious and unconscious (Vohs & Baumeister, 2004). ​

How to Boost Your Self-Regulation Skills

So, what can you do to increase your self-regulation skills? Here are some ideas:

1. Make it hard to lose self-control.

In Dan Ariely’s Ted Talk, he shares examples of how “bad” behaviors were stopped simply by making it really unpleasant or impossible to engage in these behaviors. For example, he mentions an alarm clock that donates to a charity you hate every time you hit the snooze button. Here are some other tricks that can make self-control a bit easier by making it hard to engage in undesired behaviors:

• Dieting . Remove all junk food from the house. Place a bowl of healthy snacks on the counter (like apples). Keep a healthy snack with you at all times so you don’t resort to buying junk food.
• Smoking . Throw away all cigarettes. Try not to spend time with smokers. Go to places where smoking is not allowed.
• Using your smartphone. Remove all tempting apps from your phone. Change your home screen to greyscale to make it less enticing. Plug your phone into the charger in the living room instead of your bedroom so you’re less likely to use it at night.
• Studying. Make a bet with your friend that you’ll get an A, and if you don’t, then you have to pay them money.
• Waking up early. Put your alarm clock on the other side of the room so you have to get up to hit the snooze button.
• Exercising. Put your shoes and workout clothes next to your bed. Agree to meet a friend at the gym every day so you’ll feel guilty if you don’t show up.

2. Give yourself homework.

One study showed that kids actually developed self-regulation skills through homework. Homework involves motivating yourself , inhibiting distractions, sticktoitiveness, managing time, setting goals , self-reflecting on efforts, and delay of gratification (Ramdass & Zimmerman, 2011).

As adults, we can use this strategy, too. We can give ourselves “homework” assignments that require us to develop our skills. For example, we might give ourselves the following homework assignments:

• Spend 30 minutes per day using a foreign language app to learn a new language.
• Study for an exam that can help us get an advanced degree or certification.
• Take an online course.
• Devote a few hours on Saturdays to developing a new skill like car mechanics or carpentry.

By regularly working toward building new skills, we hone our ability to regulate our behavior, and it gets easier to practice self-control.

A version of this post also appears on The Berkeley Well-Being Institute 's Web site.

​Baumeister, R. F. (2014). Self-regulation, ego depletion, and inhibition. Neuropsychologia, 65, 313-319.

Ramdass, D., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2011). Developing self-regulation skills: The important role of homework. Journal of advanced academics, 22(2), 194-218.

Vohs, K. D., & Baumeister, R. F. (2004). Understanding self-regulation. Handbook of self-regulation, 19.

Tchiki Davis, Ph.D. , is a consultant, writer, and expert on well-being technology.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Sticking up for yourself is no easy task. But there are concrete skills you can use to hone your assertiveness and advocate for yourself.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

Promoting Self-Regulation and Critical Reflection in the Writing Classroom

by Nilakshi Herath | 24 Jun 2021

Self-regulated learning is an active, constructive process whereby students learn to set goals and then to monitor, regulate, and control their cognition, motivation, and behavior…  ( Pintrich, 2000).   In tertiary level ESL writing classes, most students very often tend to remain passive and unmotivated because they lack self-regulation and critical reflection, which are crucial in producing classroom assignments in terms of reflective essays and independent compositions.    However, self-regulation does not come easily and calls for teachers to use instructional practices that foster students’ self-regulation.  This resource shares some of the best practices to foster students’ self-regulation in the writing classroom.

Resource Type: Teaching Tips

Audience: University

Audience Language Proficiency: Intermediate

• Critical thinking involves a variety of skills such as identifying a particular source of information and reflecting on whether or not that information is consistent with one's prior knowledge. So, activities such as engaging students in a classroom debate on a controversial issue prior to writing a persuasive essay or providing them with graphs and tables of real issues to write paragraphs will help develop critical thinking of students.

When students start a writing assignment, they often jump in without understanding what they are supposed to do. Task analysis is a strategy which can be used to avoid that.

Goal setting is effective in directing students to be focused on what they write. For an example, if a student is writing a story, a challenging writing goal may be to show the emotions of the characters through dialogue, rather than mere description.

Think-pair-share is an effective activity which enhances self-regulation. This short activity allows for a break  during lectures so students can answer a question posed by the instructor. First the students reflect on the question independently. Then they discuss their responses with a partner. Lastly, groups of students share their thoughts with the whole class. Students can engage in the writing task afterwards.

Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M.   Boekaerts, P. R.   Pintrich, & M.   Zeidner  (Eds.)  Handbook of self-regulation. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Schunk, D. H. & Zimmerman, B. J. (2008).   Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications.  New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.

TESOL Interest Section: English for Specific Purposes, Second Langauge Writing

This website uses cookies.  A cookie is a small piece of code that gives your computer a unique identity, but it does not contain any information that allows us to identify you personally. For more information on how TESOL International Association uses cookies, please read our   privacy policy . Most browsers automatically accept cookies, but if you prefer, you can opt out by changing your browser settings.

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Sweepstakes
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2024 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

The Importance of Self-Reflection: How Looking Inward Can Improve Your Mental Health

Sunwoo Jung / Getty Images

Why Is Self-Reflection So Important?

When self-reflection becomes unhealthy, how to practice self-reflection, what to do if self-reflection makes you uncomfortable, incorporating self-reflection into your routine.

How well do you know yourself? Do you think about why you do the things you do? Self-reflection is a skill that can help you understand yourself better.

Self-reflection involves being present with yourself and intentionally focusing your attention inward to examine your thoughts, feelings, actions, and motivations, says Angeleena Francis , LMHC, executive director for AMFM Healthcare.

Active self-reflection can help grow your understanding of who you are , what values you believe in, and why you think and act the way you do, says Kristin Wilson , MA, LPC, CCTP, RYT, chief experience officer for Newport Healthcare.

This article explores the benefits and importance of self-reflection, as well as some strategies to help you practice it and incorporate it into your daily life. We also discuss when self-reflection can become unhealthy and suggest some coping strategies.

Self-reflection is important because it helps you form a self-concept and contributes toward self-development.

Builds Your Self-Concept

Self-reflection is critical because it contributes to your self-concept, which is an important part of your identity.

Your self-concept includes your thoughts about your traits, abilities, beliefs, values, roles, and relationships. It plays an influential role in your mood, judgment, and behavioral patterns.

Reflecting inward allows you to know yourself and continue to get to know yourself as you change and develop as a person, says Francis. It helps you understand and strengthen your self-concept as you evolve with time.

Enables Self-Development

Self-reflection also plays a key role in self-development. “It is a required skill for personal growth ,” says Wilson.

Being able to evaluate your strengths and weaknesses, or what you did right or wrong, can help you identify areas for growth and improvement, so you can work on them.

For instance, say you gave a presentation at school or work that didn’t go well, despite putting in a lot of work on the project. Spending a little time on self-reflection can help you understand that even though you spent a lot of time working on the project and creating the presentation materials, you didn’t practice giving the presentation. Realizing the problem can help you correct it. So, the next time you have to give a presentation, you can practice it on your colleagues or loved ones first.

Or, say you’ve just broken up with your partner. While it’s easy to blame them for everything that went wrong, self-reflection can help you understand what behaviors of yours contributed to the split. Being mindful of these behaviors can be helpful in other relationships.

Without self-reflection, you would continue to do what you’ve always done and as a result, you may continue to face the same problems you’ve always faced.

Benefits of Self-Reflection

These are some of the benefits of self-reflection, according to the experts:

• Increased self-awareness: Spending time in self-reflection can help build greater self-awareness , says Wilson. Self-awareness is a key component of emotional intelligence. It helps you recognize and understand your own emotions, as well as the impact of your emotions on your thoughts and behaviors.
• Greater sense of control: Self-reflection involves practicing mindfulness and being present with yourself at the moment. This can help you feel more grounded and in control of yourself, says Francis.
• Improved communication skills: Self-reflection can help you improve your communication skills, which can benefit your relationships. Understanding what you’re feeling can help you express yourself clearly, honestly, and empathetically.
• Deeper alignment with core values: Self-reflection can help you understand what you believe in and why. This can help ensure that your words and actions are more aligned with your core values, Wilson explains. It can also help reduce cognitive dissonance , which is the discomfort you may experience when your behavior doesn’t align with your values, says Francis.
• Better decision-making skills: Self-reflection can help you make better decisions for yourself, says Wilson. Understanding yourself better can help you evaluate all your options and how they will impact you with more clarity. This can help you make sound decisions that you’re more comfortable with, says Francis.
• Greater accountability: Self-reflection can help you hold yourself accountable to yourself, says Francis. It can help you evaluate your actions and recognize personal responsibility. It can also help you hold yourself accountable for the goals you’re working toward.

Self-reflection is a healthy practice that is important for mental well-being. However, it can become harmful if it turns into rumination, self-criticism, self-judgment, negative self-talk , and comparison to others, says Wilson.

Here’s what that could look like:

• Rumination: Experiencing excessive and repetitive stressful or negative thoughts. Rumination is often obsessive and interferes with other types of mental activity.
• Self-judgment: Constantly judging yourself and often finding yourself lacking. 
• Negative self-talk: Allowing the voice inside your head to discourage you from doing things you want to do. Negative self-talk is often self-defeating.
• Self-criticism: Constantly criticizing your actions and decisions.
• Comparison: Endlessly comparing yourself to others and feeling inferior.

Kristin Wilson, LPC, CCTP

Looking inward may activate your inner critic, but true self-reflection comes from a place of neutrality and non-judgment.

When anxious thoughts and feelings come up in self-reflection, Wilson says it’s important to practice self-compassion and redirect your focus to actionable insights that can propel your life forward. “We all have faults and room for improvement. Reflect on the behaviors or actions you want to change and take steps to do so.”

It can help to think of what you would say to a friend in a similar situation. For instance, if your friend said they were worried about the status of their job after they gave a presentation that didn’t go well, you would probably be kind to them, tell them not to worry, and to focus on improving their presentation skills in the future. Apply the same compassion to yourself and focus on what you can control.

If you are unable to calm your mind of racing or negative thoughts, Francis recommends seeking support from a trusted person in your life or a mental health professional. “Patterns of negative self-talk, self-doubt , or criticism should be addressed through professional support, as negative cognitions of oneself can lead to symptoms of depression if not resolved.”

Wilson suggests some strategies that can help you practice self-reflection:

• Ask yourself open-ended questions: Start off by asking yourself open-ended questions that will prompt self-reflection, such as: “Am I doing what makes me happy?” “Are there things I’d like to improve about myself?” or “What could I have done differently today?” “Am I taking anything or anyone for granted?” Notice what thoughts and feelings arise within you for each question and then begin to think about why. Be curious about yourself and be open to whatever comes up.
• Keep a journal: Journaling your thoughts and responses to these questions is an excellent vehicle for self-expression. It can be helpful to look back at your responses, read how you handled things in the past, assess the outcome, and look for where you might make changes in the future.
• Try meditation: Meditation can also be a powerful tool for self-reflection and personal growth. Even if it’s only for five minutes, practice sitting in silence and paying attention to what comes up for you. Notice which thoughts are fleeting and which come up more often.
• Process major events and emotions: When something happens in your life that makes you feel especially good or bad, take the time to reflect on what occurred, how it made you feel, and either how you can get to that feeling again or what you might do differently the next time. Writing down your thoughts in a journal can help.
• Make a self-reflection board: Create a self-reflection board of positive attributes that you add to regularly. Celebrate your authentic self and the ways you stay true to who you are. Having a visual representation of self-reflection can be motivating.

You may avoid self-reflection if it brings up difficult emotions and makes you feel uncomfortable, says Francis. She recommends preparing yourself to get comfortable with the uncomfortable before you start.

Think of your time in self-reflection as a safe space within yourself. “Avoid judging yourself while you explore your inner thoughts, feelings, and motives of behavior,” says Francis. Simply notice what comes up and accept it. Instead of focusing on fears, worries, or regrets, try to look for areas of growth and improvement.

“Practice neutrality and self-compassion so that self-reflection is a positive experience that you will want to do regularly,” says Wilson.

Francis suggests some strategies that can help you incorporate self-reflection into your daily routine:

• Dedicate time to it: it’s important to dedicate time to self-reflection and build it into your routine. Find a slot that works for your schedule—it could be five minutes each morning while drinking coffee or 30 minutes sitting outside in nature once per week.
• Pick a quiet spot: It can be hard to focus inward if your environment is busy or chaotic. Choose a calm and quiet space that is free of distractions so you can hear your own thoughts.
• Pay attention to your senses: Pay attention to your senses. Sensory input is an important component of self-awareness.

Nowak A, Vallacher RR, Bartkowski W, Olson L. Integration and expression: The complementary functions of self-reflection . J Pers . 2022;10.1111/jopy.12730. doi:10.1111/jopy.12730

American Psychological Association. Self-concept .

Dishon N, Oldmeadow JA, Critchley C, Kaufman J. The effect of trait self-awareness, self-reflection, and perceptions of choice meaningfulness on indicators of social identity within a decision-making context . Front Psychol . 2017;8:2034. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02034

Drigas AS, Papoutsi C. A new layered model on emotional intelligence . Behav Sci (Basel) . 2018;8(5):45. doi:10.3390/bs8050045

American Psychological Association. Rumination .

By Sanjana Gupta Sanjana is a health writer and editor. Her work spans various health-related topics, including mental health, fitness, nutrition, and wellness.

What Is Self-Leadership? Models, Theory, and Examples

The fact is, we all lead ourselves to some extent. How efficiently we do that determines how much we live life with purpose and intent. Yet, despite its central importance to leading a meaningful life, it seems that the term self-leadership often warrants explanation and doesn’t form part of our common vocabulary.

This article offers a basic overview of what self-leadership is and its scientific foundations.

Before you continue, we thought you might like to download our three Positive Leadership Exercises for free . These detailed, science-based exercises will help you or others adopt positive leadership practices and help organizations thrive.

This Article Contains:

Self-leadership explained, theories and models of self-leadership, 8 core competencies and skills, a real-life example, training in self-leadership: 6 courses and programs, 8 inspiring quotes, positivepsychology.com’s resources, a take-home message.

Self-leadership is the practice of understanding who you are, identifying your desired experiences, and intentionally guiding yourself toward them. It spans the determination of wha t we do, why we do it, and how  we do it.

The term ‘self-leadership’ first emerged from organizational management literature by Charles C. Manz (1983), who later defined it as a “ comprehensive self-influence perspective that concerns leading oneself toward performance of naturally motivating tasks as well as managing oneself to do work that must be done but is not naturally motivating ” (Manz, 1986).

The concept was based on the (then novel) insight that self-leadership is a prerequisite for effective and authentic team leadership (Manz & Sims, 1991). In fact, more autonomous, self-leading workers are more productive, irrespective of their work role (Birdi et al., 2008).

Since its first mention, discussion and examination of the self-leadership concept remained predominantly in organizational leadership and management contexts. More recently, Marieta Du Plessis (2019) acknowledged the opportunity to complement the concept with insights from positive psychology research, offering the following definition:

Positive self-leadership refers to the capacity to identify and apply one’s signature strengths to initiate, maintain, or sustain self-influencing behaviors.

Du Plessis emphasizes the importance of value-based self-inspiration and self-goal setting in the self-leadership journey.

When considering this definition, the broader applicability of self-leadership becomes evident. In fact, the concept of self-leadership draws on several interdisciplinary theoretical models and frameworks, including many from the field of positive psychology.

Theoretical foundations

Self-control is synonymous with self-management and self-regulation and describes the iterative process of determining a desired end state, comparing that to the current state, and subsequently taking action to close the gap between the two (Carver & Scheier, 1981).

It is important to note that especially in the early literature, the terms self-leadership and self-management were often used interchangeably.

However, self-management is a necessary but not entirely encompassing element of self-leadership in that it simply refers to the internally regulated management and execution of tasks (i.e., addressing the how of an action). In this case, the choice of the task itself and the underlying reason for the choice are externally regulated.

In contrast, self-leadership includes an internally regulated choice, value alignment, and execution of the chosen activity (i.e., addressing the what , why , and how ).

Social-cognitive theory  acknowledges the triadic interaction between our thoughts, behavior, and socio-political environment (Bandura, 1986).

Self-determination theory describes the reciprocity between human motivation and a purposeful life. It highlights the role of internally regulated and intrinsic motivation as a driver behind self-leadership behaviors (Deci & Ryan, 1985).

However, self-leadership theory is also well suited to a couple of other theories. In light of the central notion of self-determined action in line with one’s intrinsic needs, in particular self-actualizing behaviors , Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is one such view.

Furthermore, self-leadership is rooted in self-awareness in combination with self-management, which, according to Daniel Goleman (2005), form two of the four pillars of emotional intelligence .

Self-leadership models

There is still a general lack of self-leadership models and guiding frameworks in line with the relative infancy and historical development of the scientific self-leadership evidence base.

The positive self-leadership capability model explicitly combines insights from the organizational leadership literature with those from organizational and positive psychology (Du Plessis, 2019).

This model is based on the strengths-based capability framework (Stander & Van Zyl, 2019). It is aligned with experiences from delivering organizational interventions regarding positive self-leadership development.

It offers several competencies (outer quadrants) across four dynamically interacting core capabilities (inner quadrants): character strengths, abilities and talents, interests and aspirations, and environmental strengths (Du Plessis, 2019).

The positive self-leadership capability model (reprinted with permission from Du Plessis, 2019)

While most of these capabilities draw on popular, well-known concepts from positive psychology research, environmental strengths refer to an individual’s ability to draw on resources from their socio-political and built environment.

Given the broad field of self-leadership and lack of comprehensive and empirically tested self-leadership models to date, it might be more helpful to focus on the various competencies involved in it.

Here are some cognitive and behavioral strategies that effective self-leadership draws on.

1. Self-awareness and self-knowledge

Self-awareness is the ability to perceive yourself clearly through inward inspection. It is the act of practicing mindfulness, with the attention directed toward yourself.

Self-awareness allows us to perceive our current inner reality or state and, as such, is a prerequisite of self-control and self-regulation  (Carver & Scheier, 1981; Silvia & O’Brien, 2004).

Basic self-knowledge is vital to understanding one’s needs, motives, and drives. At a minimum, this includes the following four elements:

Personality traits

Our personality traits predict and explain our thoughts, feelings, and behavior, in particular spontaneous action. Interestingly, individuals with a higher conscientiousness score (one of the Big Five character traits) have been shown to be more efficient self-leaders (Stewart, Carson, & Cardy, 1996).

Individuals with a lower conscientiousness score and the ambition to improve their self-leadership skills could place particular effort on cultivating conscientiousness.

Personal strengths and weaknesses

These provide insight into what we feel drawn toward, how we can conquer problems and perform exceptionally well, what drains us, and where we tend to procrastinate.

Our values are what is most important to us in life, and, knowingly or not, we make decisions based on them. They are the reason why we do what we do.

Talents and interests

Our talents and interests offer insight into how we can put our strengths to work, enjoy the process, and maximize our chances of succeeding and serving a purpose bigger than ourselves.

Self-knowledge allows us to answer questions such as ‘What am I feeling and why?’; ‘What is important to me?’; ‘How can I succeed and when do I need to be particularly vigilant on my goal journey?’; and ‘What is my sense of purpose?’

2. Identifying desired experiences

Arguably, we all strive for happiness, and our goals are a means to achieve that. However, research shows that our ability to predict what will make us happy is poorer than we think (Gilbert & Wilson, 2006). So it is important to understand insights from happiness research as well as how to align our goals or desired experiences with our values.

Download 3 Free Positive Leadership Exercises (PDF)

These detailed, science-based exercises will help you or others to adopt positive leadership practices to help individuals, teams and organizations to thrive.

Download 3 Free Positive Leadership Exercises Pack (PDF)

By filling out your name and email address below.

• Email Address *
• Your Expertise * Your expertise Therapy Coaching Education Counseling Business Healthcare Other
• Email This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

3. Constructive thought and decision making

As humans, we like to think of ourselves as a cognitive and rational species that makes thoughtful choices along the path of life. Unfortunately, many of the processes happening inside our minds are anything but rational (Kahneman, 2012).

An example of this is the phenomenon of cognitive dissonance (Festinger, 1957). Another is that our ability to reason is inhibited when we feel stressed and are experiencing the so-called fight-or-flight response (also known as the amygdala hijack).

Unfortunately, we are somewhat neurologically wired to perceive threats and therefore have to proactively practice positivity if we want to use our full potential to make rational decisions (Fredrickson, 2001). When we are relaxed and in a positive emotional state, we can think creatively and innovatively (Fredrickson & Losada, 2005).

Finally, this includes developing a growth mindset – the belief in our ability to develop and change things or ourselves (Dweck, 2016). This implies an understanding that while we cannot control all of our experiences, we can control how we choose to react to them.

Therefore, understanding the fundamentals of constructive thought and decision-making processes, plus practicing mindfulness and positivity to cultivate them, are essential elements of self-leadership.

4. Planning and goal setting

The planning and goal-setting competencies include breaking bigger dreams into manageable milestones and then optimizing each milestone into a goal.

The goal-setting process includes articulating SMART goals, identifying contingency plans, proactively committing by documenting it all, and establishing accountability and using positive reward upon goal attainment.

5. Optimizing motivation

Optimizing motivation includes the competency of adjusting one’s goal to become more appealing. This can be achieved by identifying an intrinsically motivating goal behavior and aligning the goal to one’s values and self-concept (Ryan & Deci, 2000).

Optimizing motivation also means understanding the role of willpower, a finite resource but one that can be cultivated. Finally, this competency includes an awareness that we may not feel ready or confident when trying a new goal behavior. Instead, self-efficacy is developed by taking small, continuous steps toward the goal (Bandura, 1977).

World’s Largest Positive Psychology Resource

The Positive Psychology Toolkit© is a groundbreaking practitioner resource containing over 500 science-based exercises , activities, interventions, questionnaires, and assessments created by experts using the latest positive psychology research.

Updated monthly. 100% Science-based.

“The best positive psychology resource out there!” — Emiliya Zhivotovskaya , Flourishing Center CEO

6. Harnessing the ecosystem

The nature versus nurture debate is an ongoing point of curiosity regarding the magnitude of influence the environment versus our genetics have on our behavior. Do we mostly learn our behavior through our life circumstances, experiences, and the people around us? Or is it innate and mostly inherited?

These days, scientists agree that the answer isn’t usually found at either extreme end of the scale. Instead, we know that they usually both interact and together influence the way we act.

Harnessing the ecosystem is about proactively seeking support for our goal behavior in the social, organizational, community, political, and physical environment we live in. This includes mobilizing social support, cueing new goal behavior through small tweaks in our physical environment, and identifying goal-aligned resources in our community.

7. Amplifying performance

There are three techniques worth learning to amplify self-leadership performance:

• High-performance planning entails asking yourself a set of questions about how you can perform optimally during a predefined period and reviewing your ambitions at the end of it. As such, it is a particular form of planning, goal setting, and intention forming.
• Self-coaching is a constructive thought strategy and involves solution seeking by mentally navigating a coaching framework, such as the GROW model.
• Functional visualization techniques (also referred to as functional imagery training) involve detailed mental rehearsal of the desired goal behavior, which has been shown to significantly increase the likelihood of goal attainment (Solbrig et al., 2018).

8. Embracing failure and cultivating grit

Tal Ben-Shahar famously said:

Learn to fail or fail to learn.

(Ben-Shahar, 2014)

Most people will fail at some stage on the path to their goals. Often when people don’t stick to their plans, they get so frustrated with themselves in those situations that they avoid thinking about the whole topic altogether (cognitive dissonance at its best).

They give up because they will not attain the goal as quickly or to the extent that they had planned and therefore feel like a smaller win is not worthy. Both are fatal to our goal attainment.

It is important to adjust one’s expectations about encountering some form of failure along the goal path. Other important competencies to cultivate are self-compassion and grit.

Self-compassion is treating yourself with the same care, love, and respect you would give to a struggling close friend. Research shows that contrary to the popular belief that self-compassion leads to complacency, it actually increases motivation (Neff, 2003).

Grit is a combination of passion and perseverance for long-term goals (Duckworth & Gross, 2014). Grit is what can, more reliably than any other characteristic, distinguish the successful from the non-successful.

You can cultivate it by putting deliberate effort into developing your talents into skills; and, when you take your skill and put effort into refining it, you will accomplish achievement.

However, when reflecting on the practice of leading oneself intrinsically, proactively, and regardless of external circumstance, one person comes to mind immediately: Viktor Frankl .

As described in his (1984) book Man’s Search for Meaning , Frankl famously survived the Holocaust and three years of incarceration in Nazi concentration camps. Despite the immense hardships he experienced there, Frankl was able to survive.

Moreover, he demonstrated many critical self-leadership skills throughout his experience. He had a profound understanding that he could not change what was happening to him and his fellow inmates, but he could choose how to respond to it.

