167
ISSN: 2763-5724 / Vol. 04 - n 04 - ano 2024
PSYCHOLOGİCAL FEATURES OF SELF-REGULATİON MECHANİSMS İN
STRESSFUL SİTUATİONS
Aynur Eyazzade1
Abstract: The article is devoted to the study of the psychological characteristics of self-regulation
mechanisms in students in stressful situations. In the article, the theoretical analysis and generalization
of works related to the problem, a set of psychodiagnostic methods were used. The research base was
the requirements of Odlar Yurdu University and various faculties of Baku State University. 135 second
and third year students aged 18-23 participated in the study. A systematic approach was applied to
the description and study of the research object for the reliability and validity of the research results.
Mathematical methods were used for empirical data processing. Thus, according to the results of the
correlation analysis, a relationship between stress resistance and self-regulation was found among the
respondents. We see a negative relationship (r≤0.01) between stress resistance and self-regulation and one
of its styles. This shows that there is a correlation between stress resistance, self-esteem and emotional
stability and self-regulation. As self-regulation increases, the impact of stressful situations decreases. We
believe that the present analysis can contribute to a better understanding of the mechanisms underlying
successful and unsuccessful stress regulation. It should be taken into account that this will help prevent
mental disorders and improve treatment.
Keywords: stress situations, students, self-regulation mechanisms, psychological characteristics, stress
resistance,
1 Doctorant in Psychology, Ganja State University, Azerbaijan ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-
0008-4932-5937
168
ISSN: 2763-5724 / Vol. 04 - n 04 - ano 2024
Introduction
There is a large body of research on self-regulatory mechanisms in non-life-threatening
situations, and the results from these studies can only be applied to appropriate situations. How should
self-regulation mechanisms be applied in dicult situations, including stressful situations? In general,
how do self-regulation mechanisms manifest themselves in stressful situations? Is it possible to nd a
link here?
Research shows that self-regulation is very important for success in social life and health
[Jabbarov, 2017]. Self-regulation has been shown to predict better health, higher economic status, and
lower levels of criminal behavior [Mott et al, 2011]. These same studies show that children who lack
self-regulation skills have more social skills. [Aghajani et al., 2014]. Self-regulation is a general process
of managing feelings, thoughts, and behaviors to meet common personal goals and standards [Fujita,
2011]. Components of self-control include self-control, persistence, and emotion regulation. These
abilities are important to every aspect of our lives, including personal relationships, nancial decisions,
academic and professional achievement, and health behaviors. Empirical studies have consistently
demonstrated the importance of self-regulation in learning skills. People who score poorly on self-
control tests have been found to have more debt than others [Achtziger et al., 2015]. Among people with
equal sexual desire, those with low self-control are more likely to cheat on their partner. Self-control
can also be altered and depleted through experiences and behaviors, which leads to the possibility that
when self-control is depleted, people may do things they would not normally do.
Literature review
Studies have shown that when people lose self-control, their sexual desires turn into bolder
romantic intentions and betrayal. A number of studies devoted to the problem have focused on the
general topic of self-regulation and how it relates to sleep, stress, behavior, and emotional functioning
169
ISSN: 2763-5724 / Vol. 04 - n 04 - ano 2024
with health behaviors and outcomes [Burke, 1988; Jabbarov, 2021].
In order to focus on how self-regulation aects both health behaviors and objective and
subjective experiences of stress, we consider it appropriate to analyze research from dierent directions.
However, it should be noted at the outset that research investigating the relationship between self-
regulation and stress is very limited. Although the relationship between these two categories has been
studied to some extent.
One study examined the eect of a self-regulation task on illness-related clinic visits in college
students. Students were divided into two groups according to optimistic and pessimistic tendencies
and assigned to the self-regulation task group as either the disclosure task group or the control group.
Among the optimists, the relationship between self-regulation and disclosure tasks and clinic visits was
sought, and among pessimists, only the self-regulation task and clinic visits were found. This means that
the self-regulation task helped all participants to reduce their stress [Evans and Fuller-Rowell, 2013].
A study of 241 youth, half of whom lived at or below the poverty line and half of whom grew
up in the majority of the population, found a signicant relationship between stress, economic status,
and self-regulation [Evans and Fuller-Rowell, 2013].
