Journal of International Psychiatry

〇bjective To explore the effect of cognitive emotion regulation strategies on the vulnerability tostress-relaLed sleep disturbance. Methods A total o」f 345 sleep good healthy volunteers were recruited by“purpos- ive sampling” technique. Every participant completed an extensive survey that included the general condition ques- tionnaire, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index(PSQI), Hamilton Depression Scale(HAMA) , Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAMD) , Ford Insomnia Response to Stress Test(Chinese Version) (FIRST-C) and Cognitive Emotion Regula- tion Scale(CERQ-C). A11 participants were classified as FIRST high score group(high score group) and FIRST low score group(low score group) by FIRST-C. Results High risk group is younger than thelow risk group (27.91±8.22 vs24. 82±7.73, P<0.01) , and had a higher percentage of females(27. 91±8. 22 vs24. 82±7.73, P<0. 01). High risk group showed significantly higher mean scores in self-blame(13. 01±3. 03 vs14. 31±3. 24,) , rumination(13. 86±3.04 vs14.70±3.21) and catastrophizing(12.52±3.23 vs13. 62±3.51) , while1ower mean score in positive refocus(13.61±3.41 vs12. 87±2. 34) than Low risk group(P<0.01 or 0.05). Results of linear regression analysis showed that gender, and scores of self-blame, positive refocus, catastrophizing were significant co]Telation with FIRST score(t=3.52、4.03、 -2.21、4. 16, P<0.01 or 0.05). Conclusion Negative cognitive emoLion regulaLion strategies can increase the vulnerability of situational insomnia, while positive cognitive emotion regulation strategy has protective effects.

Stress-related sleep disturbance; Vulnerability; Cognitive emotion regulation