He understood the importance of values in life, had a strong awareness of his own, and lived by them, and in doing so, he found meaning and purpose. He exhibited constructive thought strategies and continuously identified opportunities to contribute to the wellbeing of his inmates. And, he managed to persevere in this way not only throughout the entire period of incarceration but also afterward.

Great leadership starts with self-leadership – Lars Sudmann

Due to the infancy of the self-leadership field, courses and programs are still somewhat rare. It should also be noted that the course information provided online is often brief and vague, which makes it hard to judge how many self-leadership competencies are covered.

Most of the current courses are positioned in the organizational leadership training arena. Here are a few courses worth mentioning:

• The Ken Blanchard® Companies provide worldwide in-person and online training (or a combination thereof), explicitly for employees.
• Mainstream Corporate Training offers self-paced self-leadership online training and live online training.
• Ducidium Pty Ltd provides in-person training in Australia and is currently developing self-paced virtual training.

Regarding training for self-leadership more broadly (i.e., not tied to the workplace), the following courses can be recommended:

• Stanford Graduate School of Business offers a free online course developed by lecturer Ed Batista called ‘ The Art of Self-Coaching. ’ While Batista refers to self-coaching rather than self-leadership, he covers many critical self-leadership skills topics and competencies. The easiest way to access the course may be via Batista’s website , where he also offers a course outline.
• Self Leaders is a Stockholm-based company offering virtual, experience-based, and customized self-leadership training worldwide. They also frequently offer free short workshops and events .
• Dr. Maike Neuhaus offers a comprehensive online self-leadership course called Fresh Start , which gives you clarity on change, and helps you flourish.

Mastering others is strength. Mastering yourself is true power.

Self-leadership… is about influencing ourselves, creating the self-motivation and self-direction we need to accomplish what we want to accomplish.

Charles C. Manz

All human beings are self-leaders; however, not all self-leaders are effective at self-leading.

Being a self-leader is to serve as chief, captain, president, or CEO of one’s own life.

Peter Drucker

The first and best victory is to conquer self.

The one thing you can’t take away from me is the way I choose to respond to what you do to me.

Viktor E. Frankl

First, be a leader of yourself. Only then can you grow to lead others.

David Taylor-Klaus

Leadership’s First Commandment: Know Thyself… No tool can help a leader who lacks self-knowledge.

Harvard Business Review editorial

17 Exercises To Build Positive Leaders

Use these 17 Positive Leadership Exercises [PDF] to help others inspire, motivate, and guide employees in ways that enrich workplace performance and satisfaction. Created by Experts. 100% Science-based.

The following articles will make great supplemental reading:

• How to Improve Emotional Intelligence in the Workplace
• Self-Therapy for Anxiety and Depression
• Positive Leadership: 30 Must-Have Traits and Skills
• What’s Your Coaching Approach? 10 Different Coaching Styles Explained

Two special masterclasses can be particularly helpful as additional resources and are highly recommended:

• Motivation and Goal Achievement Masterclass
• Meaning and Valued Living Masterclass

If you’re looking for more science-based ways to help others develop positive leadership skills, this collection contains 17 validated positive leadership exercises . Use them to equip leaders with the skills needed to cultivate a culture of positivity and resilience.

A relatively new concept, self-leadership warrants more research. In particular, the current evidence base around self-leadership will benefit significantly from an interdisciplinary examination by complementing organizational leadership literature with insights from positive psychology.

Also, self-leadership competencies are now increasingly receiving attention from education professionals, who are stressing the importance of adapting school curricula to the rapidly changing workforce landscape due to advances in technology.

Here, it is highlighted that graduates need to be self-aware, self-driven, flexible, and adaptable to an ever-changing work environment (Freeman, 2020).

Now dubbed as a key 21st-century skill, learning the art of self-leadership will indeed form part of a fundamental life instruction booklet, maybe sooner rather than later.

We hope you enjoyed reading this article. Don’t forget to download our three Positive Leadership Exercises for free .

• Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review , 84 (2), 191–215.
• Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory . Prentice-Hall.
• Ben-Shahar, T. (2014). Choose the life you want: The mindful way to happiness . The Experiment.
• Birdi, K., Clegg, C., Patterson, M., Robinson, A., Stride, C. B., Wall, T. D., & Wood, S. J. (2008). The impact of human resource and operational management practices on company productivity: A longitudinal study. Personnel Psychology , 61 (3), 467–501.
• Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1981). Attention and self-regulation . Springer.
• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior (1st ed.). Springer.
• Du Plessis, M. (2019). Positive self-leadership: A framework for professional leadership development. In L. E. Van Zyl & S. Rothman, Sr. (Eds.), Theoretical approaches to multi-cultural positive psychological interventions (p. 450). Springer International Publishing.
• Duckworth, A., & Gross, J. J. (2014). Self-control and grit. Current Directions in Psychological Science: A Journal of the American Psychological Society , 23 (5), 319–325.
• Dweck, C. S. (2016). Mindset: The new psychology of success (updated ed.). Ballantine Books.
• Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance . Stanford University Press.
• Frankl, V. E. (1984). Man’s search for meaning (rev. ed.). Washington Square Press.
• Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. The American Psychologist , 56 (3), 218–226.
• Fredrickson, B. L., & Losada, M. F. (2005). Positive affect and the complex dynamics of human flourishing. The A merican Psychologist , 60 (7), 678–686.
• Freeman, O. A. M. (2020). Future trends in education. In W. Leal Filho, A. M. Azul, L. Brandli, P. G. Özuyar, & T. Wall (Eds.), Quality education (pp. 337–351). Springer International Publishing.
• Gilbert, D. T., & Wilson, T. D. (2006). Miswanting: Some problems in the forecasting of future affective states. In S. Lichtenstein & P. Slovic (Eds.), The construction of preference (pp. 550–564). Cambridge University Press.
• Goleman, D. (2005). Emotional intelligence (10th Anniversary ed.). Bantam Books.
• Kahneman, D. (2012). Thinking, fast and slow . Penguin.
• Manz, C. C. (1983). Improving performance through self-leadership. National Productivity Review , 2 (3), 288–297.
• Manz, C. C. (1986). Self-leadership: Toward an expanded theory of self-influence processes in organizations. The Academy of Management Review , 11 (3), 589.
• Manz, C. C., & Sims, H. P. (1991). SuperLeadership: Beyond the myth of heroic leadership. Organizational Dynamics , 19 (4), 18–35.
• Neff, K. (2003). Self-compassion: An alternative conceptualization of a healthy attitude toward oneself. Self and Identity , 2 (2), 85–101.
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. The American Psychologist , 55 (1), 68–78.
• Seligman, M. (2018). PERMA and the building blocks of well-being. The Journal of Positive Psychology , 13 (4), 333–335.
• Silvia, P. J., & O’Brien, M. E. (2004). Self-awareness and constructive functioning: Revisiting “the human dilemma.” Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology , 23 (4), 475–489.
• Solbrig, L., Whalley, B., Kavanagh, D. J., May, J., Parkin, T., Jones, R., & Andrade, J. (2018). Functional imagery training versus motivational interviewing for weight loss: A randomised controlled trial of brief individual interventions for overweight and obesity. International Journal of Obesity , 43 (4), 883–894.
• Stander, F. W., & Van Zyl, L. E. (2019). The talent development centre as an integrated positive psychological leadership development and talent analytics framework. In L. E. Van Zyl & S. Rothmann, Sr. (Eds.) Positive psychological intervention design and protocols for multi-cultural contexts (pp. 33–56). Springer International Publishing.
• Stewart, G. L., Carson, K. P., & Cardy, R. L. (1996). The joint effects of conscientiousness and self-leadership training on employee self-directed behavior in a service setting. Personnel Psychology , 49 (1), 143–164.

Share this article:

Article feedback

What our readers think.

Very inspiring and informative

Found this article particularly useful in my research paper for Self-Leadership Competencies

Thank you so much!!!

It is insightful powerful reading

Let us know your thoughts Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Related articles

8 Leadership Assessment Tools to Uncover Hidden Strengths

Leaders are everywhere: they help build organizations, steer institutions, and govern our societies. Yet recent governmental and organizational scandals across the globe highlight a worrying [...]

Theory X and Theory Y (& Z): Employee Motivation Explained

Most leaders and managers are aware of the importance of motivating their employees and creating an environment for them to perform at their best (Sennewald [...]

Contingency Theory: Mastering Leadership Flexibility

While most of us would recognize a great leader, few of us know what it takes to become one (Hill et al., 2022). And it’s [...]

Read other articles by their category

• Body & Brain (53)
• Coaching & Application (50)
• Compassion (23)
• Counseling (48)
• Emotional Intelligence (21)
• Gratitude (18)
• Grief & Bereavement (21)
• Happiness & SWB (40)
• Meaning & Values (26)
• Meditation (17)
• Mindfulness (40)
• Motivation & Goals (45)
• Optimism & Mindset (31)
• Positive CBT (29)
• Positive Communication (23)
• Positive Education (41)
• Positive Emotions (32)
• Positive Leadership (18)
• Positive Parenting (15)
• Positive Psychology (23)
• Positive Workplace (37)
• Productivity (17)
• Relationships (46)
• Resilience & Coping (38)
• Self Awareness (21)
• Self Esteem (37)
• Strengths & Virtues (29)
• Stress & Burnout Prevention (37)
• Theory & Books (44)
• Therapy Exercises (37)
• Types of Therapy (58)

• Comments This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• HHS Author Manuscripts

The Development of Self-Regulation across Early Childhood

Janelle j. montroy.

a Children’s Learning Institute, Department of Developmental Pediatrics, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, 7000 Fannin Street Suite 2373H, Houston, TX 77030, USA

Ryan P. Bowles

b Department of Human Development and Family Studies, Michigan State University, 552 W. Circle Drive, 2F Human Ecology, East Lansing, MI 48823, USA

Lori E. Skibbe

c Department of Human Development and Family Studies, Michigan State University, 552 W. Circle Drive, 2E Human Ecology, East Lansing, MI 48823, USA

Megan M. McClelland

d Department of Human Development and Family Sciences, Oregon State University, 245 Hallie E. Ford Center for Healthy Children and Families, Corvallis, OR 97331

Frederick J. Morrison

e Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, 2030 East Hall, Ann Arbor, MI 48109

Associated Data

The development of early childhood self-regulation is often considered an early life marker for later life successes. Yet little longitudinal research has evaluated whether there are different trajectories of self-regulation development across children. This study investigates the development of behavioral self-regulation between the ages of three and seven, with a direct focus on possible heterogeneity in the developmental trajectories, and a set of potential indicators that distinguish unique behavioral self-regulation trajectories. Across three diverse samples, 1,386 children were assessed on behavioral self-regulation from preschool through first grade. Results indicated that majority of children develop self-regulation rapidly during early childhood, and that children follow three distinct developmental patterns of growth. These three trajectories were distinguishable based on timing of rapid gains, as well as child gender, early language skills, and maternal education levels. Findings highlight early developmental differences in how self-regulation unfolds with implications for offering individualized support across children.

The Development of Self-Regulation Across Early Childhood The development of effective self-regulation is recognized as fundamental to an individual’s functioning, with development during early childhood often considered an early marker for later life successes ( Blair, 2002 ; Bronson, 2000 ; Calkins, 2007 ; Diamond, 2002 ; Gross & Thompson, 2007 ; Kopp, 1982 ; McClelland & Cameron, 2012 ; Mischel et al, 2011 ; Moffitt et al., 2011 ; Vohs & Baumeister, 2011 ; Zelazo et al., 2003 ). Research indicates that between ages three and seven a qualitative shift in self-regulation may take place when children typically progress from reactive or co-regulated behavior to more advanced, cognitive behavioral forms of self -regulation (e.g., Diamond, 2002 ; Kopp 1982 ) that likely require the integration of many skills such as executive functions and language skills ( Calkins, 2007 ; Cole, Armstrong, & Pemberton, 2010 ). Likewise, past research suggests wide variation in the level of self-regulation skills children manifest during early childhood that consistently predicts a multitude of short- and long-term outcomes such as school readiness, academic achievement throughout primary school, adult educational attainment, feelings of higher self-worth, a better ability to cope with stress, as well as less substance use, and less law breaking, even among individuals at risk of maladjustment ( McClelland, Acock, Piccinin, Rhea, & Stallings, 2013 ; Mischel et al., 2011 ; Moffitt et al., 2011 ).

However, despite mounting evidence that early childhood is an important time period for the development of self-regulation, little is known about how children’s trajectories of development might vary across individuals over time ( Bergman, Magnusson, & Khouri, 2002 ; Muthén & Muthén, 2000 ; Nagin, 1999 ). To address this gap, we examined the inter-individual variation in children’s growth trajectories between preschool and early elementary school based on evidence that self-regulation requires the coordination and processing of multiple skills across several domains ( Calkins, 2007 ; Cole et al., 2010 ). More specifically, we posit that there will be differences related to when the integration of these skills begin to manifest as well as differences in the patterns of how they are manifest as regulated behavior ( Blair, 2010 ; Blair & Raver, 2012 ; 2015 ; Calkins, 2007 ; Clark et al., 2013 ). In the current study, we examined the development of behavioral self-regulation via the Head-Toes-Knees-Shoulders task ( Cameron et al., 2008 ) between the ages of three and seven with longitudinal data involving up to eight measurement occasions for individual children across three samples. We evaluated possible heterogeneity in the developmental trajectories of children’s behavioral self-regulation using growth mixture modeling (GMM; Grimm, McArdle, & Hamagami, 2007 ), and potential indicators of trajectory differences.

Self-regulation is a complex, multi-component construct ( Blair & Raver, 2012 ; McClelland, Cameron Ponitz, Messersmith, & Tominey, 2010 ; Schunk & Zimmerman, 1997 ; Vohs & Baumeister, 2011 ) operating across several levels of function (e.g., motor, physiological, social-emotional, cognitive, behavioral and motivational), that in its broadest sense represents the ability to volitionally plan and, as necessary, modulate one’s behavior(s) to an adaptive end ( Barkley, 2011 ; Gross & Thompson, 2007 ). One approach to the complexity of self-regulation has been to view the multiple functions of self-regulation as hierarchically organized and, eventually, reciprocally integrated ( Blair & Raver, 2012 ; Calkins, 2007 ). Ultimately self-regulation depends on the coordination of many processes across levels of function, with children’s ability to draw on, integrate, and manage these multiple processes increasing across developmental time ( McClelland & Cameron, 2012 ; McClelland et al., 2014 ).

The current study focuses on self-regulation in relation to its role in successful classroom functioning ( McClelland & Cameron, 2012 ; McClelland, Morrison, & Holmes, 2000 ; Nesbitt et al., 2015). Effective self-regulation in the classroom requires that the child seamlessly coordinate multiple aspects of top down control (i.e., executive function) such as attention, working memory, and inhibitory control along with motor or verbal functions to produce overt behaviors, such as remembering multi-step directions amidst distractions ( Cameron Ponitz et al., 2008 ; McClelland et al., 2007 ). This form of self-regulation is therefore typically termed behavioral self-regulation (c.f., emotional self-regulation; Gross & Thompson, 2007 ). To evaluate individual differences in development of self-regulation across multiple years, we used a well validated direct assessment of behavioral self-regulation, the Head-Toes-Knees-Shoulders task (HTKS, Cameron et al., 2008 ) that captures variations in behavioral self-regulation throughout the entire range of early childhood, making it possible to accurately assess developmental change on a common scale across time ( Cameron Ponitz et al., 2008 ; Connor et al., 2010 ; McClelland et al., 2007 ; Skibbe et al., 2012 ). The HTKS is a short, game-like task where children are asked to ‘do the opposite’ in regards to a set of paired rules. For example, if the child is asked to touch their head, instead they must touch their toes. This task taps three executive function skills ( McClelland et al., 2014 ) in order to make a gross motor response: 1. attention (ability to focus on instructions and current stimuli), 2. working memory (ability to process the current trial while holding a rule or set of rules in mind), and 3. inhibition (ability to ignore a well learned response in order to respond in a counter-intuitive way).

Executive functions help an individual understand, monitor, and control their own reaction to the environment, as well as problem solve regarding desired future behaviors and/or outcomes. Put another way, the coordination of these skills often forms the basis of a child’s ability to respond adaptively within the classroom. Notably a distinction has been made in recent years between executive functions at the service of abstract or decontextualized environments, and executive functions at the service of adapting to environments that require the regulation of affect and motivation (e.g., Hongwanishkul et al., 2005). Sometimes referred to as ‘cool’ executive functions and ‘hot’ executive functions within cognitive traditions (e.g., Zelazo & Carlson, 2008 ), these skills can be considered as necessary (although not entirely sufficient; Ursache & Blair, 2011) for behavioral and emotional aspects of self-regulation, respectively (Zhou & Chen, 2008). Both hot and cool aspects are important for development; hot aspects are usually more associated with socio-emotional health and outcomes, while cool aspects are more associated with cognitive and academic outcomes ( Kim et al, 2013 ). The HTKS task generally draws on cool aspects of executive function, although in reality no task is entirely free of an emotional context, with distinctions generally being a matter of degree (Manes et al, 2002).

The Development of Behavioral Self-regulation

The development of self-regulation begins in infancy, with many of the skills that are important for behavioral self-regulation developing first as separate domains, then becoming organized and integrated over time ( Barkley; 2011 ; Corrigan, 1981 ; Diamond et al., 1997 ; Kopp, 1989 ; Stifter & Braungart, 1995 ). Previous work indicates that not only do separate facets of self-regulation appear to develop at different times and rates (such as emotional self-regulation generally preceding the development of behavioral self-regulation; Howse et al., 2003 ) but also the underlying skills may also develop at different times. For example, the ability to delay a response (an outcome most strongly associated with developing inhibitory control) appears to develop earlier than other executive skills ( Lengua, et al., 2015 ). However, despite differences across individual facets and skills associated with self-regulation, previous research consistently indicates that children younger than three have difficulty simultaneously coordinating and utilizing multiple executive function skills to create a behavioral response that also requires a motor or verbal action ( Carlson, Moses, & Breton, 2002 ; Diamond, 2002 ; Zelazo et al., 2003 ). However, after age three and during early childhood, the individual skills that support behavioral self-regulation (e.g., see Cole et al., 2010 ; Diamond et al., 1997 or Rothbart et al., 2006 ), as well as behavioral self-regulation itself as an integration of those skills, rapidly develop(s), signifying a qualitative shift in children’s regulatory abilities ( Best & Miller, 2010 ; Garon et al., 2008 ; Kopp, 1982 ; Zelazo et al., 2008 ).

Specifically, cross sectional work with a multitude of tasks indicates a rapid increase or “leap” in performance on tasks that require the integration of several executive function skills into behavior, such as the HTKS task, the Dimensional Change Card Sort, The Day/Night, Bear/Dragon, Fish Flanker, and Luria’s tapping task ( Diamond, 2002 ; Gerstadt et al., 1994 ; Rothbart et al., 2006 ; Rueda et al., 2004 ; Zelazo et al., 2003 ). For example, there are large group differences in accuracy on a fish flanker task (see Rueda et al., 2004 for a description of the task) between four year olds and six year olds, but by about age seven, children’s accuracy gains level off as performance becomes similar to adults (although reaction time continues to improve; Rothbart et al., 2006 ; Rueda et al., 2004 ). In addition, recent work explicitly evaluating behavioral self-regulation longitudinally ( Cameron Ponitz et al., 2008 ), as well as several studies of underlying executive function skills ( Chang, Shaw, Dishion, Gardner & Wilson, 2014 ; Clark et al., 2013 ; Diamond et al., 1997 ; Wiebe, Sheffield & Espy, 2012) indicate non-linear growth with rapid gains followed by a decelerating rate of gain in performance.

In summary, theory and research both provide evidence of rapid gains in the ability to regulate behavior that are likely linked to the integration of multiple processes, but particularly processes considered under the umbrella of executive function, such as attention, working memory and inhibition ( Cameron Ponitz et al., 2008 ; Chang et al., 2014 ; Diamond, 2002 ; Rothbart, et al., 2006 ). Based on these findings, we expect that the development of behavioral self-regulation in early childhood is likely best represented by a nonlinear function ( Diamond, 2002 ). Specifically, we expect that between the ages of three and seven years, gains in self-regulation will increase rapidly as multiple processes become more coordinated, followed by later decelerated growth (e.g., Cameron Ponitz et al., 2008 ; Chang et al., 2014 ; Wiebe et al., 2012).

Heterogeneity in behavioral self-regulation development

Several prominent theories suggest the possibility of multiple self-regulation growth trajectories across early childhood (see Blair, 2010 ; Blair & Raver, 2012 ; 2015 ; Calkins, 2007 ; Lerner & Overton, 2008 ). Specifically, theories drawing on psychobiological or dynamic systems models ( Blair & Raver, 2015 ; Lerner & Overton, 2008 ) indicate a back and forth developmental relationship between children’s biological traits and their experiences. These theories contend that how children learn to regulate their behavior can vary widely given that biological predispositions such as temperament and early environmental experiences greatly vary. However, few studies have fully tested whether there are underlying trajectory differences in self-regulation such that children develop behavioral self-regulation in differing ways (i.e., process differences) and/or at different rates ( Posner & Rothbart, 2000 ; Rothbart, Ellis, Rueda & Posner, 2003 ). The majority of work in this area has noted mean differences in the amount of self-regulation children are able to exert at a given age during early childhood; only recently have studies begun to focus on growth in self-regulation and predictors thereof. Of these studies, few have accounted for systematic inter-individual differences across time (but see Vallotton & Ayoub, 2011 ; Wanless et al., 2016 ; Willoughby et al., 2016 ).

Instead, the majority of studies evaluating self-regulation growth have focused on utilizing child and environmental aspects to predict aggregate variation around a general slope and/or rate mean (e.g., Blandon et al., 2008 ; Cameron Ponitz et al., 2008 ; Clark et al., 2013 ), without further consideration for whether this variation may indicate qualitatively distinct developmental change. This makes it is difficult to conclude whether there actually are subgroups of children with systematic differences in how self-regulation processes unfold ( Rogosa, 1988 ). Likewise, findings at the aggregate level do not necessarily describe the relationship among variables for a single individual or subgroup of individuals ( von Eye & Bergman, 2003 ). This makes it equally difficult to accurately map out predictive relations between children’s individual traits and environments and their self-regulation development.

Only one study to date has evaluated multiple trajectories across children in behavioral self-regulation ( Wanless et al., 2016 ). This studied focused specifically on a Taiwanese sample of children and indicated two distinct behavioral self-regulation trajectories: an “increasing” developers trajectory with children rapidly gaining in self-regulation and then leveling off across early childhood, and a “steady-then-increasing” trajectory with children demonstrating few regulatory gains between ages 3 – 5 years and rapid gains after 5 years of age. However, this study only includes a relatively small sample, and focuses on a homogenous population in Taiwan.

The current study builds upon and extends this previous work by directly examining the possibility of qualitatively different behavioral self-regulation growth trajectories between the ages of three and seven in a large heterogeneous population. We focus specifically on behavioral self-regulation as theoretical considerations indicate that the regulation of behavior is expected to include multiple trajectories during early childhood given that the multiple executive function inputs that support it are sensitive to not only genetic inputs but experiential inputs and that these inputs are rapidly developing and differentiating during this time period ( Blair & Raver, 2012 ; Lonigan & Allan, 2014). As part of investigating potential trajectories, we also evaluate one rough environmental proxy and two child level predictors in order to validate potential trajectory differences, and better understand patterns of how and, possibly when, these factors matter for self-regulation development across children.

Child factors

There are several early characteristics that previous studies have identified as having an association with the development of behavioral self-regulation ( Blair et al., 2011 ; Calkins, Dedmon, Gill, Lomax, & Johnson, 2002 ; Cole et al., 2010 ; Matthews et al., 2009 ). The current study focuses on children’s gender and language skills as these attributes are fairly consistently linked to individual differences in self-regulation ( Bohlmann et al., 2015 ; Matthews et al., 2009 ; Ready et al., 2005 ), and potentially trajectory differences ( Vallotton & Ayoub, 2011 ).

Previous findings generally indicate that boys have lower levels of self-regulation than girls ( Kochanska et al., 2001 ; Matthews et al., 2009 , 2014 ; McClelland et al., 2007 ), with gender differences often increasing across time ( Matthews et al., 2014 ). It is not well understood why such gender differences occur (though see Entwistle, Alexander, & Olson, 2007 ), although recent work suggests gender differences may in part relate to cultural beliefs and expectations ( von Suchodoletz et al., 2013 ; Wanless et al., 2016 ). However, there is evidence that, from an early age, gender is associated with what type of self-regulation developmental trajectory a child is likely to follow ( Vallotton & Ayoub, 2011 ). For example, during toddlerhood, boys’ self-regulation generally dips around age two then rises, while girls’ self-regulation rises steadily, resulting in gender differences at ages two and three favoring girls. Additional research focused on kindergarteners suggests that a subset of boys persist in demonstrating very low levels of behavioral self-regulation ( Matthews et al., 2009 ), potentially signifying these boys not only continue to developmentally lag behind girls, but that they may also not be acquiring self-regulation in the same way that peers are. Given these past findings, we expected that boys may be more likely to follow a potentially lagged trajectory.

