A non-systematic overview review of self-focused emotion regulation in autistic individuals through the lens of the extended process model

Abstract

Difficulties regulating emotions have been coined as inherent to autism, possibly even presenting a core difficulty of autism. While several models of emotion regulation have been proposed in the past, in this targeted review article, we aim to map emotion regulation difficulties in autistic individuals within the framework of the extended process model of emotion regulation. This model can be considered the most comprehensive one currently incorporating not only different emotion regulation strategy groups but also different stages and processes involved in successful self-focused emotion regulation. Within this model, we will identify areas and domains as specifically impacted by autistic individuals. We will also outline gaps in the literature and provide suggestions for future research that can help deepen our understanding of the emotion regulation processes of autistic individuals. The ultimate goal is to develop specific support programs that address specific emotion regulation mechanisms, providing a much more individualized support approach.

Lay abstract

What do we already know about emotion regulation in autism?

We know that many autistic children, youth, and adults experience difficulties regulating emotions. Existing research has focused mainly on the differences in emotion regulation capabilities between autistic and non-autistic individuals, the relationships between autistic traits and emotion regulation, and how emotion regulation relates to other outcomes, such as social skills and mental health.

What does this paper add?

We want to take a new approach to review the existing emotion regulation research through the lens of a specific theoretical model: the extended process model of emotion regulation. Professor James Gross developed this model. It consists of four emotion regulation phases: identification, selection, implementation, and monitoring.

Our review revealed specific areas within these emotion regulation phases that could significantly impact the emotion regulation experiences of autistic individuals. We also outline the gaps in the research and propose avenues for future investigation.

Implications for practice

By deepening our understanding of emotion regulation in autistic individuals through the proposed future research, researchers and clinicians can pave the way for the development of tailored support programs. These programs will directly target specific emotion regulation mechanisms, offering a much-needed individualized support approach.

Keywords

autism co-regulation dysregulation emotion regulation process model

Recent estimates suggest that approximately 15-20% of people worldwide are neurodivergent (Doyle, 2020). Autism is a neurodivergence characterized by differences across various domains, including communication, routine needs, repetitive behaviors, sensory processing, interests, and sociality. Although these are the core characterizations of autism, everyone on the spectrum is unique and different. Apart from the heterogeneity in these core characterizations, autistic individuals experience high variability in cognitive and emotion processing, everyday functioning, academic and employment outcomes, and support requirements (Hedley et al., 2017; Keen et al., 2016; Norbury & Nation, 2011; Tillmann et al., 2019). In addition, research has consistently found that a considerable proportion of autistic individuals experience significant mental health symptoms (Lai et al., 2019; Vasa et al., 2020), and more autistic individuals are diagnosed with anxiety and depression than non-autistic people (Hollocks et al., 2019). This increased occurrence of mental health issues in autistic children and adults has been attributed to difficulties with emotion regulation (ER) that are frequently observed in autistic individuals (Cai et al., 2018; Weiss et al., 2014; White et al., 2014).

According to the extended process model of ER, self-focused ER is a complex, cyclic process that includes identifying one’s own emotions, selecting and implementing strategies to regulate emotions, and monitoring the outcomes of this regulation process (Gross, 2015, 2023; Petrova & Gross, 2024). It allows us to change the intensity, duration, and types of emotions experienced (Thompson, 1991) and modify one or multiple components of emotions, such as emotional experience, psychophysiological constituents, bodily and outward expressions, and thoughts (appraisals) associated with an emotion. For instance, when we notice the physical sensations (heat rising in our bodies) and thoughts associated with anger in ourselves (blaming thoughts), we may first acknowledge that we feel anger and then try to reduce the intensity of this emotion by focusing on our breaths and practicing deep breathing. The outcome of the regulation process may be reductions in the intensity and duration of the anger. ER processes can occur either deliberately through conscious effort (previous example) or automatically without conscious awareness of one’s emotions or goal to regulate emotions (Gyurak et al., 2011). In infancy, we depend on caregivers to help us regulate emotions (see Riediger & Bellingtier, 2022), also coined as other-focused ER (see Petrova & Gross, 2024). As we grow and enter preschool, we rely less on caregivers and more on ourselves (Grolnick et al., 1996). Although the development of the regulatory systems increases and our ability to regulate emotions improves throughout childhood, a maladaptive shift may occur during adolescence (Cracco et al., 2017).

While the occurrence of mental health conditions in autistic people is often associated with ER difficulties, it is inappropriate to generalize these findings to all autistic individuals. Indeed, there is evidence indicating that a minority of autistic individuals exhibit adaptive ER capabilities (e.g., Cai et al., 2019). Nevertheless, we can conclude that as a group, autistic children and adults regulate their emotions less frequently and tend to use more maladaptive regulation strategies and less adaptive strategies than non-autistic people (e.g., Bruggink et al., 2016; Cibralic et al., 2019; Samson, Hardan, et al., 2015). Differences in neurobiology may explain the high frequency of ER difficulties often observed in and reported by autistic individuals. For example, there is lower structural connectivity between frontal regions and the lower limbic brain in autistic individuals (Samson et al., 2016), and when asked to down-regulation negative emotions, autistic individuals show a decreased engagement of prefrontal regions and less amygdala down-regulation (Pitskel et al., 2014; Richey et al., 2015).

