Introduction

There are instances in the workplace when small incidents may seem ordinary on the surface. A message comes through with a sharp tone; a meeting is conducted poorly; someone makes public comments questioning one’s work. While nothing earth-shattering has taken place, the physical body’s reaction precedes even an intellectual response, tensing the shoulders, altering breathing, and preparing an automatic counter-response.

Techniques for emotional self-regulation offer a way to navigate this type of moment. It does not equate to keeping calm at all times nor to suppressing one’s discomfort. Instead, it can be best described as actively manipulating how emotions develop and how one should respond to them (Gross, 2015). For instance, slowing down, testing one’s interpretation of the situation, changing the scene, or choosing to express what was previously internalized are some actions that could be taken.

When it comes to professionals in healthcare technology, pressure can stem from multiple sources. These can include clinical imperatives, technical limitations, tight deadlines, and user concerns, among other factors that sometimes do not align properly. The following techniques for emotional self-regulation are aimed at helping healthcare technology professionals during these challenging periods when personal reflection is not possible.

Start by Making the Feeling More Specific

Feeling that you are “feeling bad” doesn’t give us much to go on. Various emotions – anger, embarrassment, anxiety, disappointment, mental fatigue – all have the power to make us uncomfortable, but they require a different reaction.

This does not mean we need to put our feelings into sophisticated language. “I’m frustrated with the shift in the decision,” for instance, is perfectly fine. Or, “I feel exposed by the criticism.” Once we can pinpoint our emotion, it is easy to spot our reaction. Anger will inspire an urge to confront immediately; anxiety will encourage us to run from the discussion entirely.

An effective pause is: What am I feeling, what caused the emotional response, and what do I feel like doing now? Not because we are ready to act, but because we need to be aware of the impulse.

Do Something Physical Before Trying to Think Differently

In case the nervous system is working very actively, such pieces of advice as “look at it rationally” can be ill-advised; the body can sometimes need care first. One of the most straightforward solutions to consider can be deep breathing since this activity does not require one to leave their current space and is quiet enough.

According to the NHS, the key element of deep breathing is to ensure that it is comfortable. In the workplace, this can be accomplished through sitting on the chair properly, putting both feet on the floor, unclenching the jaw, and ensuring the exhalation lasts a bit longer than the inhalation for some time. It is unnecessary to relax completely. Instead, one should decrease the feeling of the need to respond immediately.

This technique of emotional self-regulation becomes especially useful when it comes to sending an email. The message sent after a couple of minutes may have the same content, although the feelings can no longer accompany it.

Question the First Interpretation

In addition to being influenced by experiences, emotions are also affected by our understanding of these experiences. A brief note from a supervisor may indicate annoyance. A delayed response may seem like a dismissal. At times, this understanding may be accurate. In other cases, it can be just one possibility among many.

Cognitive reappraisal involves a reinterpretation of the situation to produce an emotional shift. Studies have found a connection between higher levels of reappraisal and improved emotional and interpersonal functioning compared to regular suppression (Gross & John, 2003; Hu et al., 2014).

This doesn’t call for false optimism. “Everything is fine” often sounds hollow in such situations, especially when it isn’t. A better approach is to ask: Is there anything else that could be happening here? The supervisor may be busy rather than angry. The criticism may be directed at the presentation rather than the overall value of the project. A delay may indicate uncertainty elsewhere in the organization.

A reframe can be the most effective technique for emotional self-regulation when it continues to ring true.

Change the Situation When the Situation Is the Problem

Not all difficult emotions have to be regulated internally. In some cases, working conditions have to be altered. When there is a constant escalation of tension during a discussion in a group chat, it might make sense to shift it to a brief voice call. Constant notifications creating frustration are unlikely to resolve through one more deep breathing exercise.

The model of emotion regulation developed by Gross involves strategies taking place before the formation of an emotional reaction, such as choosing different situations (Gross, 2015). It is crucial in a context of work environments where employees are expected to cope with dysfunctional systems around them. Emotion regulation is not supposed to turn into accepting priorities that are ill-defined, distractions from work, and impossible deadlines.

A relevant question is: Are there any things that can be modified about the situation before I have to adapt to it?