Language is another child attribute that affects developing self-regulation, and may be an important factor for understanding potential self-regulation trajectory differences across children. Theoretically, language is thought to give children “mental tools” to help them organize and modify their thoughts and behaviors ( Vygotsky, 1934/1986 ). During early childhood, expressive language in particular may be important as it enhances the ability of the child to both name their own current state and manipulate that state in relation to a specific context ( Cole et al., 2010 ). It also seemingly enhances children’s ability to hold task requirements in mind (Karbach, Eber, & Kray, 2008). Research evaluating how expressive language helps toddlers to self-regulate suggests that trajectories of self-regulation vary between children based on the child’s observed expressive vocabulary skills ( Vallotton & Ayoub, 2011 ). Likewise, early expressive language skills are also associated with higher levels of early self-regulation, with greater language gains across preschool and the transition to kindergarten associated with greater self-regulation gains ( Bohlmann, Maier, & Palacios, 2015 ). This suggests that children with higher levels of expressive language develop self-regulation faster compared to children with lower levels of language. We also expected expressive language to be related to self-regulation growth on the HTKS because children use both expressive and receptive language when completing the task (and can answer verbally if needed/verbalize actions). Based on these previous findings, the pattern of associations between expressive language at the start of schooling and potential self-regulation trajectories should follow a similar pattern such that lower levels of expressive language are associated with a distinct, potentially lagged trajectory compared to higher levels of expressive language.

Mother education

In addition to child attributes and competencies, past research consistently demonstrates that children’s environments affect developing behavioral self-regulation ( Blair, 2010 ; Grolnick & Farkas, 2002 ; Landry et al., 2006 ). One particularly salient aspect of children’s environments that may affect developing self-regulation is their mothers’ education levels (e.g., see Miech, Essex, & Goldsmith, 2001 ). Mother education often serves as a rough yet important proxy of family socioeconomic status and resources ( Bradley & Corwyn, 2002 ; Hoff, Laursen & Tardif, 2002 ). Low maternal education levels have been linked to lower socioeconomic resources and higher stress levels that, over time, can affect children’s developing neuroendocrine processes (e.g., such as cortisol levels). These processes are theorized to directly shape developing self-regulatory response patterns (see Blair & Raver, 2015 ). Maternal education levels are also associated with distinct parenting profiles that include mothers’ warmth, responsiveness, use of rich language inputs, and ability to maintain their children’s attention ( Guttentag, Pedrosa-Josic, Landry, Smith & Swank, 2006 ), all factors that predict individual differences in children’s self-regulation levels (see Grolnick & Farkas, 2002 ). Thus, mother education levels are also expected to serve as indicator of valid differences in children’s developing self-regulation patterns.

Past theory and research indicate that behavioral self-regulation rapidly develops during early childhood with possible heterogeneity of early self-regulation trajectories (e.g., Blair & Raver, 2015 ; Vallotton & Ayoub, 2011 ; Wanless et al., 2016 ). To better understand behavioral self-regulation development and heterogeneity across children, we used the HTKS measure to assess and evaluate development via latent growth curve modeling. We then directly focused on potential trajectory differences in early childhood utilizing growth mixture modeling. We hypothesized that most children would demonstrate rapid gains in their behavioral self-regulation trajectory (e.g., Cameron Ponitz et al., 2008 ; Matthews et al., 2009 ), compared to peers, with these gains occurring early in schooling ( Blair & Raver, 2015 ). However, we hypothesized a subset of children would demonstrate a lagged behavioral self-regulation trajectory across early childhood as they are not ready to integrate the multiple processes required by advanced behavioral self-regulation when they first reach school ( Wanless et al., 2016 ; Willoughby et al., 2016 ). As part of trajectory validation, we utilized multiple diverse samples that included the same measure of behavioral self-regulation within similar age ranges, and with similar data collection procedures in order to evaluate whether trajectory findings replicate across a diverse population of children in different areas of the United States. We then further validated trajectories in relation to predicted associations between three characteristics: gender, language ability, and maternal education levels. We expected that these factors would distinguish what trajectory a child was likely to follow, with patterns of association matching previous findings, offering evidence indicating that trajectories capture meaningful individual difference as well as increasing our understanding how these characteristics relate to individual differences in development over time.

Participants

Participants consisted of 1,386 children across three samples that had at least two assessments of self-regulation between the ages of three and seven. Children were administered the same direct assessment of behavioral self-regulation in all three studies (the Head-Toes-Knees-Shoulders Task; Cameron Ponitz et al., 2008 ). The samples are described below.

Michigan longitudinal sample

The first sample was collected in predominantly middle- to upper-SES suburban area with a range of ethnic diversity in southeast Michigan. Participants included 351 (51% female) children followed from preschool through second grade as part of the “Pathways to Literacy” longitudinal study evaluating children’s socio-emotional and cognitive development (e.g., ***; blinded for review; 32 of the full sample of 383 were not included due to having fewer than 2 assessments of self-regulation). Students attended 314 classrooms located within 16 schools in a single suburban school district. All schools within this district that included at least one preschool classroom were represented and preschool classrooms included Head Start classrooms ( n = 49) as well as those that charged tuition. On average, children were 48.16 months ( SD = 7.35) old at the start of the study: just over four years of age. The bulk of parents who provided information about their child’s ethnicity ( n =257) reported that their child was White/Caucasian (80%). The remainder of children were described as African-American (4%), Asian/Indian ( 5% ), Hispanic (1%), and Multi-racial (3%). Several parents (8%) noted that another ethnicity would describe their child best. Most ( n = 278) families noted that their child’s native language was English, although some families ( n = 73) did not respond to this question 1 . Median household income was high (i.e., $115,000; Range = $11,000 to $650,000) as were parent education levels, with over 75% of mothers (n = 233) reporting that they had earned at least a bachelor’s degree.

Families were recruited via flyers sent home in children’s backpacks at the beginning of the school year(s). Children’s self-regulation was evaluated in the fall and spring of each year that the child was in the study until they finished first grade (up to 8 times) as part of a battery of measures administered by trained research assistants. Language assessments were administered during the fall of children’s first preschool year. Parents also filled out demographic information including child gender and information related to education level in the fall of their child’s first preschool year.

MLSELD preschool sample

The second sample consisted of 642 (51% female) preschool aged children from middle-SES communities with data waves collected over four years in Michigan as part of the Michigan Longitudinal Study of Early Literacy Development (MLSELD preschool sample; ***; blinded for review). Children were drawn from 78 classrooms across six schools: two in central Michigan and four in western Michigan. Schools in central Michigan were accredited by the National Association for the Education of Young Children. One was associated with a university and the other was a joint public/university preschool that also had a population of Head Start eligible children (less than 5% of the current sample). The four schools in western Michigan were part of the area’s public schools. In western Michigan, families were recruited for participation at a parent information night, while at the central Michigan schools families were recruited via flyers sent home in children’s backpacks. Children were on average approximately four years of age at the start of the study ( M = 47.74, SD = 7.02). Most parents who provided information about their child’s ethnicity ( n = 479) reported that their child was White/Caucasian (81%). Children who were African American (2%), Hispanic (3%), Asian (7%), multi-racial (4%), and those from ‘other’ (3%) ethnicities also participated in the present work. Among families reporting primary language spoken at home, almost all reported English ( n = 443) although some families did not respond to this question ( n = 158). Over half of mothers ( n = 374) reported that they had earned at least a bachelor’s degree. Household income levels were not collected as part of this study.

Children’s self-regulation was collected in the fall and spring of each year by a trained research assistant in a quiet setting; self-regulation was also collected two additional times in winter (about a month and a half apart) in two years of the study, and one additional time in the winter in one year of study (i.e., in the first two years of study self-regulation was assessed four times, year three it was assessed three times, and it was assessed twice in year four). Children’s language skills were tested in the fall of their first year of preschool and parents filled out demographic information including child gender and information related to education level at this time as well. Some children ( n = 160) participated in the study over the course of two years and a small subset of children ( n = 13) were included in the study for three years. Thus these children had their self-regulation evaluated more frequently. Across the larger MLSELD study ( n = 888), 246 children either had only one self-regulation assessment ( n = 133) or no assessments ( n = 113; by design, only half of the sample had self-regulation assessed in year 4).

Oregon sample

The third sample was recruited from a mixed-SES rural site in Oregon and consisted of 393 (50% female) children followed from preschool through kindergarten as part of a measurement study focused on improving measures of school readiness and self-regulation (***; blinded for review; 38 of the full sample of 431 were not included due to having fewer than 2 assessments of self-regulation related to study attrition). Children were drawn from 37 classrooms in 17 schools, with 54% ( n = 209) of children in Head Start programs. Children were on average over four and a half years old at the start of the study ( M = 56.14, SD = 3.65). Most parents who provided information about their child’s ethnicity ( n = 354) reported that their child was White/Caucasian (63%), or Hispanic (19%). Children who were African American (1%), Asian/Pacific Islander (4%), multi-racial (13%), and those from ‘other’(1%) ethnicities also participated in the present work. Families reported that English was the primary language spoken at home for most children ( n = 297); however this sample also included a subsample of children whose primary language was Spanish ( n = 60) who were tested in Spanish (all Spanish speakers were enrolled in Head Start). On average, mothers reported having attended some college, but only 43% reported that they had earned a bachelor’s degree or higher. Of respondents, 58% indicated that their families qualified for public assistance such as WIC or food stamps in the past four years.

Families were recruited through letters sent home with an enrollment packet sent during the summer before the beginning of the preschool year. Self-regulation was assessed each year in the fall and spring by trained research assistants (up to four time points). Language skills were assessed in the fall of children’s preschool year, and parents filled out demographic surveys at this time.

Self-regulation

Children’s self-regulation was measured directly using the Head-Toes-Knees-Shoulders task ( Cameron Ponitz et al., 2008 ; Connor et al., 2010 ; Matthews, et al., 2009 ). During the task, children are provided with paired behavioral rules (e.g., touch your head/touch your toes) and asked to do the opposite of what they were instructed to do. For example, when a child is asked to touch her toes, she should complete the opposite action (touch her head). The first ten items include one paired rule (e.g., head/toe). If children respond correctly to four or more items, they are given ten additional items with two paired rules (e.g., head/toes, knees/shoulders). Children earned two points for each correct response, one point for each self-correction (i.e., an initial movement to the incorrect response, but ultimately ending with the correct response), and zero points for each incorrect response. Scores ranged from 0–40, with higher scores indicating higher self-regulation. In the first year of the Michigan longitudinal sample data collection, when all children were in preschool, only the first half of the HTKS was administered, as the second half had not yet been developed. We therefore used a Rasch measurement approach to extrapolate an expected score on the entire 40 item task (details are provided in Bindman, Hindman, Bowles, & Morrison, 2013 ).

The HTKS has good construct and predictive validity within many culturally diverse samples, and across languages ( Cameron Ponitz, McClelland, Matthews, & Morrison, 2009 ; McClelland et al., 2007 ; von Suchodoletz et al., 2013 ; Wanless, et al., 2011 ). Scores on this measure are significantly correlated with reported self-regulation in the classroom, parental reports of attention ( Cameron Ponitz et al., 2009 ; McClelland et al., 2007 ) and other measures of self-regulation and executive function tasks. The HTKS also loads well onto a self-regulation factor with other similar measures ( Allan & Lonigan, 2014 ). In addition, past evidence indicates that growth in HTKS performance does not appear to be a function of practice effects ( Cameron Ponitz et al., 2008 ).

In terms of predictive validity, the HTKS consistently predicts academic achievement across diverse sample populations ( McClelland et al., 2007 ; Montroy et al., 2014 ; von Suchodoletz et al., 2013 ; Wanless et al., 2011 ). Notably, evidence suggests HTKS scores and growth are generally stronger predictors of growth in academic achievement than other self-regulation and executive function measures, particularly measures that mostly capture one skill versus an integration of skills ( Lipsey et al., 2014 ; McClelland et al., 2014 ).

The HTKS has strong reliability ( Cameron Ponitz et al., 2008 ; Matthews et al., 2009 ; Montroy, et al., 2014 ; Wanless, et al., 2011 ). Past studies consistently report high levels of inter-rater reliability (kappa > .90; Cameron Ponitz et al., 2008 ), and internal consistency estimates above .80 ( Montroy et al., 2014 ; Wanless et al., 2011 ). Within the current study internal consistency was also good, with Cronbach’s alpha values ranging from .85–.94 across samples.

Language skills were assessed across all three samples. In the Michigan longitudinal sample and the Oregon sample, the Picture Vocabulary subtest of the Woodcock Johnson III was used as an indicator of language ( Woodcock & Mather, 2001 ), while the Test of Preschool Early Literacy picture vocabulary subtest (TOPEL; Lonigan, Wagner, Torgeson, & Rashotte, 2007 ) was used in the MLSELD preschool sample. Both the TOPEL and WJ vocabulary tests have been well validated and extensively used in the literature as indicators of expressive vocabulary ( Bohlmann et al., 2015 ; Pence, Bojczyk & Williams, 2007; Wilson & Lonigan, 2009 ; Vallotton & Ayoub, 2011 ).

The Woodcock Johnson picture vocabulary subtest is an untimed picture naming task where children are shown a series of pictures and are asked to verbally identify the image. Children speaking Spanish in the Oregon sample were administered the Picture Vocabulary subtest of the Spanish version of the Woodcock-Johnson, the Bateria III Woodcock-Munoz. Picture Vocabulary has strong evidence of reliability (e.g., split half reliability between 0.76–0.81 for English speaking children and 0.88–0.89 for Spanish speakers) and validity. We used W-scores, a Rasch-type measure of ability, for all analyses. This type of score ensures measurement on an equal-interval scale and takes into account the level of item difficulty in relation to a children’s age.

The TOPEL picture vocabulary subtest consists of 35 items including various untimed picture naming tasks where children name pictures (1 point) and then describe aspects or functions associated with the picture presented to them (e.g., What are they for? 1 point) 2 . Thus raw scores range from 0–70. Test-retest reliability for this subtest is .81 and test developers indicated that scores were strongly related to the Early One-Word Picture Vocabulary Test ( r = .71, Brownell, 2000 ). The TOPEL was administered only in years 2 and 3 of the study. The remaining n =77 in year 1 and n = 113 in year 4 were not administered by design.

Mother education and gender

Across samples, demographics questionnaires were provided to parents including information regarding the child’s gender and parent education levels. For the Michigan longitudinal and the Oregon sample, mothers were asked to report education in terms of the number of years of schooling they had completed, while the MLSELD preschool sample was asked to report education levels via an 11-point survey question where education level categorically increased with 1 = less than a high school level education, 7 = a bachelor’s degree, and 11 = an advanced graduate degree (e.g., Ph.D or M.D). For comparability across samples, data from the Michigan longitudinal and Oregon sample were converted to the 11-point scale used by the MLSELD sample.

Analytic Approach

Analyses were done in two parts to (1) describe the general growth trajectory of self-regulation and (2) evaluate heterogeneity in self-regulation trajectories across children. First, we used latent growth curve models ( Bowles & Montroy, 2013 ; McArdle, 1986 ; Meredith & Tisak, 1990 ; Singer & Willett, 2003 ) to examine the general trajectory of development of self-regulation. These models provide information about the average values of children’s self-regulation (level of self-regulation) at a specified time, how rapidly their skills increase or decrease (i.e., slope), and whether this change is constant or might accelerate or decelerate (i.e., linear versus nonlinear growth). The general equation for the latent growth curve models we used was:

where Self-reg [ t ] n is the HTKS score for child n at age t; A[t] or the basis coefficient(s), are a function defining the shape of the growth trajectory, determining both the precise interpretation of the Level and the Slope , and the nature of change; Level n represents child n’s predicted level of self-regulation at the point where A[t] is 0; and Slope n generally reflects child n’s predicted rate of growth on the HTKS per unit of the basis coefficients. We considered five models for the trajectory: linear, quadratic, exponential, logistic, and the latent basis model. Due to variation in what age children received assessments and the time between assessments, scores were grouped by child age into three month windows in each dataset 3 . To evaluate what model optimally described the general growth trajectory of behavioral self-regulation, we utilized the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) and the Adjusted Bayesian Information Criterion (aBIC) fit indices.

Next, we utilized growth mixture modeling (GMM; Muthén, 2001 ) to evaluate if there were multiple growth trajectories of early childhood behavioral self-regulation. In GMM, the trajectory classes are formed based on the growth factor means and variances (e.g., Level and Slope means and variances) with each class defining a different growth trajectory ( Muthén, 2001 ). GMM also captures individual variation around these growth curves by estimating the growth factor variances within each class ( Muthén & Muthén, 2000 ). Within the GMM models, we chose to restrict trajectory shape to the shape indicated by the latent growth curve models. This is common practice in the GMM literature when there is not a strong theory regarding shape of trajectory differences across the population. However, slope and rate parameters (but not functional form) were ultimately allowed to vary across trajectories, thus providing information regarding different developmental progressions and patterns. In all models, errors were specified to be uncorrelated. We determined best model fit based on AIC and aBIC indices ( Tofighi & Enders, 2007 ), entropy, and bootstrapped likelihood ratio tests (BLRT) which compares the fit of the estimated model with k classes to the same model with one less class (k-1), with p-values less than .05 indicating that the estimated k class model fits better than the k-1 model ( Grimm, Ram & Estabrook, 2010 ). Note, BLRTs can only test differences in relation to what number of classes fits best, they provides little information when comparing within class solutions with differing parameters (e.g., whether a solution with constrained random effects versus variable random effects fit best). In addition we also considered whether results were interpretable and meaningful, and we took into account estimation parameters as well as estimation history as these are all relevant indicators of model comparison and selection ( Grimm et al., 2010 ). To evaluate the predictors of trajectory classes, we assigned each child to the class with the highest probability, and used logistic regression based analyses to predict class membership 4 . All analyses were completed with Mplus version 7.2 ( Muthén & Muthén, 1998–2010 ), utilizing full information maximum likelihood to account for missing data. In all analyses, year of study was included as a saturated covariate given its relationship with missing data in all samples, and the MLR estimator was used as this estimator provides the most accurate parameter estimates when missing data are present ( Enders, 2010 ; Graham, 2003 ).

Descriptive Statistics of Behavioral Self-regulation

On average, children demonstrated gains in behavioral self-regulation as measured by the HTKS between the ages of three and seven; see Table 1 for a comparison of average gains across samples. Individual observed trajectories for a random subset of 25 children’s scores per sample are presented in Figure 1 . In all samples, there were substantial individual differences, and periods of acceleration and deceleration in growth both within and across children. Correlations are provided in the supplementary materials .

Random subset of 25 children per sample’s (75 total) smoothed behavioral self-regulation trajectories

Note. HTKS refers to the Head-Toes-Knees-Shoulders task. Mos. refers to months. Dashes represent ages that data were not collected by sample.

Fit statistics for the five latent growth curve models are reported in Table 2 by sample. In all samples, both AIC and aBIC suggested that the changes and between person differences in early childhood behavioral self-regulation development were best described by an exponential curve; see Figure 2 . Across samples patterns varied such that: in the MLSELD preschool sample, children’s growth accelerated across preschool. However, in the Oregon and Michigan longitudinal samples that followed children across early elementary grades, children demonstrated faster gains early in preschool with gains slowing in early elementary school 5 .

Latent growth curve model of the developmental trajectory of behavioral self-regulation by sample.

Note. AIC refers to the Akaike information criterion, aBIC refers to the adjusted Bayesian information criterion. Bolded values indicate best fit.

Heterogeneity in Behavioral Self-regulation Development

Growth mixture modeling allows for the estimation of different trajectories with the possibility of every estimated parameter differing across groups (e.g., means, variances, covariances, and basis coefficients; Grimm et al., 2007 ; McArdle & Bell, 2000 ; McArdle & Nesselroade, 2003 ). Currently, there is no generally accepted strategy for how GMMs should be evaluated in terms of which constraints to relax first ( Grimm et al., 2007 ). However, similar to past studies, we evaluated models based on the principles of factorial invariance studies (e.g., Grimm et al., 2007 ), followed by an examination of models with different constraints related to within trajectory variation patterns (e.g., Kreuter & Muthén, 2008 ). Specifically, we evaluated fit across separate datasets starting with a two growth trajectory model where only level and slope means were allowed to vary across trajectory groups. In all models, the exponential shape indicated by the latent growth curve analyses was specified for all classes. Rate of acceleration/deceleration within the exponential trajectory(ies) was initially constrained to be the equal across curves (i.e., only timing differences were allowed with identical developmental form and rate of change). This would offer strong evidence that variation in behavioral self-regulation trajectory growth across children is similar, but with differences in developmental timing. All within curve variations (random effects) were also initially constrained ( Kreuter & Muthén, 2008 ). We then allowed rates of acceleration/deceleration to vary in order to evaluate possible differences in how children develop self-regulation across early childhood. Specifically across different class/trajectory solutions, one could potentially see changes in the sign for rate of change indicating whether rate was accelerating or decelerating across the specific study time period, as well as differences in rate parameter magnitude (i.e., it was possible for a non-significant rate parameter to be found, which would be similar to if a linear trajectory was specified). Additional growth trajectories were then added to determine what number of trajectories best fit the data. Once number and trajectory rate of change differences were determined, we progressively relaxed within trajectory level and growth variances and covariances to investigate how closely individual children followed group trajectories.

Results indicated that the three trajectory solution fit best in all samples based on the evaluation of global fit statistics in association with bootstrapped LRTs, iteration history, convergences, estimated parameters, and entropy values; see Table 3 for a summary of fit statistics across the different models and samples. In all samples, the three trajectory solution was also interpretable such that children generally demonstrated timing differences in early childhood self-regulatory gains but with some variation in rate across trajectories. As seen in Figure 3 , children demonstrated either early gains, intermediate gains, or later gains relative to sample peers. In general, children’s individual self-regulation trajectories also conformed closely to the three trajectories. Specifically, the models where within trajectory level, slope or rate variations were constrained to zero fit best for all three samples.

Predicted developmental trajectories for behavioral self-regulation by sample. A. MLSELD preschool sample, B. Oregon sample, C. Michigan longitudinal sample, D. all samples picture together; MI = Michigan.

Note. Dashes (-) denote that the model did not converge, an indicator of poor fit. Means only model: only level and growth means were allowed to vary between trajectories; means + shape: basis coefficients were allowed to vary (i.e., shape of curve) between trajectories. The “3 trajectory” models also included extra models to test whether relaxing within trajectory constraints resulted in better model fit. AIC refers to the Akaike information criterion, aBIC refers to the adjusted Bayesian information criterion. Bolded values indicate best fit. Ent. refers to entropy values, and BLRT indicates the p-value from the bootstrapped likelihood ratio tests.

As expected, the percent of children predicted to follow a given trajectory varied across samples, yet results still demonstrated clear consistency. Descriptively, in the Michigan longitudinal sample, 20% of children were classified as early developers who demonstrated higher initial levels of self-regulation and earlier gains, 45% as intermediate developers who had low initial self-regulation, followed by rapid gains, and 35% as later developers, who started with lower levels and gained more slowly compared to other groups. A similar pattern occurred within the MLSELD preschool sample with 29% of children classified as early developers, 45% of children as intermediate developers, and 26% as later developers. Likewise in the Oregon sample: 50% of children were early developers, 32% were intermediate developers, and 18% were later developers.

Broad patterns that were replicated across samples indicated that more than half of the children assessed within a given sample (including both early and intermediate developers) demonstrated rapid growth across preschool. On average, these children accurately responded (correct or self-correct) 75% of the time or more by age five (58–60 months). Yet, about 20% of children (later developers) consistently demonstrated relatively few early gains, responding at less than 35% accuracy on the behavioral self-regulation task throughout preschool. This pattern persisted into kindergarten in both samples that spanned into early elementary school with gains for later developers lagging same sample peers; in the Oregon sample gains do not pick up until 70–72 months of age (i.e., nearly 6 years of age). In short, children classified as later developers were, on average, six months to a year behind their intermediate developing peers and at least a year and a half behind early developers.

Descriptively there were also several other similarities across samples, see Table 4 for means across samples. In all three samples boys made up the majority of the later developers group whereas the majority of early developers were girls. Likewise, across all three samples, early developers had the highest mean levels of language and, on average, their mother’s obtained the highest education levels. Children in the later developers group demonstrated the lowest levels of language and had mothers with comparatively lower levels of education compared to the other two groups.

