Examining Negative Emotional Reactivity and State Self-esteem as Mediators of the Relationship Between Core Self-evaluation and Depressive Symptoms

Abstract

Background

The World Health Organization (WHO) has recognised depression as one of the leading causes of illness and disability across the world. Young adults are highly susceptible to depression, as this age group stands at a critical junction of developmental transitions and increased psychosocial demands. Existing research indicates the importance of dispositional factors like self-evaluation mechanisms in relation to depression, but little attention has been paid to contextual factors like self-esteem and emotional reactivity and how the dispositional and contextual factors interact with each other to produce the risk of depression in young adults.

Purpose

The study aims to investigate core self-evaluation (CSE), state self-esteem (SSE) and negative emotional reactivity (ER-N) as predictors of depressive symptoms. Additionally, it aims to assess the role of SSE and ER-N as mediators in the relationship between CSE and depressive symptoms.

Methods

438 participants between 18 and 25 years of age were assessed. The strength and direction of the relationships among CSE, SSE, ER-N and depressive symptoms were examined by the Pearson correlation coefficient. Furthermore, a mediation analysis was run to assess the role of negative emotion regulation (ER-N) and self-esteem in the relationship between CSE (independent variable) and depressive symptoms (dependent variable).

Results

A positive association was found between CSE and SSE, while on the other hand CSE and SSE both were negatively correlated with ER-N and depressive symptoms. This is despite the fact that ER-N significantly associates positively with depressive symptoms. Further, higher CSE exhibits fewer depressive symptoms, both directly and indirectly. Among SSE and ER-N as mediators, SSC emerged as a stronger mediator in the relationship.

Conclusion

Overall, the study highlights that positive CSE is likely to promote self-esteem in contextual situations and is also likely to manage emotional reactivity of a negative nature. The findings indicate that higher CSE reduces depression primarily by strengthening self-esteem and minimising negative emotional reactivity.

Keywords

Self-evaluation self-esteem emotional reactivity depression

Introduction

The World Health Organization (WHO)¹ has recognised depression as one of the leading causes of illness and disability among individuals aged 15–29. Worldwide, there is an increase in the burden of depression² with global prevalence estimates suggesting that nearly 28 million people are affected across all age groups.³ Longitudinal studies suggest that symptoms of depression in adolescence are found to persist later in young adulthood as well, with recent cohorts reporting higher prevalence rates in comparison to earlier generations.^{2, 4} In India, approximately 33.6% of college-aged young adults report clinically significant depressive symptoms.⁵

Depressive symptoms not only cause impaired performance in important domains like academics and interpersonal functioning but also increase the risk of psychological disorders.⁶ Existing empirical evidence confirms that depressive symptoms are an important cause of problems in mood regulation and faulty emotional processing,⁷ consequently leading to poor quality of life and impairments in cognitive and social functioning.⁸ Numerous factors, such as genetic predispositions, environmental stressors,⁹ interpersonal demands¹⁰ and emotional regulation styles¹¹ can affect the presence and severity of depressive symptoms.

Young adults are also highly susceptible to depression, as this age group stands at a critical junction of developmental transitions and increased psychosocial demands. Research indicates that dispositional factors like self-evaluation mechanisms and contextual factors like self-esteem and emotional reactivity (ER) interact with each other to produce the risk of depression in young adults. Core self-evaluation (CSE) reflects the individual’s sense of self-esteem and self-efficacy and has been found to be an important factor influencing emotional health.¹² Individuals with negative CSE are likely to experience higher levels of psychological distress, which increases the likelihood of adopting maladaptive coping methods and interpret ambiguous events adversely.¹³ Vulnerable individuals show poor adaption to stressors and have greater possibilities of developing psychological disorders due to the interplay of stressful experiences and their faulty cognitions.¹⁴ On the other hand, positive CSE is a crucial protective factor, and people with positive CSE are less likely to experience depression.^15–17

State self-esteem (SSE) entails the momentary fluctuations in self-worth in response to environmental stimuli and has been strongly associated with vulnerability to stress.¹⁸ In contrast to trait self-esteem, which is a stable predisposition, SSE refers to the dynamic nature of self-evaluative processes, which are highly dependent on the contextual factors and can fluctuate in intensity and valence in response to situational stimuli. Individuals with higher levels of SSE are more likely to use adaptive coping methods and have positive mental health. Existing research has demonstrated that SSE plays a vital role in regulating emotional reactions to difficult circumstances.¹⁸ By influencing how people perceive and react to both internal and external stressors, transient self-esteem may act as a mediator in the association between CSE and mental health outcomes, including depressive symptoms.¹²

ER can be explained by how a person reacts emotionally, both positively and negatively, to both internal and external stimuli.^{19, 20} Individuals with higher negative reactivity (ER-N) may be more likely to experience, prolonged negative emotions in response to stressful life events, which may increase their susceptibility to the beginning of psychological disorders such as depression.²¹ Additionally, reacting negatively has been positively associated with depression and anxiety, as well as poor emotion coping and suicidal ideation.^{19, 22}

