Abstract

Politics, as a chronic stressor, can significantly impact psychological well-being. Prior research suggests that emotion regula- tion strategies like reappraisal—used to reduce system-based negative emotion (i.e., emotions triggered by aspects of the so- cial system)—can enhance well-being, but at the cost of reduced collective action. This raises the question of whether strate- gies that function differently, such as amplifying system-based negative emotion (i.e., rumination) or directly addressing the stressor (i.e., planning), show similar trade-offs. We examined this question during South Korea’s recent martial law crisis (N =400). Consistent with past findings, reappraisal was associated with better psychological well-being but lower political action through reduced system-based negative emotion. In contrast, rumination and planning were linked to lower psycho- logical well-being but greater political action through sustained system-based negative emotion. Together, these findings un- derscore that different ways of regulating system-based negative emotions are associated with varying effects on both individ- ual and societal well-being, highlighting the importance of adopting a multifaceted, context-sensitive approach to under- standing emotion regulation in politically distressing situations.