Note. For gender, girls are coded 1, boys are coded 0. MLSELD preschool language scores are from TOPEL vocabulary subtest; Michigan longitudinal and Oregon language scores are from the Woodcock Johnson Picture Vocabulary Subtest (w-scores).

Predictors of self-regulation growth trajectories

In this section we investigated whether child attributes and mother education levels were indicative of which children are more likely to follow which trajectory. Given that a subset of children in each sample demonstrated a ‘later developer’ behavioral self-regulation trajectory, we first tested whether these children differed from children who globally demonstrated rapid gains in preschool, classified as ‘preschool developers’ in behavioral self-regulation (i.e., ‘intermediate’ and ‘early developers’ considered together). We followed this analysis up with a second analysis comparing intermediate to early developers. In all analyses, gender, language, and maternal education levels were included as predictors, controlling for children’s age at the first measurement time point, race/ethnicity, and whether English was a indicated as a child’s primary language.

We used the Benjamini-Hochberg procedure to account for multiple predictors ( Benjamini & Hochberg, 1995 ). This procedure controls for the false discovery rate (i.e., Type I errors) associated with conducting multiple comparisons by ranking post-hoc the individual p-value associated with each predictor from smallest p-value to largest. Each individual p-value is then compared to its Benjamini-Hochberg critical value. The predictor with the largest p-value that is less than the Benjamini-Hochberg critical value, and all predictors ranked before it are considered significant. In the current study, we used a false discovery rate of .05, thus all predictors with a Benjamini-Hochberg critical value below .05, regardless of raw p-values, were considered significant. See Table 5 for all results including raw p-values and calculated Benjamini-Hochberg critical values.

Note. B-H crit. Value refers the Benjamini-Hochberg critical value for a given predictor. Mother ed. refers to mother reported education level. Bolded values indicate significant findings.

Child gender was linked to what trajectory a child was likely to follow in both the Michigan longitudinal sample and the Oregon sample. Girls included in the Michigan longitudinal sample were 1.79 times more likely to be classified as preschool developers (following either an intermediate or early developers’ trajectory) versus later developers. Further, in the Oregon sample, girls were 2.34 times more likely to be classified as early developers versus intermediate developers. No other comparisons were significant.

Children’s language skills also predicted within sample trajectory differences. For a 1 SD increase in expressive vocabulary, children in the MLSELD preschool sample were 1.40 times more likely to be classified as a preschool developer versus a later developer. Furthermore, for a 1 SD increase in vocabulary children were 1.68 times more likely to be identified as early developers versus intermediate developers. For the Oregon sample, children were 1.23 times more likely to be classified as demonstrating a preschool developer trajectory compared to later developer trajectory, and 1.63 times as likely to be identified as early developers versus intermediate developers per a 1 SD increase in expressive vocabulary. No other comparisons were significant.

Mother education predicted trajectory differences in the MLSELD preschool sample and the Oregon sample. In the MLSELD preschool sample, children whose mothers completed one additional level of education (e.g., moving from associate to bachelors) were 1.30 times more likely to be classified as a preschool developer than a later developer. Likewise, of the children who demonstrated growth across preschool, there were significant differences between intermediate developers and early developers such that for a 1 unit difference in mother education, children were 1.26 times more likely to be classified as early developers. Within the Oregon sample, for every 1 unit increase in reported maternal education, children were 1.23 times more likely to be classified as demonstrating a preschool developer trajectory versus a later developer trajectory. No other comparisons were significant.

The development of effective self-regulation is widely recognized as an early marker for later life successes ( Blair & Raver, 2015 ; Calkins, 2007 ; Diamond, 2002 ; Gross & Thompson, 2007 ; Moffitt et al., 2011 ). The primary goal of the current paper was to evaluate the trajectory of behavioral self-regulation across early childhood in three distinct samples across two states in order to determine if there was consistent heterogeneity in this trajectory/ies across children. In addition, we evaluated whether several predictors that are often associated with self-regulation could be used to indicate the type of trajectory a child was likely to follow, with an ultimate goal of validating trajectory differences as meaningful and consistent with previous findings, while further increasing our understanding of developmental differences in early childhood behavioral self-regulation across children. Overall, our findings indicate that self-regulation rapidly increases across early childhood, with children in all samples following three distinct trajectories that were distinguishable based on several important factors.

The general growth trajectory of behavioral self-regulation across early childhood was best represented by an exponential function. This was the case across all three samples, although there were differences across samples in whether growth was accelerating or decelerating, likely related to sample specific differences in relation to what ages were captured. This result is consistent with previous findings suggesting that behavioral self-regulation (and the executive function skills that support behavioral self-regulation) develop(s) in a nonlinear fashion with early, rapid gains during the preschool (e.g., Cameron-Ponitz et al., 2008 ; Diamond, 2002 ; Wiebe et al., 2012).

The growth mixture modeling results indicated heterogeneity across children in the developmental trajectories. Despite differences in sample locations, background characteristics, and study windows, in all three samples children could be characterized as either early developers, intermediate developers or later developers relative to their within sample peers. Likewise, an identifiable overall pattern emerged such that for the majority of (but not all) children in all samples there was a period of rapid development of behavioral self-regulation in preschool with individual differences in when rapid growth occurred, how rapidly it occurred, and what level of behavioral self-regulation children demonstrated at the beginning of preschool.

Yet, overall, approximately 20% of children appear to make few gains in preschool. This was especially the case in the MLSELD preschool and Oregon sample, with a subset of children in both samples showing little to no growth until 60 months (i.e., 5 years) of age. Children classified as later developers in the Michigan longitudinal sample did show gains before age five, but these gains still lagged behind their sample peers (e.g., it takes children classified as later developers an additional nearly three years, with children ~80 months old or age 6.75, to obtain relatively identical mean levels of self-regulation their early developing peers demonstrated at four years of age).

In general, we conclude that many children are still developing behavioral self-regulation skills as they leave preschool and enter kindergarten, and that they may need behavioral supports in kindergarten with a subset of children just beginning to develop advanced behavioral self-regulation. The current study’s findings mirror teacher observations, with nearly half of teachers indicating that they feel many children enter kindergarten without the self-regulation skills necessary to be ready to learn in formal education setting ( Rimm-Kaufman et al., 2000 ). These finding are also fairly consistent with previous growth trajectory findings within a smaller, Taiwanese sample ( Wanless et al., 2016 ). Interestingly, this previous study reports that both a two and three trajectory solution fit the data, but the three class solution produced an extremely small class (p. 109; Wanless et al., 2016 ). It is plausible that three classes were consistently found in the current study due to inclusion of larger, more heterogeneous samples.

The overarching similar patterns observable across samples and in the literature at large, indicate that once children start to utilize executive function skills to carry out complex directions, it is a relatively short developmental time before they are able to accurately and consistently follow multiple abstract rules such as those utilized in the Head-Toes-Knees-Shoulders self-regulation task. Importantly, what is clear from the current study that was less clear in previous work is that: 1) it generally takes just about 2–3 years to go from little ability to self-regulate in the face of complex instructions to task mastery in this context and 2) All children will master the basic skills needed to participate in self-regulatory tasks, however the age at which they do so varies across children and is related to child characteristics and contextual factors Thus, the important relations between children’s levels of behavioral self-regulation and later development outcomes documented in previous work (e.g., McClelland et al., 2006 ) may be better described as reflecting differences in the timing of the development of behavioral self-regulation.

Indicators associated with self-regulation growth trajectories

Our findings indicate that early childhood behavioral self-regulation trajectories are distinguishable based on associations with other variables. Consistent with past findings (e.g., Matthews et al., 2009 ) the identification of a child as a girl was associated with earlier development trajectories. In all samples, there were more boys in the later developers group, with results reaching statistical significance in the Michigan longitudinal sample. Interestingly in the Oregon sample there was also a statistically significant difference in the number of boys in the intermediate trajectory compared to the early developer’s trajectory. These findings are generally consistent with previous findings (e.g., Matthews et al., 2009 ) and suggest that boys may need additional supports at the beginning or during preschool to ensure they develop the self-regulation skills necessary for entry into kindergarten. Notably, gender differences were observed in the two samples that spanned into the formal years of education (kindergarten and beyond), possibly providing support to previous evidence suggesting that gender differences appear more substantially over time ( Entwistle et al., 2007 ; Matthews et al., 2009 ; 2014 ). More work is necessary to determine why gender differences are linked to different pattern of self-regulation development. Likewise systematic investigations of how these associations change across time are also warranted. One possibility beyond the scope of the current study is that boys can be more sensitive to environmental experiences including chaos ( Cameron Ponitz, Rimm-Kaufman, Brock, & Nathanson, 2009 ; Wachs, 1992 ; Wachs et al., 2004 ), as well as parent and teacher expectations of school success ( Entwistle, et al., 2007 ; Wanless et al., 2011 ). It is possible that overtime, continued chaos or continued high or low expectations from parents and teachers may have cumulative effects on skill development.

Likewise, language was also predictive of what behavioral self-regulation trajectory a child was likely to follow. Within the MSELD preschool and Oregon sample, higher levels of expressive language at the start of preschool was associated with earlier development, similar to other field findings ( Bohlmann et al., 2015 ; Vallotton & Ayoub; 2011 ). There is long standing theoretical support for the role of language as an organizational tool used to aid self-regulation development ( Cole et al., 2010 ; Vygotsky 1934/1986 ), and the current study provides some evidence that early language skills may affect the timing and rate of development of early self-regulation growth across early childhood. Higher levels of language may give children the ability to organize and better understand incoming information such as complex behavioral rules, contributing to the use of more complex self-regulation that relies on attending to and keeping track of information (i.e., working memory), while inhibiting a well learned dominant response pattern. Future studies are necessary to better understand the ongoing relations between language and self-regulation development ( Bohlman et al., 2015 ). Specifically, more studies evaluating the potential mechanisms regarding language’s role (e.g., see Winsler et al., 2009 ) and the specifics of what other aspects of language lead to the rapid develop of self-regulation.

Mothers’ education levels also affected what trajectory a child was likely to follow. Early developers generally lived in homes where mothers reported the highest education levels, with children in Oregon and the MLSELD significantly more likely to be classified as an intermediate or early developer based on maternal education. Mother education serves as a proxy for aspects of the environment, including available household resources. These resources include physical resources such as toys, games, learning materials, and books that can support self-regulation development ( Brooks-Gunn & Duncan, 1997 ), but also abstract resources such as a less stressful home environment (see Blair & Raver, 2012 ). Additionally, more highly educated mothers often hold different beliefs compared to their lower educated counterparts that affect their parenting behavior towards their children (see Bradley & Corwyn, 2002 for review), that could in turn affect developing self-regulation. Maternal education may also help to explain why children within the Oregon sample developed self-regulation slightly later relative to both Michigan samples. There was a higher preponderance of mothers with lower education levels and families were more likely to be living at or below the poverty line, perhaps indicating that children had fewer familial supports to help them to develop their self-regulation. Furthermore, although beyond the purview of the current study, it is also important to note that poverty consistently predicts the complexity of children’s developing language ( Fernald, Marchman, & Weisleder, 2013 ; Hart & Risley, 1995 ), and is often related to gender differences in children’s performance ( Entwistle et al., 2007 ). A greater investigation across multiple indicators of a child’s environment is a necessary next step in fully understanding what attributes affect children’s self-regulation development in context.

Practical Implications

These findings have several implications. First, given that majority of children appear to demonstrate rapid gains in behavioral self-regulation between the ages of three and seven (but particularly during the preschool years), this research supports previous work emphasizing this time period as a potential critical period ( Blair, 2002 ; 2010 ; Diamond, et al., 2007 ; McClelland & Cameron, 2012 ). Utilizing preschool curricula such as Tools of the Mind ( Bodrova & Leong, 2007 ) that center on scaffolding children’s early self-regulation skills or targeted games and activities focusing on promoting self-regulation (e.g., Schmitt, McClelland, Tominey & Acock, 2015 ) may provide children the support they need to develop behavioral self-regulation skills early. On the other hand, programs and curricula that focus on self-regulation and consider/target multiple aspects of the developing child may ultimately prove even more impactful for preparing all children for formal education (see Dickinson, McCabe & Essex, 2006 ; Lonigan et al., 2015 ). Future investigations evaluating school contexts and their associations with different self-regulation developmental trajectories are necessary to provide further support to these assertions.

In addition to offering insights into the developmental trajectories of behavioral self-regulation, this work also offers tentative evidence indicating which trajectory a child is likely to follow may be predictable based on background characteristics. Specifically, it may be possible to screen for children who are at risk of entering kindergarten without the self-regulation skills teachers feel are necessary to succeed ( Rimm-Kaufman et al., 2000 ). For example, our study indicates that boys from families with lower education levels who score lower on early vocabulary tests compared to peers may be at risk of starting kindergarten behind in self-regulation. Although a more thorough investigation of predictive traits is warranted, even these few consistent predictors, in conjunction with delays in preschool self-regulation progress, may be enough to indicate a need for support, particular given research indicating that later behavioral self-regulation development can impact school readiness and future academic skills and success for years to come (see McClelland et al., 2006 ; Wanless et al., 2016 ).

This type of developmental work also could enhance progress monitoring by early childhood professionals. Recent research has advocated that early education environments should include a three-tiered system of service delivery that includes increasing instructional intensity to the level of student needs (e.g., Fox, Dunlap, & Cushing, 2002 ). A better understanding of how self-regulation development progresses, and what constitutes normal versus delayed development (i.e., benchmarks related to student needs) gives teachers the tools they need to customize level of instruction appropriately, including information for when to seek outside support for children who may need intervention. Past research indicates that early interventions targeted at increasing behavioral self-regulation skills can result in significant behavioral self-regulatory gains as well as some academic gains, particularly for individuals who are have lower initial levels of behavioral self-regulation compared to peers ( Schmitt, et al., 2015 ; Tominey & McClelland, 2011 ).

As preschool and kindergarten have evolved in focus across the last few decades (and continue to evolve) from social-emotional skills to more academic skills ( Kagan, Kauerz, & Tarrant, 2007 ; Stipek, 2011 ), it is critical for researchers and policymakers alike to remember that social-emotional development such as self-regulation development can have long lasting impacts on children’s school readiness and success, including academic success. Past research indicates that children who begin kindergarten with lower levels of self-regulation skills also lag in math and literacy skills through sixth grade, with the gaps in achievement widening through second grade between children with higher kindergarten self-regulation and children with comparatively lower levels of self-regulation ( McClelland et al., 2006 ). Although future research linking academic achievement to different self-regulation trajectory classifications is needed, we speculate that children classified in the current study as ‘later developing’ may struggle with academic achievement given that these children did not demonstrate the rapid gains their peers demonstrated in preschool with some not showing those types of gains until nearly the end of kindergarten. It is possible that a lagged trajectory in early childhood may have cascading effects on children’s future development as many of the skills that rely in part on self-regulation skills may also be delayed until self-regulation skills are more adequately acquired. Regardless, the fact that all ‘later developers’ across samples in the current study demonstrated markedly less developmental progress compared to peers should be addressed as early as possible given that self-regulation in its own right is an important developmental milestone ( Bronson, 2000 ).

Limitations and Future Studies

The current study utilized one measure of self-regulation, which, although reliable and valid, does not fully capture the multi-dimensional nature of self-regulation. The inclusion of other measures of self-regulation that each focus on a different aspect of self-regulation would certainly be informative in future studies for better understanding how these multiple aspects come together to support behavioral self-regulation. Additional measurement work is also needed, as it is not clear how these aspects integrate, or develop in relation to each other across time ( Allan & Lonigan, 2014 ; Miller, Giesbrecht, Müller, McInerney, & Kerns, 2012 ; Willoughby et al., 2011 ; Zelazo & Carlson, 2008 ). Studying the development of multiple aspects of self-regulation could provide a greater specificity of information, particularly related to the subset of children who demonstrated later development.

In addition, caution must be taken regarding whether the functional form found within the current study is specific to the measure used, or is indicative of the latent construct of behavioral self-regulation. Past evidence and theory (e.g., Diamond, 2002 ; Vallotton & Ayoub, 2011 ) support the current finding that the development of behavioral self-regulation is non-linear across early childhood, yet more research with multiple measures is needed to adequately confirm that this is the case and that the functional form of development is not an artifact of the particular assessment(s) used. Likewise, additional research focused on functional form differences across the trajectories is necessary. Consistent with typical GMM practices, the current work used a common functional form (exponential), while allowing rate of change to vary across trajectories. Our findings suggested that some children may demonstrate a different functional form indicative of a more steady progression of skill development. There is little past work or theory specifying trajectory form differences or how mechanisms of development relate to those differences. In short, it is still not clear whether children may acquire skills differently across trajectories with some children ‘leaping’ in skills indicating a possible rapid integration of multiple skills into a behavior, while others slowly build the skills that support self-regulation.

In the current study we focused on a core set of predictors to validate trajectory differences; more comprehensive work is necessary to determine underlying mechanisms of regulatory differences. As anticipated, the set of chosen indicators we focused on supported that the individual differences captured by the three trajectories found per sample are meaningful, yet a host of other indicators will likely provide more information regarding trajectory differences, as well as indicating what child skills and environments are important to help children optimize their regulatory development. For example, direct evaluation of the early contexts provided to children by aspects of parental warmth and responsiveness and their predictive association with developmental differences in self-regulation is a promising next step ( Grolnick & Farkas, 2002 ; Landry et al., 2002 ).

Likewise there is a need to evaluate genetic and neurological predictors of trajectory differences, particularly given recent findings suggesting that self-regulation and many of the processes, including neural processes, that underlie it may be genetic in nature (e.g., see Friedman, et al., 2008 ; Friedman, Miyake, Robinson & Hewitt, 2011 ) although still open to environmental influences via probabilistic epigenesis (see Blair & Raver, 2012 ; Deater-Deckard, 2014 ). This must be considered given the remarkable regularity of patterns across three diverse samples in the current study.

Conclusions

The present study is an important contribution to our understanding of how self-regulation develops during early childhood. Specifically, findings indicate that the development of behavioral self-regulation is exponential in nature. Likewise, there are differences in this trajectory such that majority of children demonstrate rapid gains across the preschool time period, while a subset of children demonstrated low levels of initial behavioral self-regulation and later self-regulation development. Differences in what trajectory a child was likely to follow were linked to different child attributes and background characteristics. Based on these findings researchers and educators alike should consider carefully how best to support children’s development of behavioral self-regulation during early childhood, particularly for children who may be at-risk of making few gains during preschool as early self-regulation development seemingly places children on a trajectory for later school, economic, and health successes.

Supplementary Material

Acknowledgments.

The research reported here was partially supported by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through Grant R305A100566 to Oregon State University. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of the Institute of the U.S. Department of Education. This work was also supported by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and the National Science Foundation under grant numbers R01 HD27176 and 0111754, respectively. Additional funding was provided by the U.S. Department of Education, Institute for Education Sciences, Cognition and Student Learning (R305H04013) and the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01 HD48539).

1 In the Michigan longitudinal sample, > 7 languages other than English were reported as children’s primary language, the largest language sub-group consisted of Arabic (n=4). For the MLSELD preschool sample, 18 languages other than English were reported, the largest language sub-groups consisted of Spanish, and Korean speakers (n = 8).

2 We also ran analyses with only points for naming an object correctly included (i.e., excluding the points received for describing functions). The results were similar with both scoring methods, thus we present findings using the total (naming and functions) score as this is commonly how the subtest is scored and used in previous studies.

3 In years one and two of the MLSELD preschool study, most children had two assessments within three months. To ensure local independence within the three month windows, only one assessment was included, chosen at random.

4 We also ran the 3-step approach discussed in Asparouhov & Muthen (2014) . However, this approach results in listwise deletion of missing data at the predictor level. Thus, in addition to the initial 3-step approach models we also used multiple imputations of missing predictor level data and re-ran all 3-step approach models. The pattern of results was the same in all cases.

5 In order to rule out the possibility that the exponential shape was a product of floor and ceiling effects across time points, all analyses were re-ran utilizing Tobit growth curve models (Wang, Zhang, McArdle & Salthouse, 2009), which can account for floor or ceiling effects. In all samples, an exponential model still fit best compared to other models, even when accounting for floor or ceilings.