Existing research on ER in autism has focused primarily on the differences in ER capabilities between autistic and non-autistic individuals (e.g., Mazefsky & White, 2014; Nuske et al., 2017; Rieffe et al., 2014; Samson, Wells, et al., 2015), the relationships between autistic traits and ER (e.g., Berkovits et al., 2017; Samson et al., 2014), the associations of ER with other outcomes such as social skills, mental health outcomes, and challenging behaviors (e.g., Berkovits et al., 2017; Cai et al., 2019; Conner et al., 2020; Goldsmith & Kelley, 2018; Jahromi et al., 2012), and more recently, factors that impact ER (e.g., Fenning et al., 2018; Greenlee et al., 2021). These empirical studies predominantly addressed two of the three theoretical models of ER (see an overview of models in Naragon-Gainey et al., 2017): ability-based and strategy-based models. Ability-based models focus on the dispositional factors that facilitate ER, while strategy-based models concentrate on specific ER strategies. Most of the existing studies have not explicitly examined autistic people’s ER through the lens of the temporal process models, which focus on the temporal unfolding of emotion and ER across various stages (for instance, a research question may be how do autistic adults identify the ER strategy most suitable for a stressful situation?). One of the most referenced models of ER in the Introduction sections of empirical papers is the extended process model (Gross, 2015, 2024; Petrova & Gross, 2024), which also happens to be a temporal process model.

We suggest it would be timely now to present the ER in autism literature through the lens of the extended process model, as initially and partly presented in the book chapter by Cai and Samson (2024). We anticipate that this novel approach to reviewing the literature will allow us to characterize ER in autism further and discover unique gaps in existing research. This not only helps researchers but also clinicians motivated to support ER in autistic individuals. Therefore, the current article aims to (1) connect existing autism literature to the extended model of ER (Gross, 2015, 2023), which postulates four ER phases (identification, selection, implementation, and monitoring), and (2) identify specific points in the ER process where issues may arise for those on the spectrum. As part of this review, we will discuss several factors that may contribute to the ER difficulties observed in autistic individuals, such as alexithymia, alterations in executive functioning, insistence on sameness, and cognitive inflexibility, which may differentially impact different phases and processes related to ER.

The process model of ER

In the extended model of ER, Gross (2015) described several stages and processes involved in ER. The identification phase first involves the perception of one’s own current or anticipated emotional state. This current state may not correspond to a desired state. It may, therefore, lead to a cascade of processes involved in ER, such as setting an ER goal and selecting and implementing one or more ER strategies combined or in sequence. Each stage can be broken down into cyclic subprocesses of perception, valuation, and action, which will be discussed in more detail below. Once a strategy has been implemented, it is followed by a monitoring stage, which allows one to observe the efficacy of a strategy—one may decide to stop using a strategy, continue implementing it, or switch to other strategies. To provide examples that may occur typically in autistic individuals: Noticing that one feels irritated about unprecedented changes and going to unfamiliar places may lead to setting an ER goal to feel less negative. To feel less irritated, one may decide not to go to an unfamiliar place (avoidance). Monitoring the efficacy of this strategy may reveal its success since negative emotions may have decreased due to the use of the avoidance strategy. In this case, there is no need to switch to other strategies (while this strategy may seem successful in the moment, there is evidence that avoidance strategy use may lead to increased anxiety or maintaining specific anxieties due to non-exposure; Ball & Gunaydin, 2022).

One can think of a myriad of ER strategies to change or maintain emotional states or their expressions, which can be categorized into five families of strategies in relation to different stages of how an emotion evolves (i.e. strategies tapping into situation selection, situation modification, attentional deployment, cognitive change, and response modulation) but can also be characterized based on their longer-term consequences on mental health (i.e. on a continuum from adaptive to maladaptive strategies). Cognitive reappraisal, a strategy that involves reframing an emotional situation’s meaning, is a particularly adaptive strategy. In contrast, expressive suppression, which involves suppressing the outward expression of emotions, is an example of a maladaptive strategy in the long term when used on a habitual basis (Gross, 2015).

Self-focused ER in autistic individuals via the process model

Identification stage

Breakdowns in the identification stage of the ER cycle may contribute to the challenges autistic individuals face in managing their emotions. Becoming aware of or identifying one’s emotions is the initial step in this stage. Researchers have utilized alexithymia to examine autistic people’s capacity to recognize, differentiate, and articulate their emotions. A systematic review and meta-analysis found that a higher proportion of autistic people have alexithymia than non-autistic people (50% vs. 5%; Kinnaird et al., 2019). It has been proposed that alexithymia plays a role in the emotional impairments observed in autism and hampers individuals’ ability to effectively regulate difficult emotions (Bird & Cook, 2013). Supporting this notion, a recent empirical study discovered a moderate association between alexithymia and emotion dysregulation in autistic youths (Gormley et al., 2022). One of the early studies on ER in autistic adults was able to show that autistic individuals still had more ER difficulties than non-autistic individuals, even if alexithymia was controlled for (Samson et al., 2012). Since around half of autistic people do not have alexithymia, we conclude that alexithymia is not universally present in all autistic people. Therefore, alexithymia may not be the only candidate to explain ER difficulties in autism, but other impairments exist that contribute to the difficulties in ER processes.

The identification process not only includes detecting or identifying a current emotional state but also involves appraising emotion. Specific appraisals of an emotion may influence how and if we attempt to regulate an emotion. Autistic individuals seem to appraise fear and anxiety, for example, differently than non-autistic children (Sharma et al., 2014). Fear and anxiety were rated higher by autistic children on self-accountability, lower on coping potential, and lower on future expectancy, which corresponded to a pattern of elevated experience of fear and anxiety. Such early misattribution patterns can likely lead to later maladaptive ER (see also Walle & Özden, 2024).