Cross-se c t ional st udie s show t hat ch i ldren who g row up in pover t y h ave i ncrea sed ch ron ic st r ess
and worse working memory than before. However, self-regulatory ability was found to have a protective
eect on this relationship. Children who grew up in poverty but demonstrated good self-regulation
skills demonstrated better working memory and skills than children who lacked self-regulation. High
levels of self-regulation appear to reduce the eects of chronic stress in poor populations. This is related
to self-regulatory skills that allow children to develop better coping strategies and distract them from
stressors [Evans and Fuller-Rowell, 2013].
Behaviors can be divided into two main categories to measure self-regulation and general
social-emotional health functioning: internalizing behaviors and externalizing behaviors. These
categories are dened simply by whether the behavior is aimed inward or outward. External behaviors
are behaviors whose goal is outside of the individual performing them and can be seen as a type of
170
ISSN: 2763-5724 / Vol. 04 - n 04 - ano 2024
behavior. The categories of externalizing behavior used in this study are aggressive behavior and
disruptive behavior. Internalizing behaviors are behaviors that are not harsh toward others. These
behaviors are kept within the individual and are often withdrawn, lonely, depressed or anxious. It is
important to identify individuals with disorders associated with these behaviors. Because they can have
dangerous health consequences for the individual.
Internalizing behaviors can manifest in dangerous physical conditions such as anorexia or
bulimia, as well as serious problems such as depression. Externalizing behaviors such as aggression are
exhibited early in life and are associated with long-term problems, including dropping out of school,
delinquency, and violence. These behaviors generally begin on a smaller scale as teasing and bullying
among young children and then escalate throughout life [Smith, 2008].
In studies focusing on the relationship between self-regulation and stress, behaviors are divided
into three categories: withdrawal, somatic complaints, anxiety, and depression. Research has shown a
relationship between self-regulation and externalizing and internalizing behaviors. Low self-control,
aggression, and delinquent externalizing behaviors were found to be correlated in twelve- and thirteen-
year-old boys. The ability to delay gratication also reduces the risk of these externalizing behaviors
[Krueger et al, 1996]. On the contrary, it has been argued that children struggling with internalizing
behaviors have very high self-regulatory abilities, causing these children to be “over-controlled”
[Eisenberg et al., 2001].
Within self-regulation, ve subcategories were examined, delay of gratication, eortful
control, and three subcategories: attentional control, activation control, and inhibition control. This
allows research to examine how aspects of a person’s self-regulation aect important health outcomes
through specically selected surveys. Besides , the magnitude of the data collected in the study allows
for further analysis of these interacting variables. This allows for a clearer and more complete picture
of human health and how it is achieved and maintained in relation to these variables. Overall, the
results show that increased attentional control, volitional control, and inhibitory control are negatively
associated with increased sleep problems. Self-regulation is often framed and may involve sacricing
171
ISSN: 2763-5724 / Vol. 04 - n 04 - ano 2024
something material in the context of a decision now for a greater reward in the future [Fujita, 2011].
Research shows that the relationship between stress and emotional regulation is complex and
results from the interaction of biological, psychological, and environmental factors. It should be taken
into account that a better understanding of the main mechanisms of successful and unsuccessful stress
regulation will help to improve strategies for the prevention and treatment of mental disorders [Nasso et
al, 2019]. The diculty in studying the relationship between stress and emotional regulation is related
to the need to think about a dynamic perspective that analyzes the regulatory role of stress. In fact,
stress involves dierent stages, and the neurocognitive processes involved in emotion regulation dier
signicantly between stages. In general, the stress process includes at least three stages: anticipation,
coping with the stressor (stress) and recovery.
For a long time, these stages were viewed in general terms. Only recently has the need to look
at each stage dierently has emerged. In this direction, Ottaviani (2018) and Nasso (2019) note that the
study of neurocognitive processes involved in the anticipation of stressful events can be the basis for
understanding the process of stress regulation [ [Ottaviani, 2019.; Nasso et al, 2019]. In this context, De
Raedt and Hooley (2016) proposed the Neurocognitive Framework for Regulatory Expectancies (NFRE),
a framework in which stress expectancy plays a central role in the process of stress regulation and the
development of depression and other stress-related psychopathologies. The obtained results show that
the activation of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex during the stress anticipation phase reduces the stress
response through indirect and inhibitory connections with the amygdala [De Raedt and Hooley, 201].