• Allan NP, Lonigan CJ. Exploring dimensionality of effortful control using hot and cool tasks in a sample of preschool children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 2014; 122 :33–47. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.013. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Asparouhov T, Muthén B. Auxiliary variables in mixture modeling: Three-step approaches using M plus. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal. 2014; 21 :329–341. doi: 10.1080/10705511.2014.915181. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Barkley R. Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity disorder, self-regulation, and executive functioning. In: Vohs KD, Baumeister RF, editors. Handbook of self-regulation, second edition: Research, theory, and applications. 2. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2011. pp. 551–564. [ Google Scholar ]
• Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological) 1995:289–300. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bergman LR, Magnusson D, Khouri BME. Studying individual development in an interindividual context: A person-oriented approach. Mahwah, NJ: Psychology Press; 2002. [ Google Scholar ]
• Best JR, Miller PH. A developmental perspective on executive function. Child Development. 2010; 81 :1641–1660. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01499.x. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bindman SW, Hindman AH, Bowles RP, Morrison FJ. The contributions of parental management language to self-regulation in preschool children. Early Childhood Research Quarterly. 2013; 28 :529–539. doi: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2013.03.003. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Blair C. School readiness: Integrating cognition and emotion in a neurobiological conceptualization of children’s functioning at school entry. American Psychologist. 2002; 57 :111–127. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.57.2.111. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Blair C. Stress and the development of self-regulation in context. Child Development Perspectives. 2010; 4 :181–188. doi: 10.1111/j.1750-8606.2010.00145.x. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Blair C, Granger DA, Willoughby M, Mills-Koonce R, Cox M, Greenberg MT, … Fortunato CK. Salivary cortisol mediates effects of poverty and parenting on executive functions in early childhood. Child Development. 2011; 82 :1970–1984. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01643.x. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Blair C, Raver CC. Child development in the context of adversity: Experiential canalization of brain and behavior. American Psychologist. 2012; 67 :309–318. doi: 10.1037/a0027493. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Blair C, Raver CC. School readiness and self-regulation: A developmental psychobiological approach. Annual Review of Psychology. 2015; 66 :711–731. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015221. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Blandon AY, Calkins SD, Keane SP, O’Brien M. Individual differences in trajectories of emotion regulation processes: The effects of maternal depressive symptomatology and children’s physiological regulation. Developmental Psychology. 2008; 44 :1110. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.44.4.1110. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bodrova E, Leong DJ. Tools of the mind: The Vygotskian approach to early childhood education. Columbus, OH: Merrill/Prentice Hall; 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bohlmann NL, Maier MF, Palacios N. Bidirectionality in self-regulation and expressive vocabulary: Comparisons between monolingual and dual language learners in preschool. Child Development. 2015; 86 :1094–1111. doi: 10.1111/cdev.12375. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bowles RP, Montroy JJ. Latent growth curve modeling using structural equation modeling. In: Petscher Y, Schatschneider C, Compton DL, editors. Applied quantitative analysis in the social sciences. New York, NY: Routledge; 2013. pp. 265–303. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bowles RP, Pentimonti JM, Gerde HK, Montroy JJ. Item response analysis of uppercase and lowercase letter name knowledge. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment. 2013; 32 :146–156. doi: 10.1177/0734282913490266. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bradley RH, Corwyn RF. Socioeconomic status and child development. Annual Review of Psychology. 2002; 53 :371–399. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135233. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brooks-Gunn J, Duncan GJ. The effects of poverty on children. Future Child. 1997; 7 :55–71. doi: 10.2307/1602387. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bronson MB. Self-Regulation in early childhood: Nature and nurture. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2000. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brownell R. Expressive one-word picture vocabulary test - 2000 edition. Novato, CA: Academic Therapy Publications; 2000. [ Google Scholar ]
• Calkins SD. The emergence of self-regulation: Biological and behavioral control mechanisms supporting toddler competencies. In: Brownell CA, Kopp CB, editors. Socioemotional development in the toddler years: Transitions and transformations. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2007. pp. 261–284. [ Google Scholar ]
• Calkins SD, Dedmon SE, Gill KL, Lomax LE, Johnson LM. Frustration in infancy: Implications for emotion regulation, physiological processes, and temperament. Infancy. 2002; 3 :175–197. doi: 10.1207/S15327078IN0302_4. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cameron Ponitz CE, McClelland MM, Jewkes AM, Connor CM, Farris CL, Morrison FJ. Touch your toes! Developing a direct measure of behavioral regulation in early childhood. Early Childhood Research Quarterly. 2008; 23 :141–158. doi: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2007.01.004. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cameron Ponitz CE, McClelland MM, Matthews JS, Morrison FJ. A structured observation of behavioral self-regulation and its contribution to kindergarten outcomes. Developmental Psychology. 2009; 45 :605–619. doi: 10.1037/a0015365. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cameron Ponitz CE, Rimm-Kaufman SE, Brock LL, Nathanson L. Early adjustment, gender differences, and classroom organizational climate in first grade. The Elementary School Journal. 2009; 110 :142–162. doi: 10.1086/605470. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Carlson SM, Moses LJ, Breton C. How specific is the relation between executive function and theory of mind? Contributions of inhibitory control and working memory. Infant and Child Development. 2002; 11 :73–92. doi: 10.1002/icd.298. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chang H, Shaw DS, Dishion TJ, Gardner F, Wilson MN. Direct and indirect effects of the family check-up on self-regulation from toddlerhood to early school-age. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology. 2014; 42 :1117–1128. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Clark CA, Sheffield TD, Chevalier N, Nelson JM, Wiebe SA, Espy KA. Charting early trajectories of executive control with the shape school. Developmental Psychology. 2013; 49 :1481–1493. doi: 10.1037/a0030578. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cole PM, Armstrong LM, Pemberton CK. The role of language in the development of emotion regulation. In: Calkins SD, Bell M, editors. Child development at the intersection of emotion and cognition: Human brain development. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2010. pp. 59–77. [ Google Scholar ]
• Connor CM, Ponitz CC, Phillips BM, Travis QM, Glasney S, Morrison FJ. First graders’ literacy and self-regulation gains: The effect of individualizing student instruction. Journal of School Psychology. 2010; 48 :433–455. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2010.06.003. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Corrigan P. On moral regulation: Some preliminary remarks. The Sociological Review. 1981; 29 :313–337. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-954X.1981.tb00176.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Da Silva S, Moreira B, Da Costa N., Jr 2D: 4D digit ratio predicts delay of gratification in preschoolers. PloS One. 2014; 9 :e114394. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Deater-Deckard K. Family matters intergenerational and interpersonal processes of executive function and attentive behavior. Current Directions in Psychological Science. 2014; 23 :230–236. doi: 10.1177/0963721414531597. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Diamond A. Normal development of prefrontal cortex from birth to young adulthood: Cognitive functions, anatomy, and biochemistry. In: Stuss DT, Knight RT, editors. Principles of frontal lobe function. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2002. pp. 466–503. [ Google Scholar ]
• Diamond A, Barnett WS, Thomas J, Munro S. Preschool program improves cognitive control. Science. 2007; 318 :1387–1388. doi: 10.1126/science.1151148. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Diamond A, Prevor MB, Callender G, Druin DP. Prefrontal cortex cognitive deficits in children treated early and continuously for PKU. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development. 1997; 62 :1–205. doi: 10.2307/1166208. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dickinson DK, McCabe A, Essex MJ. A window of opportunity we must open to all: The case for preschool with high-quality support for language and literacy. In: Dickinson DK, Neuman SB, editors. Handbook of early literacy research. Vol. 2. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2006. pp. 11–28. [ Google Scholar ]
• Enders CK. Applied missing data analysis. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2010. [ Google Scholar ]
• Entwisle DR, Alexander KL, Olson LS. Early schooling: The handicap of being poor and male. Sociology of Education. 2007; 80 :114–138. doi: 10.1177/003804070708000202. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fernald A, Marchman VA, Weisleder A. SES differences in language processing skill and vocabulary are evident at 18 months. Developmental Science. 2013; 16 :234–248. doi: 10.1111/desc.12019. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fox L, Dunlap G, Cushing L. Early intervention, positive behavior support, and transition to school. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders. 2002; 10 :149–157. doi: 10.1177/10634266020100030301. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Friedman NP, Miyake A, Robinson JL, Hewitt JK. Developmental trajectories in toddlers’ self-restraint predict individual differences in executive functions 14 years later: a behavioral genetic analysis. Developmental Psychology. 2011; 47 :1410–1430. doi: 10.1037/a0023750. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Friedman NP, Miyake A, Young SE, DeFries JC, Corley RP, Hewitt JK. Individual differences in executive functions are almost entirely genetic in origin. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 2008; 137 :201–225. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.137.2.201. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Garon N, Bryson SE, Smith IM. Executive function in preschoolers: A review using an integrative framework. Psychological Bulletin. 2008; 134 :31–60. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.134.1.31. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gerstadt CL, Hong YJ, Diamond A. The relationship between cognition and action: Performance of children 3–7 years old on a stroop-like day-night test. Cognition. 1994; 53 :129–153. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(94)90068-X. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Graham JW. Adding missing-data-relevant variables to FIML-based structural equation models. Structural Equation Modeling. 2003; 10 :80–100. doi: 10.1207/S15328007SEM1001_4. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Grimm KJ, McArdle JJ, Hamagami F. Nonlinear growth mixture models in research on cognitive aging. In: van Montfort K, Oud J, Satorra A, editors. Longitudinal models in the behavioral and related sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 2007. pp. 267–295. [ Google Scholar ]
• Grimm KJ, Ram N, Estabrook R. Nonlinear structured growth mixture models in M plus and OpenMx. Multivariate behavioral research. 2010; 45 :887–909. doi: 10.1080/00273171.2010.531230. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Grolnick WS, Farkas M. Parenting and the development of children’s self-regulation. In: Bornstein MH, editor. Handbook of parenting: Practical issues in parenting. 2. Vol. 5. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers; 2002. pp. 89–110. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gross JJ, Thompson RA. Emotion regulation: Conceptual foundations. In: Gross JJ, editor. Handbook of emotion regulation. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2007. pp. 3–24. [ Google Scholar ]
• Guttentag CL, Pedrosa-Josic C, Landry SH, Smith KE, Swank PR. Individual variability in parenting profiles and predictors of change: Effects of an intervention with disadvantaged mothers. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology. 2006; 27 :349–369. doi: 10.1016/j.appdev.2006.04.005. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hart B, Risley T. Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing; 1995. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hindman AH, Morrison FJ. Differential contributions of three parenting dimensions to preschool literacy and social skills in a middle-income sample. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly. 2012; 58 :191–223. doi: 10.1353/mpq.2012.0012. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hoff E, Laursen B, Tardif T. Socioeconomic status and parenting. In: Bornstein’s MH, editor. Handbook of parenting: Biology and ecology of parenting. 2. Vol. 2. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 2002. pp. 231–252. [ Google Scholar ]
• Howse RB, Calkins SD, Anastopoulos AD, Keane SP, Shelton TL. Regulatory contributors to children’s kindergarten achievement. Early Education & Development. 2003; 14 :101–120. doi: 10.1207/s15566935eed1401_7. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kagan SL, Kauerz K, Tarrant K. The early care and education teaching workforce at the fulcrum: An agenda for reform. Washington, DC: Teachers College Press; 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kazak AE. Fathers’ and mothers’ parenting behavior and beliefs as predictors of children’s social adjustment in the transition to school. Journal of Family Psychology. 2004; 18 :628–638. doi: 10.1037/0893-3200.18.4.628. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kim S, Nordling JK, Yoon JE, Boldt LJ, Kochanska G. Effortful control in “hot” and “cool” tasks differentially predicts children’s behavior problems and academic performance. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology. 2013; 41 :43–56. doi: 10.1007/s10802-012-9661-4. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kochanska G, Coy KC, Murray KT. The development of self-regulation in the first four years of life. Child Development. 2001; 72 :1091–1111. doi: 10.1111/1467-8624.00336. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kopp CB. Antecedents of self-regulation: A developmental perspective. Developmental Psychology. 1982; 18 :199–214. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.18.2.199. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kopp CB. Regulation of distress and negative emotions: A developmental view. Developmental Psychology. 1989; 25 :343–354. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.25.3.343. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kreuter F, Muthén BO. Analyzing criminal trajectory profiles: Bridging multilevel and group-based approaches using growth mixture modeling. Journal of Quantitative Criminology. 2008; 24 :1–31. doi: 10.1007/s10940-007-9036-0. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lan X, Legare CH, Ponitz CC, Li S, Morrison FJ. Investigating the links between the subcomponents of executive function and academic achievement: A cross-cultural analysis of Chinese and American preschoolers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 2011; 108 :677–692. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2010.11.001. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Landry SH, Miller-Loncar CL, Smith KE, Swank PR. The role of early parenting in children’s development of executive processes. Developmental Neuropsychology. 2002; 21 :15–41. doi: 10.1207/S15326942DN2101_2. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Landry SH, Smith KE, Swank PR. Responsive parenting: Establishing early foundations for social, communication, and independent problem-solving skills. Developmental Psychology. 2006; 42 :627–642. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.42.4.627. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lengua LJ, Moran L, Zalewski M, Ruberry E, Kiff C, Thompson S. Relations of growth in effortful control to family income, cumulative risk, and adjustment in preschool-age children. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology. 2015; 43 :705–720. doi: 10.1007/s10802-014-9941-2. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lerner RM, Overton WF. Exemplifying the integrations of the relational developmental system: Synthesizing theory, research, and application to promote positive development and social justice. Journal of Adolescent Research. 2008; 23 :245–255. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lipsey MW, Nesbitt KT, Farran DC, Dong N, Fuhs MW, Wilson SJ. Learning-related cognitive self-regulation measures for prekindergarten children with predictive validity for academic achievement (Working Paper) Peabody Research Institute at Vanderbilt University website. 2014 https://my.vanderbilt.edu/cogselfregulation/files/2012/11/Self-Reg-summary-paper-5-7-141.pdf .
• Lonigan CJ, Wagner RK, Torgesen JK, Rashotte CA. TOPEL: Test of preschool early literacy. Austin, TX: PRO-ED; 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lonigan CJ, Phillips BM, Clancy JL, Landry SH, Swank PR, Assel M, … Eisenberg N. Impacts of a comprehensive school readiness curriculum for preschool children at risk for educational difficulties. Child Development. 2015; 86 :1773–1793. doi: 10.1111/cdev.12460. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Martel MM, Roberts BA. Prenatal testosterone increases sensitivity to prenatal stressors in males with disruptive behavior disorders. Neurotoxicology and Teratology. 2014; 44 :11–17. doi: 10.1016/j.ntt.2014.05.001. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Matthews JS, Marulis LM, Williford AP. Gender processes in school functioning and the mediating role of cognitive self-regulation. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology. 2014; 35 :128–137. doi: 10.1016/j.appdev.2014.02.003. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Matthews JS, Ponitz CC, Morrison FJ. Early gender differences in self-regulation and academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2009; 101 :689–704. doi: 10.1037/a0014240. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McArdle JJ. Latent variable growth within behavior genetic models. Behavior Genetics. 1986; 16 :163–200. doi: 10.1007/BF01065485. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McArdle JJ, Bell RQ. An introduction to latent growth models for developmental data analysis. In: Little TD, Schnabel KU, editors. Modeling longitudinal and multilevel data: Practical issues, applied approaches and specific examples. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2000. pp. 69–107. [ Google Scholar ]
• McArdle JJ, Nesselroade JR. Growth curve analysis in contemporary psychological research. In: Schinka JA, Velicer WF, editors. Handbook of psychology: Research methods in psychology. New York, NY: Wiley; 2003. pp. 447–480. [ Google Scholar ]
• McClelland MM, Acock AC, Morrison FJ. The impact of kindergarten learning-related skills on academic trajectories at the end of elementary school. Early Childhood Research Quarterly. 2006; 21 :471–490. doi: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2006.09.003. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McClelland MM, Acock AC, Piccinin A, Rhea SA, Stallings MC. Relations between preschool attention span-persistence and age 25 educational outcomes. Early Childhood Research Quarterly. 2013; 28 :314–324. doi: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2012.07.008. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McClelland MM, Cameron CE. Self-regulation in early childhood: Improving conceptual clarity and developing ecologically valid measures. Child Development Perspectives. 2012; 6 :136–142. doi: 10.1111/j.1750-8606.2011.00191.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McClelland MM, Cameron CE, Connor CM, Farris CL, Jewkes AM, Morrison FJ. Links between behavioral regulation and preschoolers’ literacy, vocabulary, and math skills. Developmental Psychology. 2007; 43 :947–959. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.43.4.947. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McClelland MM, Cameron CE, Duncan R, Bowles RP, Acock AC, Miao A, Pratt ME. Predictors of early growth in academic achievement: The head-toes-knees-shoulders task. Frontiers in Psychology. 2014; 5 :1–14. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00599. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McClelland MM, Cameron Ponitz CE, Messersmith E, Tominey SL. The integration of cognition and emotion. In: Lerner RM, Overton WF, editors. Handbook of lifespan human development. 4. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons; 2010. pp. 509–553. [ Google Scholar ]
• McClelland MM, Morrison FJ, Holmes DL. Children at risk for early academic problems: The role of learning-related social skills. Early Childhood Research Quarterly. 2000; 15 :307–329. doi: 10.1016/S0885-2006(00)00069-7. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McClelland MM, Wanless SB. Growing up with assets and risks: The importance of self-regulation for academic achievement. Research in Human Development. 2012; 9 :278–297. doi: 10.1080/15427609.2012.729907. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Meredith W, Tisak J. Latent curve analysis. Psychometrika. 1990; 55 :107–122. doi: 10.1007/BF02294746. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Miech R, Essex MJ, Goldsmith HH. Socioeconomic status and the adjustment to school: The role of self-regulation during early childhood. Sociology of Education. 2001; 74 :102–120. [ Google Scholar ]
• Miller MR, Giesbrecht GF, Müller U, McInerney RJ, Kerns KA. A latent variable approach to determining the structure of executive function in preschool children. Journal of Cognition and Development. 2012; 13 :395–423. doi: 10.1080/15248372.2011.585478. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mischel W, Ayduk O, Berman MG, Casey BJ, Gotlib IH, Jonides J, … Shoda Y. “Willpower” over the life span: Decomposing self-regulation. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience. 2011; 6 :252–256. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsq081. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Moffitt TE, Arseneault L, Belsky D, Dickson N, Hancox RJ, Harrington H, … Caspi A. A gradient of childhood self-control predicts health, wealth, and public safety. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2011; 108 :2693–2698. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1010076108. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Montroy JJ, Bowles RP, Skibbe LE, Foster TD. Social skills and problem behaviors as mediators of the relationship between behavioral self-regulation and academic achievement. Early Childhood Research Quarterly. 2014; 29 :298–309. doi: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2014.03.002. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Muthén BO. Latent variable mixture modeling. In: Marcoulides GA, Schumacker RE, editors. New developments and techniques in structural equation modeling. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2001. pp. 1–33. [ Google Scholar ]
• Muthén BO, Muthén LK. Integrating person-centered and variable-centered analyses: Growth mixture modeling with latent trajectory classes. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research. 2000; 24 :882–891. doi: 10.1111/j.1530-0277.2000.tb02070.x. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Muthén LK, Muthén BO. Mplus user’s guide. 6. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén; 1998–2010. [ Google Scholar ]
• Nagin DS. Analyzing developmental trajectories: A semiparametric, group-based approach. Psychological Methods. 1999; 4 :139–157. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.4.2.139. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Posner MI, Rothbart MK. Developing mechanisms of self-regulation. Development and Psychopathology. 2000; 12 :427–441. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ready DD, LoGerfo LF, Burkam DT, Lee VE. Explaining girls’ advantage in kindergarten literacy learning: Do classroom behaviors make a difference? The Elementary School Journal. 2005; 106 :21–38. doi: 10.1086/496905. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rimm-Kaufman SE, Pianta RC, Cox MJ. Teachers’ judgments of problems in the transition to kindergarten. Early Childhood Research Quarterly. 2000; 15 :147–166. doi: 10.1016/S0885-2006(00)00049-1. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Roben CK, Cole PM, Armstrong LM. Longitudinal relations among language skills, anger expression, and regulatory strategies in early childhood. Child Development. 2013; 84 :891–905. doi: 10.1111/cdev.12027. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rogosa D. Myths about longitudinal research. In: Schaie KW, Campbell RT, Meredith W, Rawlings SC, editors. Methodological issues in aging research. New York, NY: Springer Publishing Co; 1988. pp. 171–209. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rothbart MK, Posner MI, Kieras J. Temperament, attention, and the development of self-regulation. In: McCartney K, Phillips D, editors. Blackwell handbook of early childhood development. Malden: Blackwell Publishing; 2006. pp. 338–357. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rothbart MK, Ellis LK, Rosario Rueda M, Posner MI. Developing mechanisms of temperamental effortful control. Journal of Personality. 2003; 71 :1113–1144. doi: 10.1111/1467-6494.7106009. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rueda MR, Posner MI, Rothbart MK. Attentional control and self-regulation. In: Vohs KD, Baumeister RF, editors. Handbook of self-regulation: Research, theory, and applications. 2. New York NY: Guilford Press; 2004. pp. 284–299. [ Google Scholar ]
• Schmitt SA, McClelland MM, Tominey SL, Acock AC. Strengthening school readiness for Head Start children: Evaluation of a self-regulation intervention. Early Childhood Research Quarterly. 2015; 30 :20–31. doi: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2014.08.001. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schmitt SA, Pratt ME, McClelland MM. Examining the validity of behavioral self-regulation tools in predicting preschoolers’ academic achievement. Early Education and Development. 2014; 25 :641–660. doi: 10.1080/10409289.2014.850397. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schunk DH, Zimmerman BJ. Social origins of self-regulatory competence. Educational Psychologist. 1997; 32 :195–208. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep3204_1. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Singer JD, Willett JB. Applied longitudinal data analysis: Modeling change and event occurrence. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2003. [ Google Scholar ]
• Skibbe LE, Grimm KJ, Bowles RP, Morrison FJ. Literacy growth in the academic year versus summer from preschool through second grade: Differential effects of schooling across four skills. Scientific Studies of Reading. 2012; 16 :141–165. doi: 10.1080/10888438.2010.543446. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stifter CA, Braungart JM. The regulation of negative reactivity in infancy: Function and development. Developmental Psychology. 1995; 31 :448–455. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.31.3.448. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stipek D. Classroom practices and children’s motivation to learn. In: Zigler E, Gillian WS, Barnett SW, editors. The pre-K debates: Current controversies and issues. Vol. 2011 Baltimore, MD, US: Paul H Brookes Publishing; 2011. pp. 98–103. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tofighi D, Enders CK. Identifying the correct number of classes in growth mixture models. In: Hancock GR, editor. Mixture models in latent variable research. Greenwich, CT: Information Age; 2007. pp. 317–341. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tominey SL, McClelland MM. Red light, purple light: Findings from a randomized trial using circle time games to improve behavioral self-regulation in preschool. Early Education & Development. 2011; 22 :489–519. doi: 10.1080/10409289.2011.574258. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vallotton C, Ayoub C. Use your words: The role of language in the development of toddlers’ self-regulation. Early Childhood Research Quarterly. 2011; 26 :169–181. doi: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2010.09.002. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vohs KD, Baumeister RF. Handbook of self-regulation, second edition: Research, theory, and applications. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2011. [ Google Scholar ]
• von Eye A, Bergman LR. Research strategies in developmental psychopathology: Dimensional identity and the person-oriented approach. Development and Psychopathology. 2003; 15 :553–580. doi: 10.1017/S0954579403000294. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• von Suchodoletz A, Gestsdottir S, Wanless SB, McClelland MM, Birgisdottir F, Gunzenhauser C, Ragnarsdottir H. Behavioral self-regulation and relations to emergent academic skills among children in Germany and Iceland. Early Childhood Research Quarterly. 2013; 28 :62–73. doi: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2012.05.003. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vygotsky LS. In: Thought and language. Kozulin A, translator. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press; 1934/1986. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wachs TD. The nature of nurture. Vol. 3. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications; 1992. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wachs TD, Gurkas P, Kontos S. Predictors of preschool children’s compliance behavior in early childhood classroom settings. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology. 2004; 25 :439–457. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wang L, Zhang Z, McArdle JJ, Salthouse TA. Investigating ceiling effects in longitudinal data analysis. Multivariate behavioral research. 2008; 43 :476–496. doi: 10.1080/00273170802285941. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wanless SB, Kim KH, Zhang C, Degol JL, Chen JL, Chen FM. Trajectories of behavioral regulation for Taiwanese children from 3.5 to 6 years and relations to math and vocabulary outcomes. Early Childhood Research Quarterly. 2016; 34 :104–114. doi: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2015.10.001. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wanless SB, McClelland MM, Acock AC, Cameron Ponitz C, Son S-H, Lan X, Morrison FJ, Chen J-L, Chen F-M, Lee K, Sung M, Li S. Measuring behavioral regulation in four cultures. Psychological Assessment. 2011; 23 :364–378. doi: 10.1037/a0021768. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wiebe SA, Sheffield T, Nelson JM, Clark CAC, Chevalier N, Espy KA. The structure of executive function in 3-year-olds. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 2011; 108 :436–452. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2010.08.008. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Willoughby M, Kupersmidt J, Voegler-Lee M, Bryant D. Contributions of hot and cool self-regulation to preschool disruptive behavior and academic achievement. Developmental Neuropsychology. 2011; 36 :162–180. doi: 10.1080/87565641.2010.549980. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Willoughby MT, Magnus B, Vernon-Feagans L, Blair CB Family Life Project Investigators. Developmental delays in executive function from 3 to 5 years of age predict kindergarten academic readiness. Journal of Learning Disabilities. 2016 doi: 10.1177/0022219415619754. Advamce online publication. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wilson SB, Lonigan CJ. Identifying preschool children at risk of later reading difficulties: Evaluation of two emergent literacy screening tools. Journal of Learning Disabilities. 2009; 43 :62–76. doi: 10.1177/0022219409345007. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Winsler A, Fernyhough C, Montero I, editors. Private speech, executive functioning, and the development of verbal self-regulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
• Woodcock RW, Mather N. WJ-III: Woodcock Johnson III tests of achievement: Examiner’s manual. Itasca, IL: Riverside; 2001. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zelazo PD, Carlson SM. Hot and cool executive function in childhood and adolescence: Development and plasticity. Child Development Perspectives. 2012; 6 :354–360. doi: 10.1111/j.1750-8606.2012.00246.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zelazo PD, Carlson SM, Kesek A. The development of executive function in childhood. In: Nelson CA, Luciana M, editors. Handbook of developmental cognitive neuroscience. 2. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2008. pp. 553–574. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zelazo PD, Müller U. Executive function in typical and atypical development. In: Goswami’s U, editor. The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of childhood cognitive development. 2. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons; 2010. pp. 574–603. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zelazo P, Müller U, Frye D, Marcovitch S, Argitis G, Boseovski J, … Sutherland A. The development of executive function in early childhood. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development. 2003; 68 :11–43. doi: 10.1111/j.0037-976X.2003.00260.x. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

REVIEW article

Emotional regulation and arnold’s self-ideal: a way to flourishment.

• 1 Universidad Internacional de la Rioja, Logroño, Spain
• 2 Department of Theory and Methods in Educational and Psychological Research, Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain
• 3 Department of Psychology, Universitat Abat Oliba CEU, CEU Universities, Barcelona, Spain

The convergence of researchers in the fields of flourishing, moral psychology, and social–emotional studies has reached a stage where developing a theory that connects emotional regulation and flourishing is meaningful. This theoretical investigation aims to uncover insights from the research of Magda B. Arnold, renowned for her theory of emotions, and lesser-known for her notion of the self-ideal, regarding the relationship between emotional regulation and flourishing. Our initial hypothesis posits that Arnold’s concept of self-ideal provides a framework for understanding how to foster emotional regulation in individuals by directing it toward constructive life objectives. To achieve this, we explore the current state of emotional regulation and flourishing and the relationship between these concepts; we consider the interconnectedness of emotion and self-ideal within Arnold’s theory and analyze its potential to serve as a foundation for building a theory relating flourishing and emotional regulation. We find in Arnold’s theory substantial ideas about the relationship between emotional regulation, flourishing, and self-ideal, as well as emerging empirical research relating to these themes. We conclude that Arnold’s research can serve as a catalyst for developing psychological intervention models that enhance emotional regulation and promote a flourishing life.

1 Introduction

Emotional regulation and flourishing are two growing fields in the realms of psychology and education. However, the interplay between emotional regulation and flourishing is a less explored topic, albeit no less relevant. The aim of this research is to study this subject. The procedure involved reviewing the research conducted by Magda B. Arnold, known for her theory of emotions, to find clues about the relationship between emotional regulation and flourishing. Our starting hypothesis is that Arnold’s notion of self-ideal allows us to understand how promoting emotional regulation in individuals serves as a means for them to achieve constructive life goals. As we will see later, such goals are an important element of flourishing as it is currently conceived ( Vittersø, 2016a ). This proposal is particularly innovative due to the limited research linking emotional regulation with flourishing, and because existing studies focus on showing the correlation between specific emotional regulation strategies and flourishing ( Barber et al., 2010 ; Richard-Sephton et al., 2024 ). However, the proposed approach is novel in its aim to theoretically link emotional regulation and flourishing as a preliminary step before examining the connection between specific emotional regulation strategies and flourishing.