In addition to breakdowns in the initial step of detecting one’s own emotions, ER difficulties can also emerge during later processes of the identification stage. These later processes involve our beliefs about emotions. Ford and Gross (2019) suggest that individuals’ perceptions and beliefs about emotions, specifically whether emotions are perceived as good or bad (goodness of emotions) and controllable or uncontrollable, play a significant role in ER. They hypothesized that believing an emotion to be “bad” increases the likelihood that the emotion is identified as needing regulation. For many people, our natural inclination is to seek positive emotions and avoid negative emotions (Barrett, 1996; Larsen, 2000; Rusting & Larsen, 1995), therefore identifying positive emotions as good and negative ones as bad. This intrinsic motivation leads us to approach stimuli that make us feel good and avoid those that make us feel bad. As a result, we engage in the down-regulation of negative emotions to reduce the intensity or frequency, and we readily accept and embrace our positive emotions, as highlighted by Gross et al. (2006). However, it has been found that a higher proportion of autistic adults actively down-regulate positive emotions in everyday life than non-autistic adults (Cai et al., 2020). One possible explanation for this observation is that some autistic people may find any emotion, including positive ones, too overwhelming and unpleasant, leading them to label all emotions as bad. In the general population, believing that emotions are bad predicts lower well-being and greater depressive and anxiety symptoms (Ford et al., 2018; Karnaze & Levine, 2018).

Finally, Gross (2015) suggested another way that ER difficulties could occur at the identification stage is via psychological inertia—the tendency to continue acting as one has previously. Emotional inertia, defined as resistance to change emotionally (Kuppens et al., 2010), could be even more relevant. People with high emotional inertia have emotional states likely to persist from one moment to the next. High emotional inertia in both positive and negative emotions has been shown to predict internalizing symptoms in adolescents and adults (Koval & Kuppens, 2024; Kuppens et al., 2010). Recently, autistic individuals have begun to use the term autistic inertia to describe their difficulty in acting on their intentions, with potential causes being motor difficulties, poor mental health, and executive functioning impairments (Buckle et al., 2021). Although no research has been conducted on emotional inertia in autism, some autistic people likely experience high emotional inertia. We know that, as a group, autistic individuals experience more executive functioning impairments and higher levels of insistence on sameness than non-autistic people (Demetriou et al., 2018; Eisenberg et al., 2015). We suggest that these executive functioning impairments, coupled with high levels of insistence on sameness and specific beliefs about emotions (uncontrollability, for example), are likely to lead autistic people to be stuck in psychological inertia and not activate goals to regulate emotions.

To summarize, problems in the identification stage of the ER process may result in the regulation difficulties observed in some autistic people. There is mounting evidence for alexithymia in autism and alexithymia impacting effective ER. Other aspects within the identification stage need further exploration, such as autistic people’s beliefs about the goodness of emotions (devaluing positive emotions), the controllability of emotions, and the role of psychological inertia.

Selection stage

After setting a goal to attenuate, increase, or maintain one’s emotional state, one needs to access mental representations of ER strategies to select one or multiple. This mental representation can vary in breadth and depth, influenced by factors such as developmental stage and past experiences. Studies have indicated that the repertoire of ER strategies expands as individuals transition from childhood to adolescence and adulthood, progressing from primarily behavioral strategies to more cognitive strategies (Riediger & Bellingtier, 2022). However, research has also shown that autistic children tend to employ less sophisticated ER strategies compared to their typically developing peers, indicating a delay in ER development (Nuske et al., 2017). In addition, a systematic review suggests that autistic individuals may possess a different repertoire of ER strategies, including more maladaptive ones (Cibralic et al., 2019). Preliminary evidence suggests that there may not be a difference between autistic and non-autistic individuals in terms of the number of strategies employed for each regulation moment (Cai et al., 2020). Therefore, the issue may lie not in the quantity of strategies utilized but rather in the types of strategies selected. In line with this hypothesis, multiple studies have demonstrated that autistic children and adults utilize cognitive reappraisal less frequently compared to non-autistic individuals (Samson, Hardan, et al., 2015; Samson, Wells, et al., 2015).

One reason that many autistic people tend to utilize less cognitively taxing strategies, such as cognitive reappraisal, may be due to the combination of anxiety and executive function difficulties often observed in this population. South and Rodgers (2017) proposed in their anxiety model that alexithymia and differences in sensory processing, along with other co-occurring factors related to autism, such as rigidity of thought and intolerance of uncertainty, may result in increased arousal and anxiety in autistic individuals. Research in non-autistic samples indicates that cognitive reappraisal is less effective at modifying the experiences of negative emotions in intensely emotional situations (Sheppes & Meiran, 2007; Sheppes, 2023), and people are less likely to select reappraisal in these types of situations (Sheppes et al., 2014). For many autistic children and adults, these highly intense emotional situations occur quite frequently in daily life due to the reasons proposed by South and Rodgers (2017). Similar to the findings of the general population by Sheppes and colleagues, it may not be adaptive to choose cognitive taxing strategies like cognitive reappraisal. In addition, problems with executive function in autistic people may also lead them to use less cognitively taxing strategies. A meta-analysis of executive function found that autistic people performed, on average, significantly worse on executive function than non-autistic ones. Executive function subdomains (working memory, response inhibition, planning, fluency, mental flexibility, and concept formation) were not differentially impaired in autism—they were all impaired with moderate effect sizes (Demetriou et al., 2018). Cognitive reappraisal is associated with better working memory and attention shifting in the general population (McRae et al., 2012). The mixture of higher arousal and lower executive function may together contribute to autistic people’s tendency to prefer less cognitively demanding ER strategies, such as avoidance or distraction, which historically is deemed maladaptive in the general population. Finally, it is also possible that some autistic individuals may have difficulties changing their perspectives (needed for cognitive reappraisal), which often involves reinterpreting a situation in a different light (Samson et al., 2012).