Previous research has established CSE as a foundational personality trait comprising self-esteem, generalised self-efficacy, emotional stability and locus of control.²³ Individuals with positive evaluations of self are likely to possess a stable and positive self-view, perceive themselves as competent, and are less susceptible to emotional dysregulation, thereby demonstrating a lower vulnerability to depression.²⁴ On the other hand, cognitive theories (e.g., Beck’s schema models) posit negative self-evaluations as core vulnerabilities in depression.²⁵

CSE is believed to influence SSE, which is more transient in nature and fluctuates depending on contextual feedback and perceived evaluation. Individuals with higher CSE are more likely to report elevated SSE, owing to their robust internal self-worth and adaptive coping mechanisms.²⁶ Moreover, ER, particularly in its negative form, has been shown to mediate the relationship between personality and mental health outcomes. High ER-N can amplify emotional responses to daily stressors, exacerbating the risk of depression.^{21, 27} Theoretical frameworks such as the vulnerability-stress model and cognitive appraisal theory propose the idea that individual differences in self-evaluation and emotional processing shape susceptibility to depressive symptoms^{28, 29} and justify the inclusion of SSE and ER-N as mediating variables.

Current Study

Extant literature confirms direct links between CSE, SSE, ER-N and depressive symptoms,^{18, 30} but little attention has been paid to examine these variables in an integrated framework. The current study addresses this gap by integrating dimensions of cognition, ER and self-concept into a comprehensive framework. Also, prior studies have independently examined the roles of SSE and ER-N in relation to depressive symptoms, but few have investigated how these constructs explain the link between CSE and depression. The present study seeks to fill this gap by investigating SSE and ER-N as mediators of the relationship between CSE and depressive symptoms and provide an integrated understanding of how the interaction between stable self-concepts (CSE) and dynamic, state-dependent emotional and self-evaluative influences depressive symptomatology in young adults.

Conceptual Framework and Hypotheses

The present study aims to test the mediational role of SSE and ER-N as mechanisms linking CSE to depressive symptoms in young adults. CSE, a personality construct reflecting fundamental evaluation of self³¹ has been consistently linked to psychological adjustment and vulnerability to depression. Borrowing from cognitive affective models of depression, the current framework posits that SSE and ER-N serve as two distinct mediators of the direct relationship between self-evaluation and depressive symptoms. Specifically, individuals with low CSE are more susceptible to fragile SSE and heightened ER-N, which makes them more vulnerable to depressive affect. Framing SSE and ER-N as explanatory pathways between CSE and depressive symptoms acknowledges that cognitive self-evaluative processes and ER represent independent psychological pathways through which CSE exerts its influence on depressive symptoms. This model extends prior research by integrating trait-like and state-like self-perceptions with affective vulnerability, extending a more comprehensive explanation of the multiple mechanisms underlying depression risk in young adults.

Based on the existing literature, the following hypotheses have been formulated:

H₁: CSE will have a negative impact on depressive symptoms.

H₂: CSE will have a positive impact on SSE.

H₃: CSE will have a negative impact on negative ER.

H₄: SSE will have a negative impact on depressive symptoms.

H₅: Negative ER will have a positive impact on depressive symptoms.

H₆: SSE will mediate the relationship between CSE and depression.

H₇: Negative ER will mediate the relationship between CSE and depression.

Methods

The present study employed a quantitative, cross-sectional research design to examine the mediating roles of SSE and negative ER in the relationship between CSE and depressive symptoms among young adults.

Measures

Core Self-evaluation Scale

The core self-evaluations scale (CSES)³² was used to assess an individual’s fundamental appraisal of their own self-esteem, generalised self-efficacy, locus of control and emotional stability. The scale consists of 12 items (e.g., ‘I am confident I get the success I deserve in life.’) rated on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Higher scores indicate more positive CSEs. The CSES has demonstrated good internal consistency (α ≈ 0.80) in prior research.

State Self-esteem Scale

Self-esteem was assessed with the state self-esteem scale (SSES),³³ which contains 20 items measuring current feelings of self-worth in three domains (performance, social and appearance). Items (e.g., ‘I am worried about looking foolish’) are rated on a 5-point scale. Higher total scores indicate higher momentary self-esteem. The SSES provides a reliable and valid measure of the dynamic, fluctuating nature of self-esteem.

Perth Emotional Reactivity Scale

The Perth Emotional Reactivity Scale (PERS)³⁴ is a self-report questionnaire to assess trait levels of emotional reactivity. The scale consists of 30 items to measure general positive reactivity and general negative reactivity of the respondents. For the current study, 15 items measuring negative reactivity were used. The items assessed three dimensions of emotional reactivity: intensity of positive emotions, intensity of negative emotions, persistence of emotional activation and intensity and duration of emotional responses.³⁴ Higher scores on the negative ER subscale reflect a greater tendency to experience and express intense negative emotions.