Most of the research on Arnold has focused on her contribution to the psychology of emotion ( Gasper and Bramesfeld, 2006 ; Kappas, 2006 ; Reisenzein, 2006 ; Shields, 2006 ). However, recently, the literature has focused on investigating other aspects of her theory: her inspiration from Thomistic psychology ( Echavarría, 2020 ; Pugen, 2020 ), the anthropological foundations of her personality theory ( García-Alandete, 2024 ), as well as the value of her theory of emotions in the current framework of flourishing ( Valenzuela, 2024 ).

Of particular value to this work is considering how Hulsey and Hampson (2014) link Arnold’s concept of self-ideal to moral identity. These authors assert, drawing on Arnold’s theory, that acting in accordance with this self-ideal leads to harmony and integration of the personality, optimizing emotional response. This assertion is reiterated by Cornelius (2006) : the goal in the organization and integration of the personality, in Arnold’s theory, is the coherence between emotional responses and the person’s highest ideals, citing Arnold and Gasson (1954) , p. 306:

If… emotion is to be instrumental in self-actualization, the objects of emotion must be harmonized with the person’s larger goal as a human being. If these objects are seen in their real value, if they are seen in the proper perspective of man’s final end, then the judgment that they are suitable will be objective and well ordered.

This last statement is directly related to the topics of flourishing and personal purpose, subjects of study that have grown in interest in current psychology. It also shows the link between these concepts and emotional regulation: emotions need to be regulated to achieve constructive life goals, which will allow the integration of the personality, as mentioned by Arnold (1969a , b , 1970) .

Valenzuela (2024) , on the other hand, directly links Arnold’s theory of emotions with the current concept of flourishing. According to this author, the relationship between emotions and Arnold’s self-ideal is related to flourishing understood as eudaimonia. Specifically, she shows that Arnold’s concept of happiness goes beyond a hedonistic conception of pleasure, relating it to the meaning of life and to a fundamentally eudaemonic content. Likewise, she suggests that the self-ideal not only leads to maturity, but also to the flourishing of the personality. Thus, the positive emotions that, according to Arnold, allow us to pursue the self-ideal and, especially, the desire for happiness, more than other emotions, would help us to pursue goals that are valuable and meaningful for our lives.

Building on this recent publication on Arnold ( Valenzuela, 2024 ), we will propose the interrelation between the concepts of emotional regulation and flourishing based on Arnold’s model and her concept of self-ideal. Before that, we will present the state of the art on the theory of emotional regulation and flourishing, focusing on the possible relationship between both processes and conceptions. The study we present aims to respond primarily to the following question: How can Arnold’s psychological theory contribute to a better understanding of emotional regulation, flourishing, and the relationship between them? To accomplish this, we must first investigate the following issues: Does flourishing manifest in emotional regulation? Do current theories on flourishing include any reference to emotions and their regulation? Is flourishing an objective or could it be an objective of emotional regulation?

2 Emotional regulation

Emotional regulation is a concept that has been widely studied in recent decades and is a field characterized by definitional chaos ( Gross, 1999 ). In Table 1 , we include a summary of the theories discussed in this section and their main focus. According to Petrova and Gross (2023) , in the year 2022, more than 30,000 articles were published on this topic. In their article, these authors reflect on the future of research on emotional regulation, focusing on interpersonal emotional regulation, on the tactics for carrying out emotional regulation strategies, and on the temporal plane of this process. These three keys set the roadmap for the next generation of emotional regulation researchers. However, in order to understand the current state of the question, it is necessary to refer to the most relevant theories that have dominated during the last decades. In this regard, Gross (1999 , 2015) , a renowned author in this field, stands out, formulating one of the most relevant theories in this field at the end of the 20th century. He distinguishes between the process of emotional generation and the process of emotional regulation ( Gross et al., 2011 ) and presents a process model of emotion generation, based on different researchers among which we find Arnold, Lazarus, Frijda and others. This model acknowledges the concept of valuation or appraisal initiated by Arnold (1969a , 1970) , understanding cognition not only as strictly intellectual or rational, but also as sensory knowledge ( Echavarría, 2020 ), reflected in this author’s intuitive appraisal ( Kappas, 2006 ).

Table 1 . Emotional regulation (ER).

Gross’s (1999) model follows the sequence situation-attention-appraisal-response:

Emotion begins with an evaluation of emotion cues. When attended to and evaluated in certain ways, emotion cues trigger a coordinated set of response tendencies that facilitate adaptive responding. These responding tendencies involve experiential, behavioral, and physiological systems. Response tendencies from each system may be modulated, and it is this modulation that gives final shape to the manifest emotion (p. 528).

Emotion begins with an appraisal, followed by a set of responses that can be modulated. This latter concept refers to emotional regulation, a process that can be defined in various ways. According to Thompson (1991) , the concept of emotional regulation refers to “the extrinsic processes responsible for monitoring, evaluating, and modifying emotional reactions, especially their intensive and temporal features, to accomplish one’s goals” (pp. 27–28). According to Gross (1999) , emotional regulation refers to “those processes by which people exert an influence on the emotions we have, on when we have them, and on how we experience and express them” (p. 275). Both authors elaborate a joint definition of emotional regulation, referring to the individual’s efforts, conscious or unconscious, to influence at some point in the process of emotion generation ( Gross and Thompson, 2007 ). Subsequently, Gross et al. (2011) emphasize that the defining feature of emotion regulation is the activation of a goal to influence the emotion trajectory. Therefore, a goal is necessary to carry out such emotional regulation, an issue that will be further explored later and more directly in the research by Tamir (2016) and which is especially relevant when considering the relationship between emotional regulation and flourishing, as we will see below.

To carry out such emotional regulation, there is a wide variety of strategies, which can focus on different aspects of the emotional process. Despite the variety of instruments and categorizations of these strategies, some authors conclude that in practice they comprise the same type of emotional regulation strategies ( González et al., 2006 ). These strategies are focused on modifying what we feel ( Pascual Jimeno and Conejero López, 2019 ).

Gross recognizes reappraisal as the deliberate strategy par excellence to regulate emotion, since it allows modifying the valuation given to the stimulus that generates the emotion ( Etkin et al., 2015 ) and allows changing the way of thinking about a situation to reduce the emotional impact it produced ( Gross, 2002 ). Nonetheless, there are other strategies available. The core feature for this author is the adaptiveness or functionality of these strategies. This notion of adaptive or maladaptive is based on evolutionary psychology and does not fully fit into our proposal as we will explain afterwards.

Hervás and Vázquez (2006) refer to Gross and Thompson definitions of emotion regulation and focus on some limitations of the Gross model: the lack of emphasis on emotional acceptance which is crucial to develop acceptance toward emotions and serves as a mechanism of emotional regulation; the risk of using emotional regulation as a way of evitation, which has been criticized by subsequent research; the difficulty of reevaluating or changing significance in some situations. They conclude enlightening that this model does not distinguish with detail which options of emotional regulation are adaptive and functional or dysfunctional and disadaptative.

For this reason, Hervás (2011) proposes a model of emotional processing consisting of six stages: emotional openness, emotional attention, emotional labeling, acceptance, emotional analysis and emotional regulation. We will focus on the last stages (emotional analysis and emotional regulation) because of the link between these stages and Arnold’s proposal. Hervás proposes four element keys for analyzing emotion: origin, message, validity and learning. He proposes to recognize the origin of the emotion and to understand the message, the meaning of such emotion, as well as he points out that it prepares us to respond. Subsequently, he indicates that the signal offered by emotions can be “right or wrong” and that this analysis corresponds to the person: to contrast the situation as objectively as possible and decide whether the emotion is a valid message or a false alarm. For this analysis, he proposes cognitive strategies such as the evidence search technique, the double parameter technique or the pie technique. If the emotions are valid, it will be necessary to draw the relevant conclusions, learn for the future and develop an action plan. After this learning, Hervás proposes the function of emotional modulation, which is the capacity to modulate the emotional response through emotional, cognitive or behavioral strategies.

This analysis elaborated by Hervás offers valuable insight into the concept of emotional regulation: there is no indicator that allows us to classify when and why some strategies are adaptive and functional and when they are not. To carry out this emotional processing we need additional information that allows us to know when our action is functional and when it is not. According to what we propose in this article, this information would come from the concept of flourishing.

Subsequently, Tamir (2016) highlights that research in emotional regulation has primarily focused on the process of emotional regulation and has only recently raised questions about the content , such as why people regulate their emotions and what they want to feel. This author confirms the relationship between the motives and goals of emotional regulation and offers a taxonomy of motives in the field of emotional regulation: hedonic (prohedonic, counterhedonic) or instrumental (performance to do , epistemic to know , social to relate , eudaimonic to be ).

In the same vein, Tamir et al. (2020) state that emotional regulation is a motivated process and that the establishment and pursuit of goals shape emotional regulation; it is necessary, among other aspects, to promote adaptive emotion regulation. They also assert that the relationship between emotional regulation and well-being is complex, as emotions serve as goals to achieve but also as signals of progress toward the set goal. Therefore, they suggest that future research should focus on revealing how goal setting and goal striving jointly contribute to adaptive functioning. This point is of particular relevance for understanding the intimate connection between emotional regulation and motivation, which will also be addressed by Arnold, and to explain how flourishing is reflected in emotional regulation. Next, we will delve into what flourishing is in current psychology and present the research that links emotional regulation and flourishing.

3 Flourishment

The topic of flourishing has been of interest in psychology over the past few decades and the number of research studies in this area has been increasing over time ( David et al., 2013 ; Vittersø, 2016c ; Cherkowski and Walker, 2018 ; Diener et al., 2018 ; Galvin, 2018 ). This surge can be attributed, among other factors, to the widespread concern in some prosperous societies about being happy, an issue addressed by health sciences and social sciences, and the emergence and promotion of Positive Psychology, which aims to promote human flourishing and thereby happiness ( Lopez and Snyder, 2009 ; Brown et al., 2018 ). The study of this extensive psychological research on flourishing leads to three related findings: there are multiple conceptions of flourishing, it is designated by different terms, and there are different instruments and constructs for measuring flourishing. Measuring human flourishing is essential to drive research and guide psychological intervention related to both mental health and personal development. Some researchers have recently emphasized the need for a coherent theoretical foundation and a comprehensive approach to flourishing that serves to improve and complete current measurement instruments ( Fowers et al., 2023 ). Given this state of the art, we pose these questions: What conception of flourishing does current psychology research tend toward? What aspects of these theories could be illuminated by Arnold’s theory on emotional regulation and the self-ideal?

3.1 Other ways to define flourishing

The first step is to provide an explanation of the different names for flourishing. Although it is frequent in the literature to resort to different nouns to designate the same reality, it also happens that the introduction of a different name than usual marks the meaning of the reality. Both situations occur in the science of flourishing. The literature expresses the reality of flourishing with different names, which from the oldest to the most recent nomination are: eudaimonia, good life, happiness, well-being or wellbeingor flourishing. Eudaimonia is good life, fulfilling life, self fulfillment, and it has its origin in Aristotelian philosophy ( Dabdoub et al., 2020 ). Eudaimonia is translated as happiness, “a complete life that goes well for the person leading it” ( Vittersø, 2016a , p.1) although over time it has come to mean feeling good with a full or good life, to later reduce the meaning of being happy to only feeling good-positive emotions, life satisfaction and pleasure-. Wellbeing is the term that refers to that sense of happiness that reflects a state of mind, a being well because of feeling good ( Diener et al., 2018 ). With the word flourishing, the meaning of eudaimonia is recovered, which includes feeling good, being and doing well. In these conceptualizations, emotions and actions to achieve happiness or have a happy life play an important role ( Intelisano et al., 2020 ).

3.2 Theories on flourishing

The second step is to delve into psychological theories on flourishing, which in most cases are made and remade, based on the results of empirical research. Exploring the content of instruments measuring flourishing, we discover the ideas researchers hold about what human flourishing entails. Fowers et al. (2023) highlight eight measures of flourishing. The authors analyze the consistency of the psychological theories upon which the constructs are built and conclude that there is a lack of a coherent theoretical foundation on flourishing. The instruments they refer to are:

Psychological Well-Being Scale ( Ryff, 1989 ), Mental Health Continuum ( Keyes, 2002 ), Flourishing Scale ( Diener et al., 2010 ), the Questionnaire for EudaimonicWell-Being ( Waterman et al., 2010 ), Positive Emotion, Engagement, Positive Relationships, Meaning and Purpose, and Accomplishment ( Seligman, 2011 ), Flourishing ( Huppert and So, 2013 ), Comprehensive Index of Thriving ( Su et al., 2014 ), and the Flourishing Index ( Vander Weele, 2017 ) ( Fowers et al., 2023 , p.123).

The constructs that serve as the basis for establishing the structure and domains of measurement instruments ultimately form the content of diverse conceptualizations of flourishing in psychology. If instruments measuring happiness capture the degree of satisfaction, life satisfaction or well-being based on feeling good (pleasure, emotions and positive affects), they are conceiving the construct of psychological wellbeing (PWB) as a subjective well being (SWB) or hedonic well being (HWB). But if in the instruments introduce other domains related to having other goods that make up a complete life, then PWB is identified with eudaimonic well being (EWB), an objective well being: that which makes one well and makes all people well. There are two main conceptualization paths of EWB: one focuses on objective elements of psychological functioning, while the other adds to it, including the pursuit and achievement of the true self, the self-realization, the pursuit of excellence. In all cases, flourishing has been operationally defined by the degree and frequency of well-being indicators, how individuals feel and their level of satisfaction, both in themselves and in relation to the goods, experiences, activities and qualities reflected in their lives. Fowers et al. (2023) criticize the difficulties presented by measurement instruments precisely because they follow this assessment path, in addition to presenting other fragile aspects such as the underlying notion of flourishing, as we have highlighted in previous lines, or whether they are valid instruments for populations from different cultures.

The tendency to conceptualize flourishing as EWB in psychological research, with an integrative view of the elements contributing to well-being-both in terms of feeling and condition ( Ryff et al., 2021 ) shows an approach to the Aristotelian notion of Eudaimonia ( Waterman et al., 2010 ). The concept of flourishing, which has been developed especially in the last 20 years in the context of Positive Psychology, is often denied as the optimal state of well-being ( Richard-Sephton et al., 2024 ). It comprises three dimensions: SWB or HWB, PWB or EWB and social well-being. SWB results from the predominance of positive emotional experiences (experiences and judgments of satisfaction) over negative ones. PWB stems from the ability to lead a meaningful and purposeful life, with autonomy. Social well-being depends on relationships with other people and with the community. The concept of well-being and, consequently, of flourishing, is distinct from that of mental health, which denotes the absence of negative features in functioning, emotions and behavior, which prevent the individual from realizing their potential and connecting with their environment (work, family and community) ( Richard-Sephton et al., 2024 ). This psychological concept of well-being as optimal functional psychological development aligns with part of the content of eudaimonia or flourishing in its Aristotelian sense and is also embraced in educational theory: “the actualization of human potential so that each person leads a good life” ( Martínez et al., 2023 , p. 23). In the words of Kristjánsson (2020) , p. 23:

Progressive development of subjectively determined and objectively valuable meaningful life, which satisfactorily mobilizes the individual's natural capacities in areas linked to specific and existential tasks of their species, in which humans as rational, social, moral, and emotional beings can achieve excellence.

Vittersø (2016a) , p. 8 states that the most representative theories of the literature on psychological eudaimonics are: “(..) Waterman’s Eudaimonic identity theory ( Waterman, 1984 ; 1992 ), Ryff’s version of Psychological well-being ( Ryff, 1989 ) and Deci and Ryan’s Self determination theory (SDT; Ryan and Deci, 2001 )”. These theories focus on an aspect of human flourishing while considering Aristotle’s theory of eudaimonia: the fulfillment of life as the ultimate purpose of being human, an optimally functioning life. In addition to these theories, Fowers et al. (2024) have proposed a systematic theory of flourishing from a neo-Aristotelian approach that inspires and provides a foundation for psychological research on the topic. They suggest taking into account eudaimonia with a broader perspective, a vision of what contributes to the process of living well and the outcome of having a good life. To do this, they include more elements than those promoting the development of all necessary capacities to achieve optimal psychological functioning and assert that harmony among them is important.

We believe that Arnold does indeed have in mind this comprehensive framework of what flourishing is because she is knowledgeable about and grounded in Thomistic philosophy, which has an Aristotelian basis:

We must organize our personality according to a valid self-ideal if we are to escape the consequences of emotional indulgence. Contradicting the demands of our nature by giving free rein to our emotions instead of allowing them to support our human purposes inflicts us with a penetrating discontent and an unspeakable anguish. Aspiring to a self-ideal that does not perfect human nature is not worth the effort. To suppose that human nature can withstand the permanent frustration of its deepest desires is to seek fundamental anguish ( Arnold, 1970 , p. 313-314).

It is precisely this vision that underlies her theoretical proposals on emotional regulation and the self-ideal, which we believe can inspire intervention models to promote people’s flourishing, as seen in the final section of this article. The construct of flourishing has its roots in a classical concept, impossible to operationalize in all its breadth and depth, which is the concept of happiness. The concept of happiness is based on conceiving fulfillment in the unfolding of a person’s potentialities and is recognized in various ways in different cultures, philosophies, and religions.

The most frequently referenced concept is the Aristotelian notion of eudaimonia (εὐδαιμονία). Aristotelian eudaimonia is a state of full deployment of human operational capacities, whose core is the knowledge of truth but also requires the presence of other goods, its indispensable conditions, such as possessions, health, ethical virtue, and, above all, friends, and would result in a subjective state of joy. From this point of view, eudaimonia is not only PWB, but also the other forms of well-being (subjective and social) that would be either its conditions, or its consequences. Thus, the Aristotelian concept of eudaimonia coincides with the construct of flourishing. This coincidence is significant because when Arnold speaks of happiness, she has in mind the Thomistic concept of beatitudo , which is Aquinas’ designation for what Aristotle calls eudaimonia , another author whose contribution to the concept of flourishing has been highlighted ( Titus, 2016 ).

3.3 Contents of flourishing

The third step is to examine the elements that constitute flourishing or a fulfillment life according to the scales highlighted by Fowers et al. (2023) , from which we discard two closely related to mental health. The selected scales draw on many cases from the three major theories of psychological eudaimonics ( Vittersø, 2016a ). These instruments coincide in some domains, as seen in Table 2 , and those that are not common are related. Although all of them aim to assess psychological functioning, they include domains that are closer to a eudaimonic conception of flourishing, with the content attributed to eudaimonia by Aristotle.

Table 2 . Measures of flourishing.

The inclusion of domains characteristic of SWB is present in all instruments except Ryff’s (1989) : SWB experiences of eudaimonia/feelings of personal expressiveness; positive feelings, negative feelings, balanced feelings, positive emotion, happiness, and life satisfaction, enjoyment of activities as personally expressive.

The construct present in all instruments is purpose (in life) and meaning (in life), highlighted in Table 2 in bold. Meaning is the significance and coherence of one’s life, or sense of one’s life, “having a deep, coherent, organizing conceptual framework for one’s life, one that helps define who we are as individuals and what is most important to each of us ( Danvers et al., 2016 ) or “the fulfillment of the intrinsic values of our human nature” ( Vittersø, 2016a , p. 5). Meaning gives sense to purpose, which is the end that people seek when directing their lives, which is reflected in the goals they pursue to achieve that end. A person who reasonably defines his or her own framework of meaning, chooses values and/or goals. Making meaning of one’s life is a basic human need, satisfying it is an indicator of flourishing, as is also directing one’s behavior according to purpose, values and goals. Flourishing is supported by a meaning that exists along a continuum in life. Researchers explaining the relationship of this construct with flourishing or PWB mention the role of feelings, emotions, and affects, not only to assess if people feel good but also as essential elements for having meaning and purpose.

Relationships with others: positive relations with others, supportive relations (supporting oneself and supporting others), contribute to others, relationships (in two instruments), close social relationships, are the constructs mentioned in all the instruments ( Table 2 , highlighted in bold) except in Waterman et al.’s (2010) . Relatability with others is a basic psychological need. Affectivity also plays a relevant role in achieving relationships with others, while also reflecting whether they contribute to WB. Building positive and supportive relationships can be a goal that is part of life purpose and meaning.

The instruments contain various constructs that are related to the capabilities and qualities of people, which demonstrate that the person has achieved or is achieving human flourishing understood as an optimal psychological functioning. We refer to: self-acceptance (self and past life); autonomy (in two instruments); environmental mastery (adapting to an environment), mastery (dominance), accomplishment; competence (ability to act), optimistic (in two instruments), engaged and engagement (in two instruments), respected, health, both mental and physical.

Other domains such as character and virtue, good person, personal grow, the pursuit of excellence and self-realization, self-discovery, perceived development of one’s best potentials, Intense involvement in activities, indicate the process of flourishing and the outcome achieved in that process: being virtuous, being a good person, being oneself.

The domains demonstrate a SWB (feelings and satisfaction life), a PWB (psychological functioning) and a Social WB (relationships with others), all of which added together is what is contained in an EWB. However, as pointed out more clearly by Waterman et al. (2010) and Vander Weele (2017) when arguing about the theoretical foundations of the instruments they have developed to measure flourishing and the most prominent psychological theories of flourishing, Waterman’s Eudaimonic identity theory ( Waterman, 1992 ), Ryff’s version of Psychological well-being ( Ryff, 1989 ) and Deci and Ryan’s Self determination theory ( Ryan and Deci, 2001 ), functioning well, in the sense of efficacy, is not in itself the end that is identified with having a complete, fulfilling, or good life. This is explained by Waterman et al. (2010 , p. 6):

The theory links eudaimonist philosophy with the study of psychological functioning, and it emerged from consideration of two questions. (1) In the task of identity formation, do some potential identity elements represent ‘better’ resolutions to an identity crisis than others? (2) If so, how are the ‘better’ choices to be recognized? Eudaimonic identity theory draws upon eudaimonist philosophical constructs, including the daimon or ‘true self’, self-realization, the pursuit of excellence, and eudaimonia (..).

The process of identity formation, process of self-determination includes the consideration of values, self or personality ( Bauer, 2016 ; Schlegel et al., 2016 ) and life ( Dahla et al., 2020 ) concretized as goals to be achieved, thus intrinsically motivating action. Feelings, emotions and experiences of satisfaction are indicators of success in the choice and execution of values and goals in life, but they also play an active role, aligned or not with motivation ( Waterman et al., 2010 ; Danvers et al., 2016 ; Vallerand, 2016 ; Vittersø, 2016b ; Chaves, 2021 ).

4 Relationship between emotion, emotional regulation and flourishing

In the previous sections, we have discussed flourishing and emotional regulation. The complexity of the construct of flourishing has been highlighted. In an initial stage of research, flourishing is understood as the optimal state of well-being and has been operationally defined by the degree and frequency of well-being indicators ( Richard-Sephton et al., 2024 ). In a later stage, the meaning of flourishing is expanded, drawing inspiration from Aristotle’s conception of eudaimonia. Emotional regulation, in turn, designates a psychological and behavioral process of identification, monitoring, evaluation, and adjustment of one’s emotional response to events and circumstances internal and external to the individual. If SWB or EWB is considered an integral part of the flourishing construct, understanding SWB as the predominance of positive emotional experiences (experiences and judgments of satisfaction) over negative ones ( Richard-Sephton et al., 2024 ), it becomes evident not only that there is a connection between emotion and flourishing, but also that there seems to follow from this a connection between emotional regulation and flourishing. Indeed, emotional regulation appears to be a process that enables directing the emotional experience toward that experience of high well-being that would be flourishing.

If adequate emotional regulation promotes greater well-being and a more fulfilling life, research should be able to establish a positive correlation between both constructs. Although the results may sometimes be more ambiguous than expected, in general, such a positive correlation is observed. Research has focused on determining the most effective strategies to promote flourishing ( Barber et al., 2010 ) and on the correlation between the use of the emotional regulation strategies most known by the scientific literature and flourishing ( Richard-Sephton et al., 2024 ). As we have pointed out earlier, these researchers establish that emotional regulation strategies can be adaptive and functional or maladaptive and dysfunctional. Adaptive and functional strategies are useful strategies, as they help the person successfully achieve the desired emotional state. Adaptive strategies promote positive emotions; functional strategies aim to decrease negative emotions. On the other hand, maladaptive and dysfunctional strategies would be useless strategies, as they are ineffective in achieving the desired emotional state or because they are associated with emotional or psychological difficulties. Maladaptive strategies decrease positive emotions. Dysfunctional strategies increase negative emotions.