The adaptiveness of specific strategies is often defined based on their long-term mental health effects. However, whether the appropriateness and efficacy of strategies are the same for people with and without autism is still an open question. While avoidance is generally considered a maladaptive strategy, initial evidence suggests that it may be adaptive for autistic children (Rieffe et al., 2014). ER strategies categorized under situation selection, such as avoidance, can be particularly effective for individuals who struggle with utilizing other types of strategies (Webb et al., 2018). Another example is the presence of restrictive and repetitive behaviors, specifically insistence on sameness, which are diagnostic criteria for autism. However, it is worth noting that such behaviors are also commonly observed in typically developing young children, and these behaviors serve as strategies to manage fears and anxiety (Evans et al., 1997). Interestingly, autistic adolescents and adults also appear to utilize repetitive behaviors as a means to regulate their emotions (Samson et al., 2022; Samson, Wells, et al., 2015). This may suggest that these strategies may be essential and potentially adaptive for autistic individuals, particularly when other, more cognitively demanding strategies are less accessible due to the factors associated with autism (as described above). These examples highlight the importance of considering individual differences when evaluating the effectiveness and adaptiveness of ER strategies in autistic individuals. While certain strategies may be considered maladaptive, they may serve a beneficial purpose for individuals with specific cognitive, sensory, and emotional profiles. Recognizing the potential adaptive functions of these strategies can inform interventions and support approaches that acknowledge and leverage the unique ER needs of autistic people. However, since a recent article showed that a tendency toward behavioral repetition could contribute to repetitive negative thinking, which was linked to mental health problems (Cooper & Russell, 2024), we think that more research is needed to fully understand the links between repetitive behaviors, ER, and mental health outcomes.

To summarize, there is increasing evidence that autistic people use less cognitively taxing strategies and tend to use more behavioral approaches, including avoidance or repetitive behaviors that are typically considered more maladaptive in the long run—however, more research is needed to determine to which extent autistic people may benefit from such strategies in the short and long run. Differences in the ER repertoire might also be linked to less efficacy of cognitive ER strategies due to elevated arousal in autism.

Implementation stage

In the previous section, we discussed the possible reasons for selecting fewer cognitively taxing strategies by autistic people. Another possible reason is difficulties with implementing strategies, i.e. translating strategies into tactics—however, due to the limited research on ER tactics in both autistic and other populations (see also Petrova & Gross, 2024), it is currently difficult to ascertain whether autistic individuals face challenges in the implementation stage of ER. Although autistic people tend to utilize cognitive reappraisal less frequently spontaneously, even a brief introduction with practice opportunities has shown significant improvements in the use of reappraisal in the laboratory setting (Samson, Hardan, et al., 2015), indicating that intervention programs focusing on the selection and implementation of adaptive strategies could be advantageous for autistic people (see, e.g., Zaharia et al., 2021).

Certain studies indicate that autistic individuals may employ cognitive reappraisal differently, potentially utilizing alternative tactics associated with different neural pathways. Richey et al. (2015) examined the neural correlates of instructed cognitive reappraisal, and no differences in subjective ratings of reappraisal efficacy were found between the autistic and non-autistic groups. However, distinct variations were observed in the brain activation patterns during regulation, including reduced activation in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex among the autistic group. These findings suggest that autistic individuals may achieve effective ER despite employing alternative functional brain mechanisms. It is important to note that in research settings, the use of instructed reappraisal may be more effective than when used in real-life settings during high arousal moments. In addition to Richey et al.’s work on differing neural correlates in autistic people during reappraisal, Pitskel et al. (2014) demonstrated weaker functional connectivity between the prefrontal cortex and the amygdala, which aligns with previous findings of compromised structural prefrontal-amygdala connectivity associated with ER difficulties in autistic individuals (Samson et al., 2016).

In summary, autistic individuals can employ advanced strategies like instructed cognitive reappraisal in laboratory settings, albeit through alternative functional brain mechanisms. However, as discussed earlier, they tend to utilize these cognitively demanding strategies less frequently in spontaneous situations. Therefore, further exploration is warranted to understand how to effectively assist autistic people in utilizing strategies during stressful moments or, in other words, how to translate ER strategies into tactics. For instance, exploring alternative approaches such as other-focused ER or intervention programs targeting factors that support ER, such as self-compassion (see Cai et al., 2024), may prove beneficial in supporting autistic people in regulating their emotions.

Monitoring stage

Finally, after going through the earlier stages of the ER process, we need to monitor ER efficacy to maintain, change, or stop regulation efforts (Gross, 2015). Like the implementation phase, there is a scarcity of research examining the monitoring phase of ER. We propose that autistic individuals may encounter challenges in the monitoring stage of ER due to at least two potential mechanisms: alexithymia and psychological inflexibility/rigidity. To successfully monitor one’s emotions, we need to be able to assess the efficacy of our chosen ER strategies by detecting changes in our emotions. For those autistic individuals who experience difficulties with emotional awareness, it becomes challenging to identify subtle shifts in their emotional states. Reduced interoceptive ability, which involves being aware of the body’s perception of its internal states, has been hypothesized to serve as a pathophysiologic basis of alexithymia by non-autism-researchers (Brewer et al., 2016; Murphy, Brewer, et al., 2018; Murphy, Catmur, & Bird, 2018; Trevisan et al., 2019). This same pattern of relationship has been identified in autistic individuals (Butera et al., 2023; Ben Hassen et al., 2023; Mul et al., 2018). There is also preliminary evidence that alexithymia mediates the relationship between interoceptive sensitivity and ER abilities in autistic adults (Zdankiewicz-Ścigała et al., 2021). It would be challenging to empirically study the mechanism of alexithymia in the monitoring phase of ER via self-reported surveys and in naturalistic settings (using experience sampling methodology) because it may be difficult to untangle the role of alexithymia in the monitoring phase from its role on the identification phase. A more realistic approach to study this mechanism may be to conduct an experiment where after an unpleasant emotion is elicited from participants, they asked to report their bodily and emotional states, and are taught to emotionally regulate using an effective strategy. Then, participants are asked to report changes in their bodily sensations and emotional states. Individuals who did not notice alternations in bodily sensation or emotional states are likely to be less emotionally aware than individuals who noticed reduced emotional intensity and bodily discomfort.

