Regulating Others’ Emotions Scale (ROES)

Abstract

The Regulating Others’ Emotions Scale (ROES), developed by MacCann et al. (2025), is an assessment tool designed to systematically evaluate the diverse strategies individuals utilize when attempting to regulate the emotions of others. Its development spanned four rigorous studies, integrating theoretical frameworks such as Gross’s (1998) process model of emotion regulation and Niven et al.’s (2009) taxonomy of controlled extrinsic regulation strategies. Initial development involved generating a pool of 96 items, which were subjected to expert review by eight researchers.

Following two waves of online administration to adults in English-speaking countries, the scale was refined using advanced psychometric techniques. Subsequent Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analyses resulted in a robust final instrument consisting of 32 items, distributed across an eight-factor structure representing distinct interpersonal regulation strategies.

Keywords

Cognitive Reframing, Direct Action, Distraction, Downward Social Comparison, Expressive Suppression, Humor, Receptive Listening, Structural Validity, Valuing, Emotion Regulation Strategies, Emotional Regulation, Interpersonal Interaction, Emotional Assessment, Social and Interpersonal Measures.

Authors

MacCann, Carolyn; Double, Kit S.; Olderbak, Sally; Austin, Elizabeth J.; Pinkus, Rebecca T.; Walker, Sarah A.; Kunst, Hannah; Niven, Karen.

Purpose

The primary objective of the ROES is to provide a comprehensive and psychometrically sound measure for assessing the specific methods and strategies employed by individuals to influence or modify the emotional states of those around them. This assessment is crucial for advancing research in areas such as social psychology, relationship dynamics, and organizational behavior, where understanding interpersonal emotion regulation is essential.

The scale serves to categorize these strategies into eight distinct, measurable factors, allowing researchers to analyze the efficacy and context-specificity of different regulatory approaches used in real-world social interactions, thereby linking specific regulatory behaviors to broader social and emotional outcomes.

Construct

The ROES specifically measures the construct of Extrinsic Emotion Regulation (also known as Interpersonal Emotion Regulation), focusing on how a regulator attempts to alter the emotional experience of a target individual. The scale operationalizes this construct into eight distinct, empirically derived strategies, rooted in established theoretical models of emotional processing and interpersonal influence.

The eight subscales measured are: Expressive Suppression, Downward Social Comparison, Humor, Distraction, Direct Action, Cognitive Reframing, Valuing, and Receptive Listening. These factors capture a broad spectrum of behaviors, ranging from surface-level attempts to suppress outward emotional expression to deep-level engagement aimed at cognitive reappraisal or emotional validation.

Validity

The ROES demonstrates strong evidence of Structural Validity, confirmed by Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) which supported the intended eight-factor model across the 32 retained items. This indicates that the scale structure accurately reflects the underlying theoretical dimensions of the regulation strategies.

Further validation studies confirmed both convergent validity and discriminant validity. Convergent validity was established through meaningful correlations with existing scales designed to measure extrinsic emotion regulation. Discriminant validity was demonstrated by appropriate differentiation from broad personality traits, including the HEXACO model traits and the dark triad traits. Crucially, the ROES also showed criterion-related validity by successfully predicting practical social and emotional outcomes, such as the regulator’s well-being, the target individual’s emotions, and overall relationship quality. The highest engagement strategies (Valuing, Cognitive Reframing, and Responsive Listening) showed the most consistent associations with positive outcomes, with Valuing demonstrating the strongest predictive power.

Reliability

The internal consistency of the ROES subscales is classified as good to excellent. Measures of internal consistency, using Cronbach’s alpha, ranged from .78 to .90 during the initial Wave 1 administration, and from .75 to .92 during Wave 2. These values confirm the homogeneity of items within each of the eight subscales, suggesting high reliability across the measured constructs.

Regarding stability over time, the test-retest reliability was assessed over a three-week interval. Fifty percent of the measured strategies achieved a coefficient greater than .70, with the overall range spanning from .59 to .80. This indicates moderate to good temporal stability for most of the regulation strategies measured by the scale, reinforcing its utility for longitudinal research.