Rumination, avoidance, and suppression are three common types of emotional regulation strategies that are associated with poor mental health outcomes. We attempt to link emotional regulation strategies with flourishing. Flourishing is associated with increased use of cognitive reappraisal, which is the fundamental adaptive strategy, and with decreased use of experiential suppression or avoidance ( Barber et al., 2010 ; Richard-Sephton et al., 2024 ). Overall, it is observed that flourishers report lower use of maladaptive strategies than significant use of adaptive strategies, compared to non-pathological individuals who are not flourishing, highlighting the positive use of reappraisal. Similarly, rather than showing a significant difference in the use of functional strategies to minimize negative emotions, there is a lower use of dysfunctional strategies that exacerbate negative emotion ( Richard-Sephton et al., 2024 ). The results, therefore, demonstrate a correlation between emotional regulation and well-being or flourishing, but more clearly due to the lack of resorting to maladaptive and dysfunctional strategies than due to a significant difference in the use of adaptive and functional strategies, fundamentally highlighting the use of reappraisal.

These results require a theoretical elaboration that allows accounting for the different aspects and adequately addressing the theoretical questions they raise. We may ask what makes an emotional experience positive or negative, and whether it is appropriate to call adaptive and maladaptive, functional and dysfunctional strategies. If we speak of a connection between emotional regulation and flourishing, perhaps the word adaptation, so closely related to the purpose of survival, may not be the appropriate word. Even more so, this inadequacy can be considered from the perspective of flourishing understood as eudaimonia, which does not only consist of surviving but of living well. Therefore, the concept of eudaimonia needs to teleologically influence the concepts by which an emotion is valued.

On the other hand, a theoretical answer is needed to the question of how flourishing relates to emotional regulation that, beyond correlation, points to causes. The presence of a cognitive cause is evident, since mechanisms such as reappraisal are cognitive strategies of emotional regulation. This is where Magda Arnold’s concept of self-ideal and its role in emotion regulation can play a key role. On the one hand, if the emotion is caused by an intuitive evaluation, it is about seeing how that intuitive assessment relates to intellectual and reflexive cognition ( Echavarría, 2020 ), a topic on which Arnold explicitly focuses. In turn, the self-ideal allows for a pivot between these levels of cognition and promotes a synthetic grasp of the state of fulfillment designated in current research and theory with the name of flourishing.

5 An integrated conceptualization of emotional regulation and flourishment

After defining the concepts of emotional regulation and flourishing and reviewing the state of the art in the relationship between both concepts, we proceed to present a theorization that integrates both concepts, taking as a starting point the notions outlined in Arnold’s theory. It is relevant to highlight that the terms used by this psychologist differ slightly from those used today; nevertheless, we believe that what matters are not the terms used but the concepts to which they refer. Understanding these concepts is precisely what will allow us to offer an integrative conceptualization that combines subsequent research on emotional regulation and its relationship with flourishing. Figure 1 includes a diagram that synthesizes this integrated conceptualization.

Figure 1 . Relationship between emotional regulation, self-ideal, and flourishing. Table created by the authors based on Arnold’s theory ( Arnold and Gasson, 1954 ; Arnold, 1970 , 1984 ).

To focus our analysis, we will address the following issues: (a) the link between appraisal, emotion and self-ideal; (b) the concept of self-ideal; (c) the importance of the self-ideal in emotional regulation; (d) emotional regulation strategies; (e) the relationship between emotion and motivation.

5.1 The link between appraisal, emotion and self-ideal

Arnold is known for being a pioneer in the theories of appraisal in emotion psychology. Her concept of appraisal inspired Lazarus, a renowned psychologist in this field. In an article published in 1968, Lazarus acknowledged Arnold’s influence: “the [present] view of emotions which emphasizes cognitive processes as antecedents and the arousal of coping impulses to deal with appraised danger is an elaboration of that presented by Arnold” ( Lazarus, 1968 , p. 190 cited in Reisenzein, 2006 , p. 940). Likewise, Lazarus (2001) pointed out the differences between Arnold’s concept of appraisal and his own and described how this concept, first used by Grinker and Spiegel in 1945 but without a specific meaning, is conceived by Arnold fundamentally as an instantaneous, intuitive, and automatic process. Like Arnold, Lazarus distinguished between primary and secondary appraisal, non-conscious and conscious, but while Arnold focuses on the former, with an intuitive and immediate character, Lazarus focuses on the latter, on the reflective process and its dependence on complex meanings.

Arnold proposes the following sequence: perception - appraisal - emotion. Emotion is defined by Arnold (1969a , b) as a felt tendency toward an intuitively valued object as beneficial or away from an object appraised as harmful. This way of understanding emotion is very similar to that later developed by Gross (1999 , 2015) , a reference psychologist in the field of emotional regulation. Therefore, emotion stems from an evaluation of reality, from an appraisal. The evaluation preceding the emotion provides information about what is important to the individual, about what they value, according to the meaning that a situation or object has for them. Arnold (1969b) distinguishes between intuitive and reflective evaluation, explaining the difference through the example of a man suffering from obsessive-compulsive disorder due to the fear of contamination, which leads him to wash his hands incessantly every time he touches something. This fear of contamination and germs causes him to wash his hands even though his conceptual and reflective knowledge tells him that his fear is exaggerated and that his skin can tear with frequent washing. In this case, intuitive evaluation produces fear and reflective evaluation makes him aware that he is powerless against that fear. This deliberate judgment is conscious, and intuitive evaluation, on the contrary, is not experienced consciously, although it can be inferred through reflection. Both appraisals are value judgments that do not necessarily lead to action, but they can do so. In this sense, Arnold asserts that each person establishes a hierarchy of values for themselves that guides their actions, which she calls the self-ideal. This guidance can lead to their development and perfection as a human being or move away from them.

According to Arnold, when we appraise something we also value the extent to which it contributes to or detracts from the ideal we aspire to, which she calls the self-ideal: “Whenever anything seems attractive or pleasant, it is also appraised as it contributes to or detracts from the ideal toward which he aims” ( Arnold, 1970 , p. 302). In this way, Arnold introduces a novel aspect into her concept of emotion, not considered by other authors, which is its relationship with the self-ideal. She defines it as the ideal that guides the person’s action and organizes his or her personality. Therefore, personality is shaped around the attainment of this ideal, which constitutes the direction or goal around which their actions and abilities are organized. Arnold describes emotions as “guardians of the self-ideal” since they can help the person on their path toward the self-ideal: negative emotions lead the person to change their way of acting, and positive emotions facilitate following the valid self-ideal.

According to Cornelius (2006) , in Arnold’s view, emotion is a reflection of the significance that the situation or object holds for the person, and not knowing what a person values, their self-ideal, can hinder understanding why they value objects and situations the way they usually do and, therefore, why they feel what they feel in a particular situation.

In this sense, Arnold asserts that the self-ideal a person has developed assigns value to what they encounter. At this point, it is interesting to note the difficulty we encounter in distinguishing in Arnold’s proposal whether that value refers to intuitive or reflective appraisal, especially in cases where they differ. According to the analysis of her complete theory, we could conclude that there is a relationship between reflective value judgment and the person’s self-ideal, but we cannot forget the emotional residue (or affective memory) left by various emotional experiences, which affects intuitive appraisal, leading to reactions that do not align with rational judgment and can hinder the path toward the self-ideal.

5.2 The concept of self-ideal

Arnold does not offer a single definition of the self-ideal, but throughout her writings, she refers to this notion in various ways: as a “life goal,” “what we (..) are striving for,” “what, in striving, we finally achieve” (1959, p. 34), “the best that is possible for this individual to achieve,” “the perfection both of his individuality and his humanity.” Therefore, the self-ideal is a life goal, an ideal that consists of achieving perfection. Furthermore, according to Arnold, the self-ideal guides the organization of personality: “These rational tendencies to action organize human personality under the guidance of the self-ideal” ( Arnold, 1970 , p. 295); “We must organize our personality according to a valid self-ideal” (p. 313), she also includes it in her definition of personality: “the human being can and does organize his powers, actions, and habits in the active pursuit of his self-ideal” (1959, p. 33). Therefore, the self-ideal is not only a goal but also a guide and organizing principle.

Arnold assumes that the self-ideal is formed and that not any self-ideal will suffice; Arnold distinguishes the valid self-ideal because it reflects such perfection: “a valid self-ideal is the perfection of a man’s humanity,” “a self-ideal that is objectively valid and that represents ideal humanity as it can be achieved by this particular individual” ( Arnold, 1970 , p. 306). Therefore, the self-ideal is not purely subjective but has an objective dimension.

The human ideal, therefore, relates to that of perfection: “self-ideal is the perfection of a man’s humanity” ( Arnold, 1969b ); “human perfection must be found in a self-ideal that is formed according to the best that a man knows and understands and in actions that will actualize this ideal” ( Arnold, 1970 , p. 302), and therefore, an indication of maturity is that a self-ideal has been elaborated: “A man’s self-ideal is the index of his maturity” (1959, p. 34); “maturity means forming a valid self-ideal and living it.”

On the other hand, Arnold relates the self-ideal to happiness, which she understands as “happiness is the state of a person who has chosen a self-ideal appropriate to his human personality and has steadfastly followed it” ( Arnold, 1969b ); “The desire for happiness, even more than other positive human emotions, urges us to maintain a straight path toward our self-ideal” ( Arnold, 1970 , p. 344). Therefore, happiness allows one to approach perfection or the self-ideal, just as happiness is a sign that one has chosen the appropriate self-ideal.

Additionally, the self-ideal in Arnold’s theory is closely related to values: “Thus, a man’s self-ideal is an index of his maturity, for it reveals his scale of values” (1970, p. 297), “as soon as the child’s self-ideal begins to form, it becomes a touchstone for everything else to which he attaches value” (p. 300). That is, it manifests the person’s hierarchy of values.

Moreover, the self-ideal triggers a hierarchy of motivations: “Motives are ordered into a hierarchy according to what is, by and large, the most important goal. (..) the master goal becomes our master motive, the self-ideal that shapes us as we strive toward it” ( Arnold, 1970 ), “Therefore, a man’s motivational system is established and organized around his self-ideal” ( Arnold, 1970 , p. 302), “a hierarchy of motives gradually develops as the child begins to understand what is more and what less important” ( Arnold, 1959 , p. 34).

In summary, Arnold explains the relationship between values, motivation, and the self-ideal with these words: “Such rational choice of action eventually establishes a hierarchy of values: What is valued most is what we want so intensely that we are willing to forego every other pleasure or satisfaction rather than lose it. This most wanted thing is our life goal” (1959, p. 34). Thus, she considers that what is valuable becomes a motive when it moves us to act, and this shapes the hierarchy of values reflected in the self-ideal.

5.3 The importance of the self-ideal in emotional regulation

Arnold argues that although emotion is necessary to prompt action, it does not determine human behavior. In other words, humans always have a range of options in decision-making, the capacity for self-determination, and the ability to exert executive control over psychological functions ( Arnold, 1984 ). Therefore, emotion does not necessarily propel a person toward self-improvement: it can either lead them toward the self-ideal or not, so it cannot be relied upon as a guide:

Human beings are motivated by an appraisal that is both a sensory judgment and an intellectual or reflective judgment. The final decision for action is a choice that either implements the original emotion or opposes it. In man, the choice of goal-directed action is essentially a rational wanting, an inclination toward what is reflexively appraised as good (pleasant, useful, or of value). These rational tendencies to action organize human personality under the guidance of the self-ideal ( Arnold, 1970 , p. 295).

This goal is achieved when emotional responses are guided by higher ideals, harmonizing emotional reaction with our intellectual apprehension of the world ( Cornelius, 2006 ). Therefore, the appropriate self-ideal sets the direction for action, which in more contemporary terms, we could call flourishing or eudaimonic well-being.

In this regard, we highlight the contribution of Valenzuela (2024) , who relates positive and negative emotions, as conceived by Arnold, to the concept of flourishing:

Various ‘positive’ emotions (interest, union with others, love, joy, (…) can make it easy to seek the ‘self-ideal’, that is, the flourishing or maturity of one’s personality. (…) negative emotions (fear, shyness, embarrassment) which hinder reasonable action-and keeps us from flourishing). (p. 304-5).

What role do emotions play on the way to this flourishing? According to Arnold (1970) all emotions can help a person to move toward his or her self-ideal: negative emotions arise when something has been done that is valued as wrong and urge the person to repair his or her action and change his or her way of living and positive emotions sustain this progress toward the self-ideal, attracting toward the beneficial or moving away from the negative and, on the other hand, they urge to strive to achieve it, overcoming the possible difficulties in this process, or moving to escape from dangers. Therefore, Arnold uses the term negative and positive when talking about emotions, referring to the extent to which these emotions bring us closer to or prevent us from moving away from the self-ideal. However, sometimes emotions can drive us to changes that are not constructive or it can happen that the self-ideal is not the right one, so that emotions move the person to act, but are not necessarily directed toward the flourishing of the person.

The appraisal preceding the emotion provides information about what is considered good or bad at a given moment. However, as mentioned earlier, this appraisal may be conditioned by our affective memory and may not accurately reflect the present reality or object ( Arnold, 1969a ). Therefore, following Arnold’s reasoning, emotion cannot be relied upon as a guide to achieve maximum integration and perfection.

Moreover, when this ideal is mistaken or adapted more to one’s own utility, conflict, dissatisfaction, and discomfort will arise. Arnold distinguishes between acting against an objectively valid self-ideal, which generates remorse and leads to wanting to regain the correct direction, and possessing a distorted ideal that does not fulfill all of a person’s potentialities. In the latter case, there would be no remorse for acting inappropriately. However, in this situation, an unconscious conflict would arise between the path chosen by the individual and the inherent tendency toward self-perfection in their nature ( Arnold, 1959 , p. 35). It may also happen that an emotion goes against the person’s reflective tendencies and deliberate purposes, thereby hindering action in that direction, especially if an emotional attitude or habit has developed. Excessive or chronic emotion can alter psychological functioning ( Arnold, 1970 ).

Therefore, Arnold suggests the need for some control over emotion: “Such control does not mean that emotions should be reduced or restricted, nor that the actions they prompt should be omitted. Rather, emotions should be controlled in such a way that they aid rather than hinder personality organization. (..) Obviously, such control of emotion also implies a worthwhile self-ideal to provide a focus for a man’s struggle” ( Arnold, 1970 , p. 292–3). In this sense, according to Arnold, the existence of a self-ideal is necessary to guide emotional control. In addition to this control, she also proposes different ways to correct affective memory or, in other words, the reappraisal of past experiences so that it aligns with the reality in front of us: corrective experiences and reflexive reappraisal.

Both strategies are proposed by Arnold for regulating emotions. However, she never mentions the terms emotional regulation or management, concepts used today, but rather focuses on understanding that emotion can help achieve one’s own self-ideal but can also hinder it. In this sense, she does not advocate for suppressing or repressing emotions, which is colloquially understood as emotional control. Her proposal actually resembles what Gross and Thompson (2007) refer to as emotional regulation, as the process by which the intensity, duration, magnitude, and responses related to emotion are modulated. The difference lies in Arnold’s reference to the self-ideal. Therefore, Arnold’s approach goes beyond the notion of adaptation employed by today’s theorists, expanding the goals of emotional regulation.

5.4 Emotional regulation strategies

Throughout her work, Arnold explains different ways of regulating emotions. Firstly, she points out the need to recognize the origin of the emotion and to address and confront the situation it presents rather than evade it. In other words, she suggests delving into the information provided by emotions to make constructive use of the acquired knowledge: “For better or worse, emotions influence man’s actions but cannot force them. To derive positive benefits from one’s emotions, a man must recognize their origin and decide to resolve his problem rather than evade it” ( Arnold, 1970 , p. 323).

Recognizing the origin and meaning of emotions provides necessary information for individuals to make deliberate decisions and persist in the pursuit of the appropriate self-ideal. Understanding the meaning of emotions helps determine what to do. This analysis resembles the emotional analysis phase proposed by Hervás (2011) in his emotional processing model, which suggests analyzing emotions to understand whether the message they convey is valid regarding the reality being reacted to.

Other strategies for regulating emotions employed by Arnold involve increasing the attraction of the goal we want to achieve through imagination or thought: focusing on the positive aspects of something that is feared or disliked, considering ways and means to overcome a bothersome obstacle, exploring alternative courses of action, among other aspects. Thus, according to the goals set by reason and the appropriate self-ideal, individuals can use imagination and thought to impact both reflexive and intuitive appraisal, and ultimately, emotions. Arnold also warns that sometimes, the use of imagination may not be helpful, such as when it increases attraction and therefore the strength of the emotion, as in cases where love or desire for an object becomes excessive. In these circumstances, she suggests finding an occupation that requires the person’s full attention and captivates their entire focus ( Arnold, 1969b ). Finally, she suggests that at times it may be necessary to deprive oneself of some things that may have great emotional appeal until their influence diminishes.

In any case, a valid self-ideal is necessary to direct a person’s attention toward spiritual values, toward what is more human, and away from objects that exert an excessively strong attraction on the individual without being as necessary or valuable. Therefore, at times, it will be necessary to rework the hierarchy of values and reorganize the goals that drive people.

The difficulty of regulating emotion is heightened when an emotional habit has developed, which requires a strong enough motive to make the decision to act against the emotion. Arnold points out that making the reasonable decision at the beginning of the situation helps reduce the attraction to the opposite course and reduces the pressure that uncontrolled emotion can generate, although emotional inclinations do not disappear during the course of action. The habit of acting for rational reasons, that is, the habit of deliberate choice and rational thought, can serve as substitutes for this emotional habit and provide the necessary strength in the long term to distance oneself from a reality or object that attracts intensely or excessively but is not beneficial or reasonable. In this sense, it is necessary to refer to the Thomistic influence in Arnold’s theory ( Echavarría, 2020 ), which likely understands habit in an Aristotelian sense as a disposition ( Hulsey and Hampson, 2014 ).

Finally, Arnold proposes reflective reappraisal and corrective experiences as tools that allow for the modulation of affective memory. Reflective reappraisal enables a rational reevaluation of the situation experienced. This term is similar to what is known today as cognitive reappraisal. It has been shown that reappraisal is the fundamental strategy employed by flourishers, as mentioned earlier.

On the other hand, corrective experiences are new experiences that, when confronted, allow for the correction of the previous appraisal. Thus, they influence affective memory. This need to influence the emotional impact of memory is also emphasized by Engen and Anderson (2018) as core component processes of cognitive emotion regulation.

Arnold provides a clinical example of a 25-year-old who was still affected by a traumatic experience at 17. It was not a repressed experience, but rather the subject could remember it perfectly well and yet continued to experience excessive anxiety when having to speak with the department head. Arnold points out that he had experienced the same sensation while working for a family friend, upon detecting some irregularities in the business and trying to warn him, but without success. Since then, every time he had to speak with a boss, the severe reaction of fear recurred along with all the physiological symptoms. Arnold describes what happened with this patient and explains how both tools (reflective reappraisal and corrective experience) allow for appropriate emotional regulation:

He had a fixed expectation that every employer would act like his friend and eventually disappoint him. (..) The young man knew he was afraid and recognized upon reflection that this fear (and the accompanying physical symptoms) was unfounded in the current situation; he did not realize that his previous traumatic experience had shaped his current appraisal and intensified his current emotion. (..) Hence, a corrective experience was impossible unless he could realize the connection between his old shock and his current exaggerated fear reaction. In this case, such insight was acquired in a very short time. Above his understanding, there had to be a deliberate decision, supported by his trust in the therapist, to endure the discomfort of these experiences of fear and to act, despite his fear, until he was able to emotionally realize (what he had always known reflectively) that his current employer was not a replica of his former friend. Reflective reappraisal offered him the opportunity to approach the situation with a new attitude until eventually his intuitive assessment was also changed ( Arnold, 1969a , pp. 199-200).

5.5 The relationship between emotion and motivation

In third place, we will discuss the relationship between emotion and motivation as a basis for understanding the interplay between emotional regulation and flourishing. According to Arnold (1969a) , emotion plays a significant role in motivating people to act. A motive, according to the author, is “a want that leads to action” ( Arnold, 1971 , p. 188). It is, therefore, a desire or a want that drives action and derives from something valued as good or bad, its attractiveness or repulsion to the person here and now ( Arnold, 1970 ). That desire becomes the motive for my actions. The self-ideal developed by the individual organizes their motivational system, which in turn articulates their daily activity ( Arnold, 1970 ). Sometimes, emotion leads to action and becomes the motive for acting. Other times, the person acts for reasons that are not emotional. In both cases, Arnold emphasizes the importance of the person’s motivational hierarchy being in line with a valid self-ideal.

Therefore, we can affirm that not just any goal serves as the objective of regulating our emotions. According to Arnold et al. (1962) , there are some motives that are closer to predicting future achievements, performance, or success for the individual, both in school and in life. For this reason, she dedicates her work “Story Sequence Analysis” (1962) to examining people’s motivation:

Would it not be preferable to try for a sample of a man's motives? These, we know, move him to act in distinctive ways. We may then find they reveal creativity, intelligence, aggression, conformity, and any number of other qualities. But, in tapping his motives, we have found the way in which they are combined for action. No longer do we have to be content with disjointed bones in personality analysis. Knowing a man's motives and their hierarchy, we can work with the fleshed skeleton. Thus we will be able, at last, to determine what a person's chances are for achieving excellence. (Arnold, 1962, p. 30).

This motivation is key to achieving what Arnold et al. (1962) calls achievement or excellence. Both concepts are related, although Arnold does not explicitly explain it this way, to the notion of perfection mentioned earlier and, therefore, to the self-ideal. Arnold identifies a type of motivation that correlates with greater achievement. In this sense, we deduce the correspondence between a type of motivation identified by Arnold and an objectively valid self-ideal.

After analyzing the psychological test she developed, Arnold concludes that the type of motivation that leads to better performance includes the following characteristics: it has as its goal immaterial values (ethical, religious, spiritual, and altruistic); it is willing to invest whatever effort is necessary and personal initiative to achieve what is worthwhile; relationships with others are characterized by generosity, cooperation, lasting relationships, and the presence of a common purpose (effort, suffering, or a shared life); adversity is considered to be overcome with one’s own action and a positive attitude, and finally, it includes a specific way of living the relationship with a Supreme Being. In summary, constructive motivation includes taking responsibility for one’s actions, the importance and prevalence of ethical, religious, and altruistic values, and the importance of transcendence (Arnold, 1962). The focus is not only on what a person feels but on the motives that drive them to act.

It seems rather more reasonable to acknowledge that man is responsible for his motives, his intentions, and actions; but he's not responsible for his emotions. He may be so frightened by an early traumatic experience that it would require superhuman fortitude to act courageously in a similar situation. If his motives are positive and constructive, he may nevertheless find ways of controlling his emotion or overcoming it by a corrective experience (see Arnold and Gasson, 1954 , p. 92 f.) (Arnold, 1962, p. 221).

Thus, the importance of constructive and positive motives as a means to control or overcome emotion through corrective experiences is highlighted: therefore, the self-ideal is related to emotional regulation. With all this, we can conclude that the relationship between emotion and motivation is key to understanding the relationship between emotional regulation and flourishing. Emotion can be a motive that drives action, but it can also not be. The important thing is that the motivation we have, which helps us regulate emotions, leads us to a valid self-ideal, and therefore, to flourishing.

6 Discussion

The study presented in the preceding sections aims to address the primary question posed in the introduction: I How can Arnold’s psychological theory contribute to a better understanding of emotional regulation, flourishing, and the relationship between them?

The path to beginning to answer this question involves considering the relationship between the conception of the self-ideal in Arnold’s psychological theory and current theoretical trends in psychology regarding flourishing. Arnold’s theory represents a fruitful attempt to achieve a comprehensive understanding of human personality. Therefore, it is considered a reference source in the field of psychology, particularly in the realm of emotional regulation. As highlighted earlier, Arnold lays the groundwork for relating personality, emotions, and the self-ideal. The continuity between these aspects is also a characteristic of current theories on flourishing. In our opinion, Arnold forwards, from a more theoretical and general perspective, some inspiring ideas about human development to attain happiness and well-being, ultimately, flourishing.

The reference to the self and its ideal is addressed in research of the last two decades with various terms and meanings. Specifically, the topic of the self-ideal in Arnold’s theory is related to the themes of identity and self; the constructs most frequently used in the literature include: identity (social or moral self), true self (real or perceived), authentic self, true self ( Schlegel et al., 2016 ). The topic of the self is connected to flourishing understood as psychological well-being (PWB) and emotional well-being (EWB) by authors who draw inspiration from the Aristotelian concept of eudaimonia, by researchers who investigate an objective sense of well-being and attempt to develop instruments that measure aspects of well-being beyond just positive emotions and pleasure ( Waterman et al., 2010 ). In broad terms, Arnold’s notion of the self-ideal, a valid self-ideal, emphasizes a type of objective self-ideal. The valid self-ideal consists of humanity fully realized by each individual, their perfection, stemming from their capacity (personality) and circumstances (life history). Arnold refers to a self-ideal that is rationalized as an idea but also manifested in personality and throughout one’s life. The self-ideal is objectively delineated or framed by human nature, “actualized” in each individual by their personal characteristics, actions, and life experiences. The self-ideal is the horizon of good human actions, those that make one fully human and achieve the goods that constitute a good human life.