The executive function issues we have previously discussed may also lead to psychological rigidity/inflexibility and insistence on sameness in autistic people, which potentially impacts the monitoring stage. An illustration of a situation would be when an individual has a behavioral habit that usually elicits an unwanted, unpleasant emotion and is able to successfully regulate their emotion (and acknowledge their regulation successes). However, due to their insistence on behaving in the same manner, they are unable to break their habit and repeatedly feel unpleasant emotions. Therefore, although the single instances of ER were successful, over time across multiple instances, regulation efforts were not successful. Similar to alexithymia, empirically studying the mechanisms of psychological rigidity/inflexibility and insistence on sameness on the monitoring phase is a challenging task. One idea would be to explore the behavioral addiction literature to see if research methodologies could be creatively adapted to be used in this context.

We hypothesize that the combination of alexithymia and psychological rigidity would strongly influence the monitoring stage of ER in autistic people; however, more research is needed in this area. By gaining a deeper understanding of the mechanisms that impact the monitoring stage, we can enhance our knowledge of the specific challenges faced by autistic people.

Discussion

In this article, we provided an overview of the current knowledge on ER in autism and mapped it onto the extended process model of ER (Gross, 2015). This framework enabled us to highlight potential challenges in emotional regulation across the stages of identification, selection, implementation, and monitoring (see Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Possible ER challenges within the process model experienced by autistic individuals.

While we possess a more solid understanding of difficulties in the identification stage and some understanding of the selection phase, there remains a gap in our knowledge regarding the latter two phases. Drawing from the growing body of literature, it appears that autistic individuals show a different pattern of ER strategy use. However, it seems less clear at which stage of the ER process differences emerge. Linked to lower emotional awareness, it may be that ER strategies are less clearly mentally represented or that less knowledge and understanding about emotions exist, causing some autistic individuals to experience difficulties selecting suitable ER strategies. It may also be the case that despite knowledge and understanding of ER strategies, some autistic individuals may have difficulties predominately in the implementation phase. We have attempted to hypothesize points in the ER process where challenges may occur for autistic individuals based on existing studies; however, some of the challenges may relate to more than one stage of the ER process (e.g., both identification and selection).

We make a call to action—it is crucial and timely to implement paradigms in future research that discern the challenges that may occur at specific stages of the ER process in autism. One way to study temporal-based models is to adopt naturalistic paradigms, such as ecological momentary assessment studies, which have been coined as suitable for studying the different phases of ER (see Bettis et al., 2022). This will allow us to unravel the challenges that may be encountered by autistic individuals in the ER cycle, distinguishing between those occurring in the initial ER phases versus later stages. Having this understanding may help us identify the mechanisms that could influence various stages of the ER process and comprehend how issues in the early stages can affect the subsequent ones. Another way to examine the different stages of the ER process is by running experiments in laboratory settings to study individual phases of the ER process, such as the ER choice and implementation paradigms (see examples Milyavsky et al., 2019; Sheppes et al., 2011). A potential reason why the ER in autism literature has predominantly relied on ability- and strategy-based models is that these models are more straightforward to study. In contrast, methods used to examine the temporal-based models (such as experimental paradigms) are much more time-consuming and complex. Further, given earlier phases influence later phases, it is much more difficult to identify later phase issues and correctly attribute them, given the possibility of earlier phase breakdowns.

More advanced paradigms implemented in real-world contexts may be required to achieve this goal. For example, incorporating wearable sensing technology to monitor ER success or even acoustic and language analysis (see Bettis et al., 2022). Recent developments in software algorithms and computational methods for capturing and analyzing acoustic data could significantly contribute to our understanding and evaluation of ER processes. For example, Shih et al. (2016) showed that acoustic analysis can identify diaphragmatic breathing patterns as an index of deep breathing as an ER strategy. Moreover, acoustic analysis may also detect other commonly employed ER strategies with specific acoustic features (e.g., exercise, playing, or listening to music). Insights from such research may help to improve interventions for autistic individuals. Ideally, such interventions are individualized to consider the range of abilities and differences in sensory, cognitive, social, and emotional domains.

Given the far-reaching impact of ER, including mental health outcomes, effective interventions and supports can ultimately improve the quality of life of autistic people across the lifespan. Nevertheless, given that a mechanistic understanding of ER is critical for developing effective and individually tailored treatment options, it is important to continue to study ER to transition from group-based support to providing more optimized individual interventions. More specifically, it is essential to determine which phases of self-focused ER should be focused on by considering individual differences and the high variability in autistic symptoms, cognitive functioning, emotional awareness, reactivity, and regulation.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Ru Ying Cai

Andrea C Samson

References

Ball

T. M.

Gunaydin

L. A.

(2022). Measuring maladaptive avoidance: From animal models to clinical anxiety. Neuropsychopharmacology, 47(5), 978–986. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41386-021-01263-4

Barrett

L. F.

(1996). Hedonic tone, perceived arousal, and item desirability: Three components of self-reported mood. Cognition & Emotion, 10(1), 47–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/026999396380385

Ben Hassen

Molins

Garrote-Petisco

Serrano

M. Á

. (2023). Emotional regulation deficits in autism spectrum disorder: The role of alexithymia and interoception. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 132, 104378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2022.104378

Berkovits

Eisenhower

Blacher

(2017). Emotion regulation in young children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 47(1), 68–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-016-2922-2

Bettis

A. H.

Burke

T. A.

Nesi

Liu

R. T.

(2022). Digital technologies for emotion-regulation assessment and intervention: A conceptual review. Clinical Psychological Science: A Journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 10(1), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/21677026211011982

Bird

Cook

(2013). Mixed emotions: The contribution of alexithymia to the emotional symptoms of autism. Translational Psychiatry, 3(7), Article e285. https://doi.org/10.1038/tp.2013.61

Brewer

Cook

Bird

(2016). Alexithymia: A general deficit of interoception. Royal Society Open Science, 3(10), 150664. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.150664

Bruggink

Huisman

Vuijk

Kraaij

Garnefski

(2016). Cognitive emotion regulation, anxiety and depression in adults with autism spectrum disorder. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 22, 34–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2015.11.003

Buckle

K. L.

Leadbitter

Poliakoff

Gowen

(2021). “No way out except from external intervention”: First-hand accounts of autistic inertia. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 631596. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.631596

10.