Factor Analysis

The scale development utilized both Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) to establish the underlying factor structure. The initial EFA procedures focused on the first eight factors, leading to the selection of 32 items based on strict criteria: items required salient loadings (≥ .30) on their intended target factor and the absence of significant cross-loadings on other factors.

The subsequent CFA provided strong support for the hypothesized eight-factor, 32-item model. The resulting goodness-of-fit indices demonstrated an excellent model fit to the data: Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = .951, Root-Mean-Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = .039, and Standardized Root-Mean-Square Residual (SRMR) = .055. These results confirm the statistical integrity and clear dimensionality of the ROES structure.

Instrument

Test Type: Original

Format: Participants rate the 32 items on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree).

Language Available: English

Population Group: Human (Male, Female)

Age Group: Adulthood (18 years & older), encompassing Young Adulthood (18-29 years), Thirties (30-39 years), Middle Age (40-64 years), and Aged (65 years & older).

Population Details: The scale was standardized using data collected from English-speaking adults in the United Kingdom and other English-speaking countries, covering an extensive age range of 18 to 76 years.

Test Methodology: The scale’s psychometric properties were rigorously evaluated using multiple techniques, including test validity (convergent, criterion, discriminant, structural), test reliability (internal consistency, test-retest reliability), and advanced statistical modeling (Factor Analysis, Exploratory Factor Analysis, and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)).

Keywords

Interpersonal Emotion Regulation, Extrinsic Emotion Regulation, Emotion Regulation, Psychometrics, HEXACO, Dark Triad, Social Outcomes, Relationship Quality, Factor Structure.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Carolyn MacCann: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7789-6368

Affiliation Email addresses: [email protected]

Correspondence Address: MacCann, Carolyn: University of Sydney, School of Psychology, 449 Brennan MacCallum Building (A18), Manning Road, Sydney, Australia, 2007.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The ROES may be used freely for Research/Teaching purposes. Commercial Usage is prohibited, and there is No Fee for academic use. The scale was formally published in 2025. Information regarding usage permissions is available via the Creative Commons license: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en.

Reference’s

MacCann, C., Double, K. S., Olderbak, S., Austin, E. J., Pinkus, R. T., Walker, S. A., Kunst, H., & Niven, K. (2025). What do we do to help others feel better? The eight strategies of the Regulating Others’ Emotions Scale (ROES). Emotion, 25(2), 410–429. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001459

Items of the Regulating Others’ Emotions Scale (ROES)

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

Regulating Others’ Emotions Scale (ROES)

Instructions: Please rate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements, describing how you typically act when trying to regulate the emotions of others. Use the scale below:

1 = Strongly disagree
2 = Disagree
3 = Somewhat disagree
4 = Somewhat agree
5 = Agree
6 = Strongly agree

Expressive suppression
I ask them to put a brave face on
I tell them to “turn that frown upside down”
I ask them not to look so irritated
I tell them not to frown or cry

Downward social comparison
I compare their situation to other people who are worse off
I help them to see how lucky they are compared to others
I tell them that things could be a lot worse
I talk about people who have even bigger problems

Humor
I make jokes to make them smile
I say comical, light-hearted things
I act silly to entertain them
I do something amusing

Distraction
I divert their attention to something else
I help them to focus on other things
I start talking about something more pleasant
I suggest something else for them to do

Direct action
I try to fix things for them
I do what I can to find an answer for them
I take action to change their situation
I try to modify their situation

Cognitive reframing
I discuss different ways of interpreting the situation
I help them to change the way they think about their problems
I discuss other ways that they could interpret events
I help them see events in a new way

Valuing
I tell them they are very important to me
I let them know how much they mean to me
I tell them how much I value them
I make them feel special or cared about

Receptive listening
I let them talk to me about their troubles
I let them talk to me about their troubles
I listen to them talk about their emotions
I help them to let off steam by talking to me