Methodology
A set of psychodiagnostic methods (tests) was used from the theoretical analysis and
generalization of works related to the problem. The survey “Self-regulation style of behavior-98” survey
- SSP-98 (V.I.Moros¬an¬ova, E.M.Konoz), Psychological Stress Scale PSM-25 (PSM-25 Lemyr-Tessier-
Fillion scale of stress experiences) It was designed to measure the phenomenological structure of the
172
ISSN: 2763-5724 / Vol. 04 - n 04 - ano 2024
questionnaire (V.V. Stolin). The research base was the requirements of dierent faculties of Odlar Yurdu
University. 135 students aged 18-23 participated in the study A systematic approach to the description
and study of the object, based on the original methodological and theoretical principles, the logic of
conducting experimental research in accordance with the purpose, task and hypothesis was provided
by conducting scientic research, using mathematical methods for processing empirical data. SSPS 22).
Results
As a result of the methodology and their analysis, it can be concluded that a high level of self-
determination manifests itself in two cases. This shows that the respondents’ ability to consciously
control their behavior in dierent situations, to understand and manage their situations and motives
depends on their stress resistance characteristics. The study showed that 30% of respondents had a
high level of the “Planning” scale. This shows that students consciously plan their activities, correctly
prioritize the implementation of their plans and act independently when setting their goals.
48% of respondents indicated the average level on the “Planning” scale. 23% of the respondents
showed a low level on the “Planning” scale. Such students rarely achieve their goals, their goals are
unrealistic and often change.
The study showed that 26% of the respondents had a high level on the “Modelling” scale - such
students are able to identify important conditions for achieving goals both in the current situation and
in the prospective future.
The average level on the scale of “Modeling” was determined at 58% of respondents. A low
level of 30% was determined on the “modeling” scale of the respondents - such students are characterized
by an inadequate assessment of the relationship between internal resources and external conditions,
which manifests itself in fantasy, which can be accompanied by sharp changes. At this time, negative
situations are observed in relation to the development of the situation, as well as the consequences of
one’s own actions.
173
ISSN: 2763-5724 / Vol. 04 - n 04 - ano 2024
21% of the respondents indicated a high level in the “Programming” scale - these students
have a high need to think in detail about the ways of their actions in order to achieve their goals. 36% of
respondents indicated the average level on the “Programming” scale. 42% of respondents indicated a low
level in the “Programming” scale. Such students are characterized by the inability and unwillingness
to think through the sequence of their actions, they prefer to act impulsively, facing the inadequacy of
the results later.
A high level on the “Evaluation of results” scale was determined in 25% of respondents. At this
time, students have developed adequate self-esteem, they are aware of the stability of subjective criteria
for evaluating results, and the fact of inconsistency between them. The obtained results and the purpose
of the activity and its main reasons are analyzed at this level. The average level on the “Evaluation of
results” scale was determined at 66% of the respondents. A low level on the scale of “results assessment”
was determined in 12% of respondents. Such students do not see mistakes in their activities and are
not critical of their actions. Subjective success criteria are not stable enough, and as a result, the quality
of results can be aected as the volume of work increases. 24% of respondents showed a high level
on the “elasticity” scale. Such students demonstrate the exibility of all regulatory processes. He is
able to quickly assess changes in important conditions and, if necessary, rearrange his plans. In case
of inconsistency between the obtained results and the accepted goal, the fact of inconsistency itself is
evaluated promptly and appropriate changes are made.64% of the respondents indicated the average
level on the “Elasticity” scale. 27% of respondents showed a low level on the “elasticity” scale. Such
students nd it dicult to get used to the rapid changes in the environment, they cannot adequately react
to the situation, they evaluate the inconsistency between the achieved results, they are unable to make
changes in the short term and the purpose of the activity.
The study showed that 26% of respondents “independence”. a high level has been determined
for lasi. Such students are characterized by independence in organizing activities to achieve goals,
monitoring its progress, analyzing and evaluating both intermediate and nal results. The average level
on the “Independence” scale was determined at 56% of respondents. A low level of “independence”
174
ISSN: 2763-5724 / Vol. 04 - n 04 - ano 2024
was determined in 16% of respondents. Such students depend on the opinions and evaluations of others.
When organizing activities, in the absence of this help, they act with the help of other people, experience
regulatory failures; 22% of the respondents indicated a high level on the “General level of self-regulation”
scale - the peculiarity of such students is that they are independent, easily and quickly adapt to changing
conditions, consciously set goals and achieve them. With high achievement motivation, they can form
a self-regulation style that allows them to compensate for the inuence of personal characteristics,
which sometimes become an obstacle to achieving goals. 46% of the respondents indicated the average
level on the “General level of self-regulation” scale. 30% of the respondents showed a low level in the
“general level of self-regulation” scale. Such students have not formed conscious planning of activities,
and the ability to compensate for personal characteristics that are unfavorable for achieving goals
decreases. They depend on the situation, as a result of which the success of mastering new types of
activity depends to a large extent on the compatibility of the stylistic features of the adjustment and the
requirements of the type of activity being mastered.