Butera

C. D.

Harrison

Kilroy

Jayashankar

Shipkova

Pruyser

Aziz-Zadeh

(2023). Relationships between alexithymia, interoception, and emotional empathy in autism spectrum disorder. Autism, 27(3), 690–703. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613221111310

11.

Cai

R. Y.

Edwards

Love

A. M.

Brown

Gibbs

. (2024). Self-compassion improves emotion regulation and mental health outcomes: A pilot study of an online self-compassion program for autistic adults. Autism, 28(10), 2572–2585. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613241235061

12.

Cai

R. Y.

Richdale

A. L.

Dissanayake

Trollor

Uljarević

(2019). Emotion regulation in autism: Reappraisal and suppression interactions. Autism, 23(3), 737–749. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361318774558

13.

Cai

R. Y.

Richdale

A. L.

Dissanayake

Uljarević

(2020). How does emotion regulation strategy use and psychological wellbeing predict mood in adults with and without autism spectrum disorder? A naturalistic assessment. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 50(5), 1786–1799. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-019-03934-0

14.

Cai

R. Y.

Richdale

A. L.

Uljarević

Dissanayake

Samson

A. C.

(2018). Emotion regulation in autism spectrum disorder: Where we are and where we need to go. Autism Research, 11(7), 962–978. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.1968

15.

Cai

R. Y.

Samson

A. C.

(2024). Emotion regulation in individuals on the autism spectrum. In Gross

J. J.

Ford

(Eds.), Handbook of emotion regulation (3rd ed., pp. 360–366). Guilford Publishers.

16.

Cibralic

Kohlhoff

Wallace

McMahon

Eapen

(2019). A systematic review of emotion regulation in children with autism spectrum disorder. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 68, 101422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2019.101422

17.

Conner

C. M.

White

S. W.

Scahill

Mazefsky

C. A.

(2020). The role of emotion regulation and core autism symptoms in the experience of anxiety in autism. Autism, 24(4), 931–940. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361320904217

18.

Cooper

Russell

(2024). Insistence on sameness, repetitive negative thinking and mental health in autistic and non-autistic adults. Autism, 29(2), 424–434. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613241275468

19.

Cracco

Goossens

Braet

(2017). Emotion regulation across childhood and adolescence: Evidence for a maladaptive shift in adolescence. European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 26(8), 909–921. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-017-0952-8

20.

Demetriou

E. A.

Lampit

Quintana

D. S.

Naismith

S. L.

Song

Y. J. C.

Pye

J. E.

Hickie

Guastella

A. J.

(2018). Autism spectrum disorders: A meta-analysis of executive function. Molecular Psychiatry, 23(5), 1198–1204. https://doi.org/10.1038/mp.2017.7

21.

Doyle

(2020). Neurodiversity at work: A biopsychosocial model and the impact on working adults. British Medical Bulletin, 135(1), 108–125. https://doi.org/10.1093/bmb/ldaa02132996572

22.

Eisenberg

I. W.

Wallace

G. L.

Kenworthy

Gotts

S. J.

Martin

(2015). Insistence on sameness relates to increased covariance of gray matter structure in autism spectrum disorder. Molecular Autism, 6, 54. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13229-015-0047-7

23.

Evans

D. W.

Leckman

J. F.

Carter

Reznick

J. S.

Henshaw

King

R. A.

Pauls

(1997). Ritual, habit, and perfectionism: The prevalence and development of compulsive-like behavior in normal young children. Child Development, 68(1), 58–68.

24.

Fenning

R. M.

Baker

J. K.

Moffitt

(2018). Intrinsic and extrinsic predictors of emotion regulation in children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 48(11), 3858–3870. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-018-3647-1

25.

Ford

B. Q.

Gross

J. J.

(2019). Why beliefs about emotion matter: An emotion-regulation perspective. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 28(1), 74–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721418806697

26.

Ford

B. Q.

Lam

John

O. P.

Mauss

I. B.

(2018). The psychological health benefits of accepting negative emotions and thoughts: Laboratory, diary, and longitudinal evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 115(6), 1075–1092. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000157

27.

Goldsmith

S. F.

Kelley

(2018). Associations between emotion regulation and social impairment in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 48(6), 2164–2173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-018-3483-3

28.

Gormley

Ryan

McCusker

(2022). Alexithymia is associated with emotion dysregulation in young people with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 34(1), 171–186. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-021-09795-9

29.

Greenlee

J. L.

Stelter

C. R.

Piro-Gambetti

Hartley

S. L.

(2021). Trajectories of dysregulation in children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 50(6), 858–873. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2021.1907752

30.

Grolnick

W. S.

Bridges

L. J.

Connell

J. P.

(1996). Emotion regulation in two-year-olds: Strategies and emotional expression in four contexts. Child Development, 67(3), 928–941.

31.

Gross

J. J.

(2015). Emotion regulation: Current status and future prospects. An International Journal for the Advancement of Psychological Theory, 26(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2014.940781

32.

Gross

J. J.

(2024). Conceptual foundations of emotion regulation. In Gross

J. J.

Ford

(Eds.), Handbook of emotion regulation (3rd ed., pp. 3–12). Guilford Publishers.

33.

Gross

J. J.

Richards

J. M.

John

O. P.

(2006). Emotion regulation in everyday life. In Snyder

D. K.

Simpson

Hughes

J. N.

(Eds.), Emotion regulation in couples and families: Pathways to dysfunction and health (pp. 13–35). American Psychological Association.

34.