We believe that some recent research asserts a mode of understanding flourishing that aligns with the conception of the self-ideal. This is evident in the work of Fowers et al. (2024 , p. 15), which introduces additional components of flourishing: “We envision a profile approach that will include some currently prominent concepts (e.g., meaning and belonging) and others that have been left out (e.g., harmony with others, harmony with the environment, and collective flourishing).” Up to this point, the objective of flourishing, in the theory that many researchers have worked on, is individual development manifested in good or optimal psychological functioning, necessary for a good life. Arnold situates the self-ideal as something more than individual development; therefore, he conceptualizes it as the organizer of personality. For Arnold:

With Gasson (1954) I would consider personality as the patterned totality of human potentialities, activities, and habits, uniquely organized by the person in the active pursuit of his self-ideal, and revealed in his behavior”. Together with deliberate action tendencies, emotions urge the human being to pursue his ideal. The same combination urges him to aim for particular goals ( Arnold, 1969b , p. 196).

For the science of flourishing, the objective of PWB (psychological well-being) and EWB (eudaimonic well-being) is the effective realization of self-actualization by fulfilling basic psychological needs. In this sense, indicators of flourishing are constructed to seek evidence of the development of human potential, of psychological functioning. As Waterman et al. (2010) , p. 5 stated: “The objective elements include those behaviors involved in the pursuit of eudaimonic goals such as self-realization entailing the identification and development of personal potentials and their utilization in ways that give purpose and meaning to life.” Indicators of flourishing aim to demonstrate the development of human potential regarding being (character and virtue, being a good person, personal growth), having (a purpose in life, meaning in life, values, goals, positive relations with others, supportive relationships, close social relationships, self-acceptance, autonomy, environmental mastery, mastery accomplishment, optimism, engagement, health), and doing (the pursuit of excellence and self-realization, self-discovery, perceived development of one’s best potentials). This more comprehensive view of the human being, objective and generalizable enough to encompass people of different conditions and cultures, could serve as a reference framework for research on assessment and therapeutic intervention. The shift from the general to the specific, including individuals and cultural contexts, constitutes a research and intervention pathway. This approach has been partially initiated through proposals such as those by Bauer and Weatherbie (2023) and Fowers et al. (2024) , which aim to enhance flourishing assessment tools by incorporating diverse cultural perspectives. Additionally, it is reflected in the emerging new directions in clinical therapy ( Freetly Porter et al., 2023 ) and educational counseling ( Weziak-Bialowolska et al., 2021 ).

Arnold, through Thomas Aquinas, is in contact with the notion of Aristotelian happiness-eudaimonia. Eudaimonia, as an idea, has been closely related since its origins to emotional regulation. For Aristotle, ethical virtue is a sine qua non condition of authentic happiness. As is known, in Aristotle, ethical virtues are strengths of character (ethos in Greek means character), among which are some (such as temperance and fortitude) whose function is to regulate emotions. Thus, emotional regulation is conceived by the eudaimonistic ethical tradition as a condition of eudaimonia-happiness. If we approach the concepts of flourishing and eudaimonia, therefore, we have here the historical origins of the connection between emotional regulation and flourishing. With Arnold’s conception of emotions strongly rooted in that same tradition, it is natural that he has concerned himself with studying the relationship between happiness and emotional regulation, in which the concept of self-ideal also plays a fundamental role.

After demonstrating the connection between Arnold’s self-ideal and the current conception of flourishing, we conclude that flourishing should be a primary goal in emotional regulation and that it should be reflected in the strategies employed to regulate emotion. In addition, we have also verified that theories on flourishing include references to emotions and their regulation. Vittersø (2016b) , in his study of the role of emotions in relation to flourishing, acknowledges Arnold’s theory regarding the role of feelings and explains the importance of emotions in consolidating psychological functioning and being able to achieve the goals that individuals set in life. However, what we propose is that Arnold theorizes about emotions and the self-ideal not only to establish that emotional regulation is a means to reach the self-ideal, but also to suggest that the presence of a self-ideal serves emotional regulation, understanding by self-ideal not only a realization of one’s own potentialities but also achieving a good life. This idea relates to ongoing research. For example, some studies propose models of strategies that integrate the process of self-control with emotional regulation ( Werner and Ford, 2023 ). Self-control focuses on regulating behaviors, while emotional regulation aims to regulate emotions. All cases of self-control include emotional regulation, but not all emotional regulation processes can be considered self-control. The goals for which behaviors are chosen could be oriented toward flourishing, and valuing them could be a strategy for emotional regulation.

Based on the debate raised by Hervás and Jódar (2008) questioning what marks the difference between a functional strategy and one that is not, we suggest that precisely the concept of self-ideal should be the direction in which emotion is regulated. In this sense, it is crucial to reflect on Arnold’s considerations about the motivating role of emotion, as well as the presence of motivation that can be constructive or not. Tamir et al. (2020) also highlight that emotional regulation is a motivated process, a matter that has often been relegated to the background in research. In this line, Tamir and Ford (2009) indicate that research in emotional regulation has assumed that individuals seek to feel good and avoid feeling bad, but often this is not the case, and individuals “may be motivated to experience even unpleasant emotions when they might be useful for goal attainment” (p. 488). This research corroborates what Arnold et al. (1962) pointed out: not only emotions matter but also the motives that drive my actions.

For emotional regulation to reflect flourishing, it is necessary to include eudaimonic motives, as referred to by Tamir (2016) , that is, a sense when carrying out emotional regulation that goes beyond adaptation. Following Arnold et al. (1962) , it is very relevant to know whether the individual is driven by constructive motivation toward an appropriate self-ideal or, in more current terms, flourishing. In this line, Roth et al. (2019) propose an approach to emotional regulation linked to aspects related to the self-ideal and flourishing (self-regulated action, short-and long-term goals, values, and preferences).

On the other hand, we can also conclude that emotions can be helpful in achieving flourishing if they are in harmony with the self-ideal; otherwise, it will require the use of different emotional regulation strategies to modulate their intensity and continue moving toward flourishing. Arnold suggests various strategies for modulating the intensity of emotions: the use of imagination, reflective reappraisal, corrective experiences, among others. This coincides with and expands current research showing that flourishers prioritize cognitive reappraisal as an emotional regulation strategy. Some authors ( Hervás, 2011 ; Roth et al., 2019 ) suggest the need to include acceptance and non-judgmental embrace of emotional experience. At this point, it would be necessary to continue investigating appropriate emotional regulation strategies to achieve flourishing, based on Hervás (2011) emotional processing model, which, in turn, coincides in various aspects with Arnold’s proposal. Specifically, when considering conducting an emotional analysis to decide whether the information provided by the emotion is a “false alarm” or not, which in Arnold’s words would coincide with the affective memory that generates a disproportionate reaction to the situation.

Emotional regulation and flourishing are, therefore, two concepts that need each other, with a need to focus research on the interdependence between them. There is no flourishing without the regulation of our emotions; emotional regulation does not reach its deepest meaning if it is not directed toward flourishing. This holistic approach offers a comprehensive framework by integrating both realities, introducing an innovative perspective to the most recent research, which has been primarily focused on a more analytical view of each field separately.

We highlight two limitations of this study. The first limitation is the inability to use Magda Arnold’s unpublished writings, to which we had access, and which illustrate the developed argument in greater depth. The second limitation is the need to exclude other concepts and topics related to the central subject of this study, as well as the difficulty in delving deeper into the comparative analysis between different terms that share conceptual aspects. This last limitation also presents an opportunity for future research, such as examining the processes of emotional dysregulation. For instance, the third volume of Arnold’s unpublished masterpiece, Emotion and Personality, which addresses emotional disorders, could be used for this purpose. It could be studied the relationship between emotional dysregulation and flourishing, answering the question of why and how emotional dysregulation constitutes a difficulty or problem for flourishing. In addition, research could be conducted to examine the relationships between the following variables that highlight a problem of great relevance today: emotional dysregulation, personality traits, internet addiction and flourishing.

The conclusions reached in this article call for a review of intervention programs related to emotional regulation. Given the close relationship between emotional regulation and flourishing, such programs should address not only the identification and regulation of emotions but also elements such as purpose, meaning, and close, positive relationships–key aspects typically assessed by flourishing instruments. Therefore, future research could focus on identifying indicators that jointly evaluate emotional regulation and flourishing. Moreover, Hervás’s emotional processing model could be further explored and integrated with the concept of flourishing in his proposal; studies could also focus on emotional regulation strategies and use flourishing as a guide to determine whether the employed strategies are appropriate or not.

Finally, future research lines could propose the integrated framework outlined in this article as a basis for models of emotional and character education, and even for establishing new psychotherapy protocols.

Author contributions

FR-F: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. AB-M: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. ME: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.

The author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This research article benefited from the financial support of the Faculty of Education and Psychology from the University of Navarra and the Faculty of Psychology from Universidad Abat Oliba CEU.

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge Open AI Chat GPT - 3.5 its assistance with the translation.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Arnold, M. B. (1959). Psychology and the image of man. Relig. Educ. 54, 30–36. doi: 10.1080/0034408590540105

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Arnold, M. B. (1969a). Emoción y Personalidad. Primera parte: Aspectos psicológicos , vol. 1. Buenos Aires: Editorial Losada.

Google Scholar

Arnold, M. B. (1969b). “Human emotion and action” in Human action: Conceptual and empirical issues . ed. T. Mischel (New York: Academic Press), 167–196.

Arnold, M. B. (1970). Emoción y Personalidad II. Aspectos neurológicos y fisiológicos . Buenos Aires: Editorial Losada.

Arnold, M. B. (1971). Motives as causes. J. Phenomenol. Psychol. 1, 185–192. doi: 10.1163/156916271X00110

Arnold, M. B. (1984). Memory and the brain . Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Arnold, M. B., and Gasson, J. A. (1954). The human person: An approach to an integral theory of personality . New York: The Ronald Press Company.

Arnold, M. B., Hispanicus, P., Weisgerber, C. A., and D’Aecy, P. F. (1962). Screening candidates for the priesthood and religious life (literary L) . Whitefish: Literary Licensing.

Barber, L. K., Bagsby, P. G., and Munz, D. C. (2010). Affect regulation strategies for promoting (or preventing) flourishing emotional health. Personal. Individ. Differ. 49, 663–666. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2010.06.002

Bauer, J. J. (2016). “Eudaimonic growth: the development of the Goodin personhood (or: cultivating a good life story)” in Handbook of Eudaimonic well-being . ed. J. Vittersø (New York: Springer International Publishing), 147–174.

Bauer, J. J., and Weatherbie, K. J. (2023). The quiet Ego and human flourishing. J. Happiness Stud. 24, 2499–2530. doi: 10.1007/s10902-023-00689-5

Brown, N. J. L., Lomas, T., and Eiroa-Orosa, F. J. (2018). The Routledge international handbook of critical positive psychology . Oxford: Routledge/Taylor and Francis Group.

Carvalho, T. F., De Aquino, S. D., and Natividade, J. C. (2021). Flourishing in the Brazilian context: evidence of the validity of the PERMA-profiler scale. Curr. Psychol. 42, 1828–1840. doi: 10.1007/s12144-021-01587-w

Chaves, C. (2021). “Well being and flourishing” in The Palgrave handbook of positive education . eds. M. L. Kein and M. L. Wehmeyer (London: Palgrave MacMillan), 273–295.

Cherkowski, S., and Walker, K. (2018). Perspectives on flourishing in schools . Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

Cornelius, R. R. (2006). Magda Arnold’s Thomistic theory of emotion, the self-ideal, and the moral dimension of appraisal. Cognit. Emot. 20, 976–1000. doi: 10.1080/02699930600616411

Dabdoub, J. P., Bernal, A., and Naval, C. (2020). Conflictos en la inspiración aristotélica de la Psicología Positiva. Acta Philos. 29, 73–90. doi: 10.19272/202000701005

Dahla, C. J., Wilson-Mendenhalla, C. D., and Davidson, R. J. (2020). The plasticity of well-being: a training-based framework for the cultivation of human flourishing. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 117, 32197–32206. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2014859117

Danvers, A. F., O’Neil, M. J., and Shiota, M. N. (2016). “The mind of the “happy warrior”: Eudaimonia, awe, and the search for meaning in life” in Handbook of Eudaimonic well-being . ed. J. Vittersø (New York: Springer International Publishing), 323–335.

David, S., Boniwell, I., and Conley Ayers, A. (2013). Oxford handbook of happiness . Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Diener, E., Oishi, S., and Tay, L. (2018). Handbook of well-being . Salt Lake City, UT: DEF Publishers.

Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, C., Choi, D., Oishi, S., et al. (2010). New well-being measures: short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings. Soc. Indic. Res. 97, 143–156. doi: 10.1007/s11205-009-9493-y

Echavarría, M. F. (2020). “Desire and freedom: are we responsible for our emotions?” in Desire and human flourishing. Perspectives from positive psychology, moral education and virtue ethics . ed. M. Bosch (Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland AG), 59–72.

Engen, H. G., and Anderson, M. C. (2018). Memory control: a fundamental mechanism of emotion regulation. Trends Cogn. Sci. 22, 982–995. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2018.07.015

Etkin, A., Büchel, C., and Gross, J. J. (2015). The neural bases of emotion regulation. Neuroscience 16, 693–700. doi: 10.1038/nrn4044

Fowers, B. J., Novak, L. F., Calder, A. J., and Kiknadze, N. C. (2024). Can a theory of human flourishing be formulated? Toward a science of flourishing. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 28, 123–142. doi: 10.1177/10892680231225223

Fowers, B. J., Novak, L. F., Kiknadze, N. C., and Calder, A. J. (2023). Questioning contemporary universalist approaches to human flourishing. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 27, 121–134. doi: 10.1177/10892680221138230

Freetly Porter, E., Jessen, M., Coleman, J. J., Sinha, S., Devor, N., Sauer-Zavala, S., et al. (2023). Therapist experiences and perspectives on moving beyond symptoms and into flourishing: a grounded theory analysis. Couns. Psychol. Q. 2023:5033. doi: 10.1080/09515070.2023.2225033

Galvin, K. T. (2018). Routledge handbook of well-being . London: Routledge.

García-Alandete, J. (2024). Magda Arnold's understanding of the human person: Thomistic personalism, psychophysical unity of the person, integration of personality, and transcendence. Hist. Psychol. 27, 159–177. doi: 10.1037/hop0000247.Epub

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Gasper, K., and Bramesfeld, K. D. (2006). Imparting wisdom: Magda Arnold’s contribution to research on emotion and motivation. Cognit. Emot. 20, 1001–1026. doi: 10.1080/02699930600616122

Gasson, J. A. (1954). Personality theory: A formulation of general principles. In The human person: An approach to an integral theory of personality . (eds.) M. B. Arnold and J. A. Gasson (pp. 165–221). The Ronald Press Company.

González, R. C., Fernández-Berrocal, P., Ruiz-Aranda, D., and Extremera, N. (2006). Una aproximación a la integración de diferentes medidas de regulación emocional. Ansiedad Estrés 12, 155–166.

Gross, J. J. (1999). “Emotion and emotion regulation” in Handbook of personality: Theory and research . eds. L. A. Pervin and O. P. John. 2nd ed (New York: Guildford Press), 525–552.

Gross, J. J. (2002). Emotion regulation: affective, cognitive, and social consequences. Psychophysiology 39, 281–291. doi: 10.1017/s0048577201393198

Gross, J. J. (2015). Emotion regulation: current status and future prospects. Psychol. Inq. 26, 1–26. doi: 10.1080/1047840X.2014.940781

Gross, J. J., Sheppes, G., and Urry, H. L. (2011). Taking one’s lumps while doing the splits: a big tent perspective on emotion generation and emotion regulation. Cognit. Emot. 25, 789–793. doi: 10.1080/02699931.2011.586590

Gross, J. J., and Thompson, R. (2007). “Emotion regulation: conceptual foundations” in Handbook of emotion regulation . ed. J. J. Gross (New York: The Guilford Press), 3–27.

Hervás, G. (2011). Psicopatología de la regulación emocional: el papel de los déficits emocionales en los trastornos clínicos. Behav. Psychol. 19, 347–372.

Hervás, G., and Jódar, R. (2008). Adaptación al castellano de la Escala de Dificultades en la Regulación Emocional. Clín. Salud 19, 139–156.

Hervás, G., and Vázquez, C. (2006). La regulación afectiva: Modelos, investigación e implicaciones para la salud mental y física. Rev. Psicol. Gen. Apl. 59, 9–36.

Hulsey, T. L., and Hampson, P. J. (2014). Moral Expertise. New Ideas Psychol. 34, 1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.newideapsych.2014.02.001

Huppert, F. A., and So, T. T. C. (2013). Flourishing acrossEurope: Application of a new conceptual framework for defining wellbeing. Soc. Indic. Res. 110, 837–861. doi: 10.1007/2Fs11205-011-9966-7

Intelisano, S., Krasko, J., and Luhmann, M. (2020). Integrating philosophical and psychological accounts of happiness and well-being. J. Happiness Stud. 21, 161–200. doi: 10.1007/s10902-019-00078-x

Kappas, A. (2006). Appraisals are direct, immediate, intuitive, and unwitting.. And some are reflective. Cognit. Emot. 20, 952–975. doi: 10.1080/02699930600616080

Keyes, C. L. M. (2002). The mental health continuum: from languishing to flourishing in life. J. Health Soc. Behav. 43, 207–222. doi: 10.2307/3090197

Kristjánsson, K. (2020). Flourishing as the aim of education: A neo-Aristotelian view . Abingdon, Oxfordshire: Routledge.

Lazarus, R. S. (1968). Emotions and adaptation: Conceptual and empirical relations. In Nebraska symposium on motivation . Vol. 16, (ed.) W. J. Arnold, (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press), pp. 175266.

Lazarus, R. S. (2001). “Relational meaning and discrete emotions” in Appraisal processes in emotion theory, methods, research . eds. K. R. Scherer, A. Schorr, and T. Johnstone (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press), 38–67.

Lopez, S. J., and Snyder, C. R. (2009). Oxford handbook of positive psychology . 2nd Edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Martínez, B., de Soria, A., and Naval, C. (2023). El florecimiento Como fin de la educación del carácter | flourishing as the aim of character education. Rev. Española Pedag. 81, 17–32. doi: 10.22550/REP81-1-2023-01

Pascual Jimeno, A., and Conejero López, S. (2019). Regulación emocional y afrontamiento: Aproximación conceptual y estrategias. Rev. Mex. Psicol. 36, 74–83.

Petrova, K., and Gross, J. J. (2023). The future of emotion regulation research: broadening our field of view. Affect. Sci. 4, 609–616. doi: 10.1007/s42761-023-00222-0

Pugen, A. (2020). Psychology beyond technocracy: Marshall McLuhan, Magda Arnold, and the “meaning crisis”. Dianoetikon 1, 27–48.

Reisenzein, R. (2006). Arnold’s theory of emotion in historical perspective. Cognit. Emot. 20, 920–951. doi: 10.1080/02699930600616445

Richard-Sephton, P. B., Crisp, D. A., and Burns, R. A. (2024). The emotion regulation strategies of flourishing adults. Curr. Psychol. 43, 12816–12827. doi: 10.1007/s12144-023-05332-3

Roth, G., Vansteenkiste, M., and Ryan, R. M. (2019). Integrative emotion regulation: process and development from a self-determination theory perspective. Dev. Psychopathol. 31, 945–956. doi: 10.1017/S0954579419000403

Ryan, R. M., and Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: a review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 52, 141–166. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.141

Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 57, 1069–1081. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.57.6.1069

Ryff, C. D., Boylan, J. M., and Kirsch, J. A. (2021). “Eudaimonic and hedonic well-being: an integrative perspective with linkages to sociodemographic factors and health” in Measuring well-being: Interdisciplinary perspectives from the social sciences and the humanities . eds. M. T. Lee, L. D. Kubzansky, and T. J. V. Weele (New York: Oxford University Press), 92–135.

Schlegel, R. J., Hicks, J. A., and Christy, A. G. (2016). “The Eudaimonics of the true self” in Handbook of Eudaimonic well-being . ed. J. Vittersø (New York: Springer International Publishing), 205–213.

Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Flourish. Avisionary new understanding of happiness and well being . North Sydney, NSW: William Heinemann Australia.

Shields, S. A. (2006). “Magda B. Arnold: Pioneer in research on emotion” in Portraits of pioneers in psychology . eds. D. A. Dewsbury, L. T. Benjamin, and M. Wertheimer, vol. 6 (Washington DC: American Psychological Association, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates), 223–237.

Su, R., Tay, L., and Diener, E. (2014). The development and validation of the comprehensive inventory of thriving (CIT) and the brief inventory of thriving (BIT). Appl. Psychol. Health Well Being 6, 251–279. doi: 10.1111/aphw.12027

Tamir, M. (2016). Why do people regulate their emotions? A taxonomy of motives in emotion regulation. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 20, 199–222. doi: 10.1177/1088868315586325

Tamir, M., and Ford, B. Q. (2009). Choosing to be afraid: preferences for fear as a function of goal pursuit. Emotion 9, 488–497. doi: 10.1037/a0015882

Tamir, M., Vishkin, A., and Gutentag, T. (2020). Emotion regulation is motivated. Emotion 20, 115–119. doi: 10.1037/emo0000635

Thompson, R. A. (1991). Emotional regulation and emotional development. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 3, 269–307. doi: 10.1007/BF01319934

Titus, C. S. (2016). Aquinas, Seligman, and positive psychology: a Christian approach to the use of the virtues in psychology. J. Posit. Psychol. 12, 447–458. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2016.1228005

Valenzuela (2024). The value of emotions based on Magda B. Arnold and Barbara L. Fredrickson theories (human flourishing) . Roma: Edusc.

Vallerand, R. J. (2016). “On the synergy between Hedonia and Eudaimonia: the role of passion” in Handbook of Eudaimonic well-being . ed. J. Vittersø (New York: Springer International Publishing), 191–204.

Vander Weele, T. J. (2017). On the promotion of human flourishing. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 114, 8148–8156. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1702996114

Vittersø, J. (2016c). Handbook of Eudaimonic well-being . New York: Springer International Publishing.

Vittersø, J. (2016a). “The most important idea in the world: an introduction” in Handbook of Eudaimonic well-being . ed. J. Vittersø (New York: Springer International Publishing), 1–24.

Vittersø, J. (2016b). “The feeling of excellent functioning: hedonic and Eudaimonic emotions” in Handbook of Eudaimonic well-being . ed. J. Vittersø (New York: Springer International Publishing), 253–277.

Waterman, A. S. (1984). Identity formation: Discovery or creation? J. Early Adolesc. 4, 329–341. doi: 10.1177/0272431684044004

Waterman, A. S. (1992). “Identity as an aspect of optimal psychological functioning” in Identity formation during adolescence. Advances in adolescent development . eds. G. R. Adams, T. Gullota, and R. Montemayor, vol. 4 (Newbury Park, CA: Sage), 50–72.

Waterman, A. S., Schwartz, S. J., Zamboanga, B. L., Ravert, R. D., Williams, M. K., Agocha, B., et al. (2010). The questionnaire for Eudaimonic well-being: psychometric properties, demographic comparisons, and evidence of validity. J. Posit. Psychol. 5, 41–61. doi: 10.1080/17439760903435208

Werner, K. M., and Ford, B. Q. (2023). Self-control: an integrative framework. Social and personality. Psychology. Compass 17:e12738. doi: 10.1111/spc3.12738

Weziak-Bialowolska, D., Bialowolski, P., Vander Weele, T. J., and McNeely, E. (2021). Character strengths involving an orientation to promote good can help your health and well-being: evidence from two longitudinal studies. Am. J. Health Promot. 35, 388–398. doi: 10.1177/0890117120964083

Keywords: emotional regulation, flourishing, self-ideal, Arnold, appraisal, theory of emotions, motivation

Citation: Ruiz-Fuster F, Bernal-Martínez de Soria A and Echavarría MF (2024) Emotional regulation and Arnold’s self-ideal: a way to flourishment. Front. Psychol . 15:1425850. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1425850

Received: 30 April 2024; Accepted: 29 July 2024; Published: 14 August 2024.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2024 Ruiz-Fuster, Bernal-Martínez de Soria and Echavarría. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Fátima Ruiz-Fuster, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.