Affective intensity of enacted stigma events and emotion regulation strategy use among sexual and gender minorities.

The emotion regulation choice framework (Sheppes, 2020) proposes that the affective intensity of a stressor (i.e., how distressing a stressor is) influences the selection of emotion regulation strategies. The present study aimed to test this hypothesis in the context of enacted stigma to determine whether more distressing enacted stigma experiences differentially predict the use of different emotion regulation strategies. We also aimed to determine if enacted stigma experiences that are more distressing have larger and longer term effects on affect and to examine daily factors that may increase the affective intensity of an enacted stigma event. We used data from an ecological momentary assessment study of enacted stigma from a sample of 109 older adult sexual and gender minorities, a group that is largely underrepresented in research on enacted stigma. More distressing enacted stigma events were associated with more pronounced rumination and coping self-efficacy above and beyond the effect of simply experiencing any enacted stigma. More distressing enacted stigma events also had stronger and longer lasting associations with negative affect than less distressing events. Higher stressor burden and lower coping self-efficacy also prospectively predicted higher affective intensity for subsequent enacted stigma events. The present study demonstrated partial support for the emotion regulation choice framework in the context of enacted stigma. This highlights the role of elevated stressor burden and coping self-efficacy in influencing emotional reactions to enacted stigma events and regulation of emotions following these experiences. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).