Gyurak

Gross

J. J.

Etkin

(2011). Explicit and implicit emotion regulation: A dual-process framework. Cognition & Emotion, 25(3), 400–412. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2010.544160

35.

Hedley

Uljarević

Hedley

D. F. E.

(2017). Employment and living with autism: Personal, social, and economic impact. In Halder

Assaf

L. C.

(Eds.), Inclusion, disability and culture: An ethnographic perspective traversing abilities and challenges (pp. 295–311). Springer International Publishing.

36.

Hollocks

M. J.

Lerh

J. W.

Magiati

Meiser-Stedman

Brugha

T. S.

(2019). Anxiety and depression in adults with autism spectrum disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychological Medicine, 49(4), 559–572. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291718002283

37.

Jahromi

L. B.

Meek

S. E.

Ober-Reynolds

(2012). Emotion regulation in the context of frustration in children with high functioning autism and their typical peers. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines, 53(12), 1250–1258. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2012.02560.x

38.

Karnaze

M. M.

Levine

L. J.

(2018). Data versus Spock: Lay theories about whether emotion helps or hinders. Cognition & Emotion, 32(3), 549–565. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2017.1326374

39.

Keen

Webster

Ridley

(2016). How well are children with autism spectrum disorder doing academically at school? An overview of the literature. Autism, 20(3), 276–294. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361315580962

40.

Kinnaird

Stewart

Tchanturia

(2019). Investigating alexithymia in autism: A systematic review and meta-analysis. European Psychiatry, 55, 80–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpsy.2018.09.004

41.

Koval

Kuppens

(2024). Changing feelings: Individual differences in emotional inertia. In Samson

A. C.

Sander

Kramer

(Eds.), Change in emotion and mental health (pp. 3–21). Elsevier Inc.

42.

Kuppens

Allen

N. B.

Sheeber

L. B.

(2010). Emotional inertia and psychological maladjustment. Psychological Science, 21(7), 984–991. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610372634

43.

Lai

M. C.

Kassee

Besney

Bonato

Hull

Mandy

Szatmari

Ameis

S. H.

(2019). Prevalence of co-occurring mental health diagnoses in the autism population: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Psychiatry, 6(10), 819–829. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(19)30289-5

44.

Larsen

R. J.

(2000). Toward a science of mood regulation. Psychological Inquiry, 11(3), 129–141. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1103_01

45.

Mazefsky

C. A.

White

S. W.

(2014). Emotion regulation: Concepts and practice in autism spectrum disorder. Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 23(1), 15–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chc.2013.07.002

46.

McRae

Gross

J. J.

Weber

Robertson

E. R.

Sokol-Hessner

Ray

R. D.

Gabrieli

J. D.

Ochsner

K. N.

(2012). The development of emotion regulation: An fMRI study of cognitive reappraisal in children, adolescents and young adults. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 7(1), 11–22. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsr093

47.

Milyavsky

Webber

Fernandez

J. R.

Kruglanski

A. W.

Goldenberg

Suri

Gross

J. J.

(2019). To reappraise or not to reappraise? Emotion regulation choice and cognitive energetics. Emotion, 19(6), 964–981. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000498

48.

Mul

C. L.

Stagg

S. D.

Herbelin

Aspell

J. E.

(2018). The feeling of me feeling for you: Interoception, alexithymia and empathy in autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 48(9), 2953–2967. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-018-3564-3

49.

Murphy

Brewer

Hobson

Catmur

Bird

(2018). Is alexithymia characterised by impaired interoception? Further evidence, the importance of control variables, and the problems with the Heartbeat Counting Task. Biological Psychology, 136, 189–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2018.05.010

50.

Murphy

Catmur

Bird

(2018). Alexithymia is associated with a multidomain, multidimensional failure of interoception: Evidence from novel tests. Journal of experimental psychology. General, 147(3), 398–408. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000366

51.

Naragon-Gainey

McMahon

T. P.

Chacko

T. P.

(2017). The structure of common emotion regulation strategies: A meta-analytic examination. Psychological Bulletin, 143(4), 384–427. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000093

52.

Norbury

Nation

(2011). Understanding variability in reading comprehension in adolescents with autism spectrum disorders: Interactions with language status and decoding skill. Scientific Studies of Reading, 15(3), 191–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888431003623553

53.

Nuske

H. J.

Hedley

Woollacott

Thomson

Macari

Dissanayake

(2017). Developmental delays in emotion regulation strategies in preschoolers with autism. Autism Research, 10(11), 1808–1822. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.1827

54.

Petrova

Gross

J. J.

(2024). The future of emotion regulation research: Broadening our field of view. Affective Sciences, 4, 609–616. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42761-023-00222-0

55.

Pitskel

N. B.

Bolling

D. Z.

Kaiser

M. D.

Pelphrey

K. A.

Crowley

M. J.

(2014). Neural systems for cognitive reappraisal in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 10, 117–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2014.08.007

56.

Richey

J. A.

Damiano

C. R.

Sabatino

Rittenberg

Petty

Bizzell

Voyvodic

Heller

A. S.

Coffman

M. C.

Smoski

Davidson

R. J.

Dichter

G. S.

(2015). Neural mechanisms of emotion regulation in autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45(11), 3409–3423. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-015-2359-z

57.

Riediger

Bellingtier

(2022). Emotion regulation across the lifespan. In Dukes

Samson

A. C.

Walle

(Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of emotional development (pp. 93–109). Oxford University Press.

58.

Rieffe

De Bruine

De Rooij

Stockmann

(2014). Approach and avoidant emotion regulation prevent depressive symptoms in children with an autism spectrum disorder. International Journal of Developmental Neuroscience, 39, 37–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdevneu.2014.06.003

59.

Rusting

C. L.

Larsen

R. J.

(1995). Moods as sources of stimulation: Relationships between personality and desired mood states. Personality and Individual Differences, 18(3), 321–329. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(94)00157-N

60.