Based on the obtained results, summarizing the test results for all the methods used, we found
that the subjects had a higher probability of 68% of moderate stress resistance and 62% of high level of
voluntary self-regulation. We also determined the average level of the “results assessment” (65%) and
“independence” (68%) scales, which prevailed among other self-regulation styles.
In order to determine the relationship between the level of stress resistance and the level of
self-regulation of the subjects, we correlated the data obtained from testing all the above methods
and processed them using the Spearman rank correlation coecient, which can be used for statistical
analysis between certain events.
175
ISSN: 2763-5724 / Vol. 04 - n 04 - ano 2024
Table 2. Indicators of the relationship between self-regulation and stress situations
Note. * – p<0.05; ** – p<0.01. level is important.
The obtained results are presented in a table showing all signicant statistical relationships.
Thus, according to the results of the correlation analysis, a relationship between stress resistance and
self-regulation was found among the respondents. According to the table, we see a negative relationship
(r≤0.01) between stress resistance and self-regulation and one of its styles. This shows that there is a
correlation between stress resistance, self-esteem and emotional stability and self-regulation. As self-
regulation increases, the degree of impact of stressful situations decreases.
Discussion and Conclusion
These studies have enabled the development of various psychological interventions aimed at
improving stress regulation. Studies have shown that anticipatory distraction and self-control strategies
reduce the physiological response to a stressful task. Similarly, Nasso et al (2019) observed that the
use of knowledge reappraisal in anticipation of stress resulted in a muted response to stress [Nasso et
al, 2019]. The period of anticipation of stressful events may be the basis for understanding the process
of stress regulation. However, surprisingly few studies have analyzed the dierential activation of
brain networks involved in cognitive regulation during stress and recovery phases. Taking this into
account, we propose to comprehensively analyze the psychological and neurobiological processes in
the stress and recovery phase in order to improve our understanding of the mechanisms underlying
Indicators Scale B Scale C Scale H Flexibility scale
Resistance to stress -,224* 0,176* -,160* -,344*
The ability to
self-regulate
0,390** -134* 0,220* 0,368*
Emotional stability 0,199** 0,206** 0,214** 0,220**
Self respect 0.264* 0,420* 0,115** 0,426**
176
ISSN: 2763-5724 / Vol. 04 - n 04 - ano 2024
successful and unsuccessful stress regulation. will give. Inability to regulate stress is associated with
the development of various psychological disorders and negative long-term health problems. In this
sense, various psychopathological models of chronic stress have been proposed as a trigger for various
disorders [Taylor et al.. 2019]. For this reason, clarifying the emotion regulation mechanisms involved in
the stress process has a great transdiagnostic value. Conducted studies show that the implementation of
self-regulation in stressful situations is also related to social-psychological values in many cases [Ramiz
and Vakil, 2020; Vakil, 2021].
The relationship between stress and emotion regulation is complex and results from the
interaction of biological, psychological, and environmental factors [Gotlib et al., 2008]. The diculty in
studying the relationship between stress and emotion regulation is due to the need to consider a dynamic
perspective that analyzes the regulatory role of stress. In fact, stress involves dierent stages, and the
neurocognitive processes involved in emotion regulation dier signicantly between these stages.
The processes involved in the cognitive and emotional regulation of stress can be divided into
two main systems. System 1 (bottom-up) is characterized as being automatic and reactive to a stressful
stimulus, and system 2 (top-down) involves more complex cognitive processes and involves subsequent
deliberative eorts. Based on the interaction of both systems, the resulting cognitive regulation can lead
to a reduction or intensication of the stress response. Although this distinction between automatic-
reactive and processed-active system has dierent names, it corresponds to several theoretical models
[Kahneman, 2011].
Although the main brain structures involved in both systems are known, the interactions
between them and the factors that lead to the superiority of one over the other still require further
investigation. In this direction, the concept of temporal dynamics of emotions and stress and dynamic
functional connection approach was proposed [Dosenbach et al, 2008]. In particular, components of
emotions and stress responses, including cognitive states, are thought to induce dierent neuronal
dynamics that are recongured over time as a function of the body’s internal regulatory factors [Cohen
& Edwards, 1989]. Thus, dierent neurodynamically independent brain networks are activated during
177
ISSN: 2763-5724 / Vol. 04 - n 04 - ano 2024
a negative or stressful situation. This activation is primarily related to negative and positive aect, and
secondly to the regulation processes of these initial aective reactions [Hofmann et al., 2012].