Case Study: The Meeting That Went Sideways

Daniel was a UX researcher for a digital health company. He had conducted multiple interviews with clinicians about a novel patient platform over the course of several weeks. During a stakeholder meeting to discuss the insights obtained, a senior stakeholder stated that the results were “too subjective to be of any use.”

The statement was brief; however, Daniel heard a direct attack on his work in front of the team.

First, Daniel thought of arguing each point, knowing that this would lead to a fast-paced reaction with minimal listening.

Instead, Daniel quickly jotted down two feelings: angry and embarrassed. As another person continued speaking, Daniel practiced his deep breathing exercise, focusing on relaxing his hands.

Daniel’s emotional state did not go away; however, he became less urgent.

Next, Daniel verified his interpretation of the comments. Perhaps the stakeholder was concerned about the application of those findings rather than the qualitative research in general? Daniel clarified this point with a simple question: “Do you mean the methodology, or how we present our findings in a business case?”

It completely altered the dynamics of the discussion. The key issue was the presentation. Following the discussion, Daniel scheduled another brief meeting to present a one-page summary covering the sample, limitations, and practical significance. The stakeholder kept his directness, and Daniel continued to hate the original comment. Yet, he left with a well-defined response instead of engaging in an argument.

This fictional workplace example shows what emotional self-regulation can look like in practice. The emotion did not dissipate, nor did the person miraculously become more agreeable. What made the difference was Daniel’s decision-making process.

Use Attention Carefully

Following a difficult experience, a person’s attention may become fixated. They may think of a particular statement made during the interaction or assume how others perceive them now. That is where reflective thinking may transform into rumination.

One way of breaking out of this pattern is through the quick process of grounding. Identify three items within your surroundings, two physical sensations in your body, and one sound. Another alternative is the completion of a tangible activity within ten minutes. Distraction will be an ineffective tool for coping if used repeatedly after every interaction.

There is no Perfect Technique

Different emotions and situations require different responses. For example, cognitive reappraisal may be effective when our interpretation of a situation is too narrow or unhelpful. Breathing techniques can be useful when a person is highly emotionally or physiologically aroused. Problem-solving may be the best approach when there is something that can realistically be done to improve the situation. Finally, acceptance may be more appropriate when the emotion is understandable, and the problem cannot be resolved immediately.

Numerous studies on mental well-being have found that strategies such as rumination, avoidance, and suppression are often associated with greater emotional difficulties. In contrast, more flexible approaches, including reappraisal, acceptance, and problem-solving, tend to be linked with better psychological outcomes (Aldao et al., 2010; Schäfer et al., 2017). However, context always matters—what is helpful in one situation may not be effective in another.

The real skill is not simply knowing a collection of techniques. Rather, it lies in the ability to pause, step back, and consciously choose the response that best fits the situation.

Conclusion

Techniques for emotional self-regulation are more helpful if they are commonplace enough to be used regularly. Labeling an emotion, relaxing one’s physiology, verifying an interpretation, altering an avoidable stressor, and diverting one’s focus are all techniques that allow a small but significant distance to be created between one’s emotion and actions.

This distance is especially important for healthcare technology practitioners as it may help them preserve their working relationships, decision-making processes, and overall well-being. The process of emotional regulation will not make a person less emotional.

References

1. Aldao, A., Nolen-Hoeksema, S., & Schweizer, S. (2010). Emotion-regulation strategies across psychopathology: A meta-analytic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 30(2), 217–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2009.11.004
2. Gross, J. J. (2015). Emotion regulation: Current status and future prospects. Psychological Inquiry, 26(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2014.940781
3. Gross, J. J., & John, O. P. (2003). Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: Implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 348–362. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.348
4. Hu, T., Zhang, D., Wang, J., Mistry, R., Ran, G., & Wang, X. (2014). Relation between emotion regulation and mental health: A meta-analysis review. Psychological Reports, 114(2), 341–362. https://doi.org/10.2466/03.20.PR0.114k22w4
5. Schäfer, J. Ö., Naumann, E., Holmes, E. A., Tuschen-Caffier, B., & Samson, A. C. (2017). Emotion regulation strategies in depressive and anxiety symptoms in youth: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46, 261–276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0585-0