Samson

A. C.

Dougherty

R. F.

Lee

I. A.

Phillips

J. M.

Gross

J. J.

Hardan

A. Y.

(2016). White matter structure in the uncinate fasciculus: Implications for socio-affective deficits in autism spectrum disorder. Psychiatry Research. Neuroimaging, 255, 66–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pscychresns.2016.08.004

61.

Samson

A. C.

Hardan

A. Y.

Podell

R. W.

Phillips

J. M.

Gross

J. J.

(2015). Emotion regulation in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder. Autism Research, 8(1), 9–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.1387

62.

Samson

A. C.

Huber

Gross

J. J.

(2012). Emotion regulation in asperger’s syndrome and high-functioning autism. Emotion, 12(4), 659–665. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027975

63.

Samson

A. C.

Phillips

J. M.

Parker

K. J.

Shah

Gross

J. J.

Hardan

A. Y.

(2014). Emotion dysregulation and the core features of autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44(7), 1766–1772. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-013-2022-5

64.

Samson

A. C.

Sokhn

Van Herwegen

Dukes

(2022). An exploratory study on emotion regulation strategy use in individuals with Williams syndrome, autism spectrum disorder and intellectual disability. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 13, Article 940872. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2022.940872

65.

Samson

A. C.

Wells

W. M.

Phillips

J. M.

Hardan

A. Y.

Gross

J. J.

(2015). Emotion regulation in autism spectrum disorder: Evidence from parent interviews and children’s daily diaries. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 56(8), 908–913. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12370

66.

Sharma

Woolfson

L. M.

Hunter

S. C.

(2014). Maladaptive cognitive appraisals in children with high-functioning autism: Associations with fear, anxiety and theory of mind. Autism, 18(3), 244–254. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361312472556

67.

Sheppes

(2023). Emotion regulation choice. In Gross

J. J.

Ford

(Eds.), Handbook of emotion regulation (3rd ed., p. 95–103). Guilford Publishers.

68.

Sheppes

Meiran

(2007). Better late than never? On the dynamics of online regulation of sadness using distraction and cognitive reappraisal. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(11), 1518–1532. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167207305537

69.

Sheppes

Scheibe

Suri

Gross

J. J.

(2011). Emotion-regulation choice. Psychological Science, 22(11), 1391–1396. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611418350

70.

Sheppes

Scheibe

Suri

Radu

Blechert

Gross

J. J.

(2014). Emotion regulation choice: A conceptual framework and supporting evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 143(1), 163–181. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030831

71.

Shih

C. I.

Kowatsch

Tinschert

Barata

Nissen

M. K.

(2016). Towards the design of a smartphone-based biofeedback breathing training: Indentifying diaphragmatic breathing patterns from a smartphones’ microphone. Mediterranean Conference of Information Systems, AIS Electronic Library, 4-6 September 2016, Paphos, Cyprus, 1–11.

72.

South

Rodgers

(2017). Sensory, emotional and cognitive contributions to anxiety in autism spectrum disorders. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 11, Article 20. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00020

73.

Thompson

R. A.

(1991). Emotional regulation and emotional development. Educational Psychology Review, 3(4), 269–307. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01319934

74.

Tillmann

San José Cáceres

Chatham

C. H.

Crawley

Holt

Oakley

Banaschewski

Baron-Cohen

Bölte

Buitelaar

J. K.

Durston

Ham

Loth

Simonoff

Spooren

Murphy

D. G.

Charman

, & EU-AIMS LEAP group. (2019). Investigating the factors underlying adaptive functioning in autism in the EU-AIMS longitudinal European autism project. Autism Research, 12(4), 645–657. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.2081

75.

Trevisan

D. A.

Altschuler

M. R.

Bagdasarov

Carlos

Duan

Hamo

Kala

McNair

M. L.

Parker

Stahl

Winkelman

Zhou

McPartland

J. C.

(2019). A meta-analysis on the relationship between interoceptive awareness and alexithymia: Distinguishing interoceptive accuracy and sensibility. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 128(8), 765–776. https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000454

76.

Vasa

R. A.

Hagopian

Kalb

L. G.

(2020). Investigating mental health crisis in youth with autism spectrum disorder. Autism Research, 13(1), 112–121. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.2224

77.

Walle

E. A.

Özden

Z. B.

(2024). How appraisal development shapes the development of emotion. In Samson

A. C.

Sander

Kramer

(Eds.), Change in emotion and mental health (pp. 141–157). Elsevier Inc.

78.

Webb

T. L.

Lindquist

K. A.

Jones

Avishai

Sheeran

(2018). Situation selection is a particularly effective emotion regulation strategy for people who need help regulating their emotions. Cognition & Emotion, 32(2), 231–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2017.1295922

79.

Weiss

J. A.

Thomson

Chan

(2014). A systematic literature review of emotion regulation measurement in individuals with autism spectrum disorder. Autism Research, 7, 629–648. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.1426

80.

White

S. W.

Mazefsky

C. A.

Dichter

G. S.

Chiu

P. H.

Richey

J. A.

Ollendick

T. H.

(2014). Social-cognitive, physiological, and neural mechanisms underlying emotion regulation impairments: Understanding anxiety in autism spectrum disorder. International Journal of Developmental Neuroscience, 39, 22–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdevneu.2014.05.012

81.

Zaharia

Noir-Kahlo

Bressoud

Sander

Dukes

Samson

A. C.

(2021). Proof of concept: A brief psycho-educational training program to increase the use of positive emotion regulation strategies in individuals with autism spectrum disorder. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 705937. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.705937

82.

Zdankiewicz-Ścigała

Ścigała

Sikora

Kwaterniak

Longobardi

. (2021). Relationship between interoceptive sensibility and somatoform disorders in adults with autism spectrum traits. The mediating role of alexithymia and emotional dysregulation. PloS One, 16(8), e0255460. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0255460