Gross’s Process Model helps you choose a response by locating where you can still influence an emotional sequence: the meeting setup, what receives your attention, how you interpret an event, or how you express a reaction already underway. Before a difficult meeting, name its purpose, identify the likely trigger, and choose the earliest practical adjustment that still lets you address the issue. The model is a useful map, not a tested meeting protocol; evidence on strategy choice comes mainly from controlled emotional stimuli, so apply it as a prompt and check whether it works in the conversation.
What can you change before the meeting—and what can wait?
A tense meeting can look like a choice between saying exactly what you feel and hiding it. Gross’s 1998 process model widens that choice. In an integrative review, he described five points in the emotion-generating process where regulation can occur: selecting a situation, changing part of it, directing attention, changing its meaning, and modulating the response. These are families of possible strategies, not five steps that everyone must complete. The review offers a framework for organizing choices; it did not test a preparation routine for workplace meetings.
The first useful question is what is likely to set off the reaction. If the agenda is unclear, asking for the records or clarifying the purpose changes the situation. Choosing a format or time may also help when those details are genuinely flexible and the conversation still needs to happen. Situation selection does not mean dodging accountability. It means noticing whether a reasonable adjustment can make the discussion more workable.
When the meeting itself cannot change, attention and interpretation remain available. You might keep notes focused on the decision that needs to be made rather than rehearsing a colleague’s tone. Cognitive reappraisal means changing how you interpret an event: a brief message may reflect time pressure, for example, though that possibility does not settle whether the underlying concern is real. Response modulation acts later, once a reaction is active. Taking a breath or waiting a moment before replying can affect what you express without necessarily removing the feeling.
Gross’s later extended account adds a practical distinction: identifying that a feeling needs attention, selecting a strategy, and implementing it are separate parts of regulation. You can notice anger and still be unsure what to do; you can choose to pause and find the pause difficult to carry out. That gap is one reason a model is best used to generate a few options rather than promise control over the outcome.
Sources: The Emerging Field of Emotion Regulation: An Integrative Review; Emotion Regulation: Current Status and Future Prospects
Which response fits the pressure and purpose of this conversation?
The model does not rank its options. In a 2014 experimental paper, Sheppes and colleagues tested strategy choice with emotional pictures and manipulated whether participants expected to see the same images again. In Study 3, 22 participants (13 women) chose between distraction and reappraisal; those told they would later see the pictures again chose reappraisal on 62.3% of trials, compared with 52.5% among participants choosing for immediate mood relief. The repeated exposure was to pictures in a lab, not to a difficult conversation, but the result suggests that anticipated future engagement can affect choice.
For a meeting, use that result as a prompt: if the issue will need continued attention, prepare a balanced interpretation that tests your assumptions while keeping the facts in view. If you are too activated to listen or think clearly, briefly shift attention, then return to the issue. This is a practical application, not a meeting strategy tested by the experiment.
A review by Kobylińska and Kusev argues that strategy effectiveness depends on situational demands and individual differences, and notes that evidence on flexibility remains limited. So avoid a fixed rule such as ‘always reframe.’ Ask whether your choice fits the pressure and lets you pursue the conversation’s purpose. A measured expression may keep a disagreement discussable; habitual concealment is a different pattern.
Sources: Emotion Regulation Choice: A Conceptual Framework and Supporting Evidence; Flexible Emotion Regulation: How Situational Demands and Individual Differences Influence the Effectiveness of Regulatory Strategies
How do you turn the choice into a workable meeting plan?
Before the meeting, write down the outcome you want in plain terms, such as an accurate account of a missed handoff and a clear next step. Name one part of the setup you can influence and one response to practice: bring the timeline, ask the colleague to reconstruct what happened before deciding why, and pause if anger crowds out listening. This is an illustrative plan, not a tested intervention.
Keep the other person and workplace setting in view. Diefendorff, Niven, and Ong’s 2026 Annual Review frames work emotion regulation through relational influences, professional and organizational norms, and wider social expectations. Power differences, disagreement norms, and new information can change how a response lands; individual regulation cannot correct an unsafe or unfair setting by itself.