This latter functional system of brain networks does not act as an independent factor (unlike
aect), but rather interacts with negative and positive aect systems in the regulation and control of
aect and behavior [Weiner, 1992]. This means that: a) networks related to the generation of eects can
contribute uniquely and simultaneously in stress situations [Bernard , 1961]; b) which is observed in the
regulation of aective response and inuence depending on the content of stimuli rather than a separate
and specialized function, it is the relationship with functional processes between these structures that
explains the dierences [Anand et al.. 2019].
A dynamic factor that is not clearly considered is the factor related to the stages of stress. In
general, the stress process includes at least three stages: anticipation, confrontation with the stressor
(stress) and recovery. During each of these phases, the neurocognitive processes involved in emotional
regulation dier signicantly, and depending on the phase and level of the stress response, one system
may have an advantage over the other. For this reason, it is important to develop dynamic models that
consider the regulatory role of stress in the regulation of emotions. Conducted studies show that the role
of neurocognitive processes involved in the period of anticipation of stressful events has been analyzed
more [Nasso et al., 2019; Ottaviani, 2018]. In this study, the main task is to focus on the analysis of the
cognitive and neural mechanisms involved in stress and recovery. In general, it can be conrmed that
the dominance of bottom-up processes in which signals from limbic subcortical structures (for example,
hypothalamus and amygdala) inuence the activity of higher cortex structures through their connections
with the medial prefrontal during stress experience. is hidden. In contrast, prefrontal (top-down) control
reduces amygdala activation associated with the experience of negative emotions through a cortical-
subcortical pathway [Wager et al., 2008]. Several studies have linked prefrontal activation with the use
of reappraisal [Dillon and Pizzagalli, 2013; Vanderhasselt et al. 2013]. A better understanding of the
mechanisms underlying successful and unsuccessful stress regulation will help improve prevention and
treatment interventions for mental disorders [De Raedt and Hooley, 2011]. This theoretical model is of
178
ISSN: 2763-5724 / Vol. 04 - n 04 - ano 2024
clinical importance because it will help determine which dierent aspects of stress resilience should be
targeted by therapeutic interventions and how such interventions can be better tailored.
In this sense, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) has been shown to be eective in treating
stress and emotional disorders. However, pooled meta-analytic response rates for CBT vary between
38% and 82%, depending on the specic disorder [Homann et.al, 2012]. Thus, there is still great room
for improvement. Even if a treatment is found to be eective, it is unlikely to be eective for everyone.
Adapting treatments to individual characteristics is one of the goals of personalized medicine, which
has attracted increasing attention in the eld of mental health in recent years [Simon and Perlis, 2010].
In this sense, the current review is a step forward, as it will allow for a clearer strategy and
precision when making interventions for patients with stress regulation diculties. In fact, the two
patients may have trouble regulating their stress response for dierent reasons. In one case, diculties
could be observed during the stress phase, and in the other case, during the recovery phase. Therefore,
both patients will present with similar symptoms, but treatment will require dierent interventions.
For example, training in distraction techniques may be benecial during the recovery phase of stress,
but may be counterproductive during coping with the stressful situation [Nasso et al., 2019]. Similarly,
interventions focused on reinterpretation during the stress phase have been observed to reduce
responding and inhibit amygdala activation [186], but the use of interventions focused on gratitude
and compassion is not as eective during this period. Although they would work better for a recovery
strategy [Salzmann et al,2018]. It will also create a foundation for the self-realization of educational
subjects in the learning process [Jabbarov, 2012].
It is unreasonable to assume that the same strategy will be equally eective at dierent stages
of the stress process. Thus, when coping with anticipation or a stressful situation, focusing on plans will
be a more functional strategy than positive focus, while the opposite process will be observed in the
recovery phase [Medrano et al., 2013].
Adequate training in the use of emotion regulation strategies involves analyzing the stages
of the stress process where the most diculties are observed. We believe that in the present analysis
179
ISSN: 2763-5724 / Vol. 04 - n 04 - ano 2024
we have been able to contribute to a better understanding of the mechanisms underlying successful
and unsuccessful stress regulation. It should be taken into account that this will help prevent mental
disorders and improve treatment.
References
Anand A., Jones S.E., Lowe M., Karne H., Koirala P. Resting state functional connectivity of dorsal
raphe nucleus and ventral tegmental area in medication-free young adults with major depression. Front.
