Abstract

This study systematically reviewed the effects of affect labeling on emotion regulation, examining patterns of findings and sources of variability. Affect labeling is recognized as a useful emotion regulation strategy; however, its effects have varied across outcome measures and application contexts. To clarify these patterns, a systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, analyzing studies published between 2005 and 2024. Searches of three Korean and four international academic databases identified 43 eligible studies. Overall, affect labeling consistently reduced or stabilized emotional reactivity as measured by psychophysiological and behavioral indicators. In contrast, findings for self-reported emotional experience were mixed, showing decreases, no change, and sometimes increases. This suggests that while affect labeling may attenuate psychophysiological responses, it may not similarly alter subjectively experienced emotion. Variability in outcomes was also linked to individual factors, including emotional vocabulary, emotion differentiation, mental health status, and anxiety. Contextual factors such as labeling format and perspective, emotional stimulus type, task structure, and therapeutic or intervention context also played a role. These findings suggest that affect labeling is not a uniformly effective technique for reducing emotion across all situations. Instead, it is a conditional emotion regulation strategy whose effects vary depending on individuals and contexts. This underscores the importance of evaluating affect labeling across subjective, psychophysiological, and behavioral domains, advocating for more context-sensitive applications in future research and counseling practice.