Gross and John’s 2003 Study 4 examined habitual reappraisal and suppression in several participant samples using self-reports of emotion sharing, attachment avoidance, and social support, alongside peer ratings of relationship closeness and liking. For example, in one sample, three nominated acquaintances rated relationship closeness for each of 80 participants. Across these correlational measures, habitual reappraisal was associated with closer peer-rated relationships and greater liking, while suppression was associated with less sharing and lower social support. The study concerned broad habits and interpersonal outcomes, not a single deliberate pause at work, so use it to distinguish a recurring pattern from one considered response.
Gross’s model is useful before a difficult meeting because it makes earlier choices visible: adjust the setup, prepare attention or interpretation, or plan a measured response. It cannot select the best option without the issue, relationship, and constraints. Afterward, note what helped you stay engaged and what you would change. The private 32-item Emotional Skills Profile offers an educational reflection on recent habits and scenario choices; it has no validated norms or established ability-test validity and does not select a strategy. You could begin with one conversation: ask your colleague to reconstruct the handoff, then agree what information to share next time.
Sources: Emotion Regulation at Work: A Social Perspective; Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: implications for affect, relationships, and well-being; Individual Differences in Two Emotion Regulation Processes: Implications for Affect, Relationships, and Well-Being
Questions readers ask
Does Gross’s model say which emotion regulation strategy is best?
No. It organizes possible intervention points in the emotion process. Research suggests that strategy choice can vary with intensity and context, but experiments on emotional stimuli do not establish the best response for a particular workplace meeting.
Is pausing before responding the same as suppressing emotion?
Not necessarily. A brief pause can give you time to listen and choose clear words while the emotion remains present. Habitual suppression concerns a broader pattern of holding back expression; findings about that pattern do not determine the effect of one deliberate pause.
Sources
- The Emerging Field of Emotion Regulation: An Integrative Review
Gross’s 1998 review identifies five points where regulation may occur in the emotion-generative process: situation selection, situation modification, attention deployment, cognitive change, and response modulation. It presents these as a process framework.
- Emotion Regulation: Current Status and Future Prospects
The publisher abstract describes Gross’s extended process model as having identification, selection, and implementation stages.
- Flexible Emotion Regulation: How Situational Demands and Individual Differences Influence the Effectiveness of Regulatory Strategies
The review argues that strategy effectiveness can depend on situational context and individual differences; it says the evidence examining their interaction was limited.
- Emotion Regulation at Work: A Social Perspective
The Annual Reviews abstract frames workplace emotion regulation through relational influences, shared professional and organizational norms, and wider societal expectations.
- Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: implications for affect, relationships, and well-being
PubMed’s abstract reports five studies and says Study 4 found habitual reappraisal associated with better interpersonal functioning and habitual suppression with worse interpersonal functioning. The abstract does not specify Study 4’s sample or measures.
- Emotion Regulation Choice: A Conceptual Framework and Supporting Evidence
In Study 3, 22 participants (13 women) chose between distraction and reappraisal for emotional pictures. Participants told they would encounter the pictures again chose reappraisal on 62.3% of trials, versus 52.5% for those choosing for immediate mood relief. This was a controlled picture task, not a workplace conversation.
- Individual Differences in Two Emotion Regulation Processes: Implications for Affect, Relationships, and Well-Being
The accessible full-text copy reports Study 4’s correlational measures of habitual reappraisal and suppression, including self-reports of emotion sharing, attachment avoidance, and social support and peer ratings of relationship closeness and liking. Its interpersonal-functioning results are associations, not effects of a single deliberate pause.
Apply it to the real situation
Turn an emotional pattern into one practice question
From this guide: The model helps you locate possible intervention points; your own recent habits and scenario choices can suggest what to observe next.
The Emotional Skills Profile gives you a private reflection on recent emotional habits and choices in authored scenarios. Use it to identify one behavior to observe in your next difficult conversation, then compare that reflection with what actually helps you stay clear, curious, and direct. It is an educational profile, not a normed ability score or a selector of the right response.