Psychiatr. 2019;9:765.
Aghajani T, Jabbarov R, Mustafayev M. (2014). The Eect of Playing on Children’s Social Skills
(Case of Study: Preschool Children in Tehran). J Iran Soc Dev Stud (JISDS). 2014;6(3).
Dillon D.G., Pizzagalli D.A. Evidence of successful modulation of brain activation and subjective
experience during reappraisal of negative emotion in unmedicated depression. Psychiatr.
Res. 2013;212(2):99–107.
Dosenbach N.U.F., Fair D.A., Cohen A.L., Schlaggar B.L., Petersen S.E. A dual-networks architecture
of top-down control. Trends Cognit. Sci. 2008;12(3):99–105.
Gotlib I.H., Joormann J., Minor K.L., Hallmayer J. HPA axis reactivity: a mechanism underlying the
associations among 5-HTTLPR, stress, and depression. Biol. Psychiatr. 2008;63(9):847–851.
Hofmann S.G., Sawyer A.T., Fang A., Asnaani A. Emotion dysregulation model of mood and anxiety
disorders. Depress. Anxiety. 2012;29(5):409–416.
Jabbarov, R. (2017). Traumatic factors aecting the self-realization of students. InternationalJournal of
Pharmaceutical sciences and research, 8(6), 2682-2690. http://dx.doi.org/10.13040/IJPSR.0975-8232.8
(6).2682-90
Jabbarov R.V.(2021). Psychological direction of the formation of multicultural values.
Revista on line de Política e Gestão Educacional, 3 (1), 620-637 le:///C:/-Users/ACER/
Downloads/24_+ID+15003+RPGE.+Rashid_FT+(rev)%20(1).pdf
180
ISSN: 2763-5724 / Vol. 04 - n 04 - ano 2024
Kahneman D. Farrar, Straus and Giroux; New York: 2011. Thinking, Fast and Slow.
Medrano L.A., Moretti L.S., Ortiz A., Pereno G. Validación del Cuestionario de Regulación Emocional
Cognitiva en Universitarios de Córdoba, Argentina. Psykhe. 2013;22(1)
Nasso S., Vanderhasselt M.A., Demeyer I., De Raedt R. Autonomic regulation in response to stress: the
inuence of anticipatory emotion regulation strategies and trait rumination. Emotion. 2019;19(3):443.
Ottaviani C. Brain-heart interaction in perseverative cognition. Psychophysiology. 2018;55(7)
Paykel ES. Stress and aective disorders in humans. Semin. Clin. Neuropsychiatry. 2001;6:4–11.
Ramiz, A. K., Vakil C. R.(2020). Socio-psychological issues of changing values in adolescents–youth
in education // Práxis Educacional. 6 (37). 578–590. DOI: 10.22481/ praxisedu.v16i37.6406
Salzmann S., Euteneuer F., Strahler J., Laferton J., Nater U.M., Rief W. Optimizing expectations and
distraction leads to lower cortisol levels after acute stress. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2018;88:144–
152.
Simon G.E., Perlis R.H. Personalized medicine for depression: can we match patients with
treatments? Am. J. Psychiatr. 2010;167(12):1445–1455.
Taylor S.F., Grove T.B., Ellingrod V.L., Tso I.F. The fragile brain: stress vulnerability, negative aect
and GABAergic neurocircuits in psychosis. Schizophr. Bull. 2019;45(6):1170–1183.
Vanderhasselt M.A., Baeken C., Van Schuerbeek P., Luypaert R., De Mey J., De Raedt R. How brooding
minds inhibit negative material: an event-related fMRI study. Brain Cognit. 2013;81(3):352–359.
Vakil, J. R. (2021). Psychologicla direction of the formation of multicultural values. Revista on line
de Política e Gestão Educacional, 25(1), 620-637 p. https://doi.org/10.22633/rpge.v25iesp.1.15003
Weiner, B. (1992). Human motivation: Metaphors, theories, and research. Sage Publications, Inc.
Wager T.D., Davidson M.L., Hughes B.L., Lindquist M.A., Ochsner K.N. Prefrontal-subcortical
181
ISSN: 2763-5724 / Vol. 04 - n 04 - ano 2024
pathways mediating successful emotion regulation. Neuron. 2008;59(6):1037–1050.
Джаббаров, Р.В. (2012). «О принципах формирования мотивов самореализации в процессе
обучения.» Вектор науки Тольяттинского государственного университета. Серия: Педагогика,
психология 3: 125-127