Quick Inventory for Depressive Symptoms

Depressive symptoms were measured using the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS),³⁵ which is a 16-item self-report instrument developed to assess nine core symptom domains—namely, sad mood, concentration or decision-making difficulties, self-criticism, suicidal ideation, loss of interest, reduced energy or fatigue, sleep disturbance, appetite and weight changes, and psychomotor agitation or retardation. Each item is rated on a four-point Likert scale, reflecting the intensity or frequency of symptoms experienced during the preceding seven days. The cumulative score ranges from 0 to 27, with higher scores signifying increased severity of depressive symptomatology.

Sample and Procedure

The target population for the current research is young adults in the age group of 18–25 years. This age group is particularly important with reference to the variables of the research, as they are experiencing an important transition in their life and are more vulnerable to mental health concerns.

To decide the sample size, an a priori power analysis was conducted. The analysis was guided by the empirical recommendations of Fritz and Mackinnon,³⁶ who conducted Monte Carlo simulations to estimate required sample sizes for detecting indirect effects in mediation models under varying effect size conditions. Assuming a small-to-moderate effect size for the paths from the independent variable to the mediator and from the mediator to the dependent variable, respectively, their simulation results indicated that approximately 354 participants are needed to achieve 80% power (1−β = 0.80) at an alpha level of 0.05 (two-tailed) when testing the indirect effect using bias-corrected bootstrapping. The inclusion criteria of the study were that the participants should be native Indians, aged between 18 and 25 years, and they should have a basic proficiency in English to comprehend the questionnaires. Participants with any self-reported history of severe psychiatric disorders were excluded.

The data were collected online from December 2024 to January 2025. To collect the data, a consent form was circulated through various online platforms. All participants who fulfilled the criteria listed above and consented to be a part of the research were included in the sample. The researcher received 492 forms. The received forms were screened for missing responses and incomplete data, and 28 forms were found unusable. Out of the remaining 464 forms, 26 forms were discarded as they could not pass the alertness test consisting of a directive: ‘If you are reading carefully, mark option 3 as your response to this question’. The final sample of 438 participants had a mean age of 21.2 years and comprised 241 (55.04%) girls and 197 (44.96%) boys.

Data Analysis

Statistical analyses were performed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS, version 20). The Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated to assess the strength and direction of association between CSE, SSE, ER and depressive symptoms. Linear regression and mediation analysis were performed using Process Macro v4.2 on SPSS.³⁷ CSE was entered as the independent variable, while SSE and negative ER were entered as mediators. Depressive symptoms were the dependent variable.

Results

Descriptives

Collected data were used to calculate mean, standard deviation and correlation. Table 1 shows the results.

Cronbach’s alpha (α) represents internal consistency reliability for each scale.

Means (M) and standard deviations (SD) are reported for each variable.

Correlations are Pearson’s r.

**indicates significance at p < .01.

Table 1 presents the descriptive statistics, internal consistency coefficients, and bivariate correlations among the study variables. CSE demonstrated good reliability (α = 0.87) with a mean of 38.33 (SD = 5.42). SSE also showed high internal consistency (α = 0.86) and a mean score of 66.02 (SD = 12.33). Negative emotional reactivity (ER-N) was reliable (α = 0.84) with a mean of 32.35 (SD = 9.24), and depressive symptoms demonstrated good reliability as well (α = 0.86; M = 12.33, SD = 5.21). Correlation analyses indicated that CSE was positively associated with SSE (r = 0.667, p < .01) and negatively associated with ER-N (r = −0.321, p < .01) and depressive symptoms (r = −0.507, p < .01). SSE was negatively correlated with ER-N (r = −0.446, p < .01) and depressive symptoms (r = −0.580, p < .01), while ER-N was positively correlated with depressive symptoms (r = 0.296, p < .01). These results provide preliminary support for the hypothesised relationships in the parallel mediation model.

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics.

Variable No.	Variable Name	Cronbach’s Alpha (α)	Mean	SD	1	2	3	4	5
1	CSE	0.87	38.33	5.42	−
2	SSE	0.86	66.02	12.33	0.667**	−
4	ER-N	0.84	32.35	9.24	−0.321**	−0.446**	−0.293**	−
5	Depressive Symptoms	0.86	12.33	5.21	−0.507**	−0.580**	−0.199**	0.296**	−

Notes. CSE = Core self-evaluation; SSE = State self-esteem; ER-N = Negative emotional reactivity; Depressive Symptoms = Depressive symptom score.

Mediation Analyses

Mediation analysis was performed to assess whether the hypothesised mediators (SSE and negative ER) mediated the relationship between CSE and depressive symptoms. To conduct this analysis, the PROCESS method³⁷ measured the direct relationship between the CSE and depressive symptoms in the absence of mediating variables indicated by c, followed by measuring indirect relationships after including the mediating variables indicated by c’.

Using the PROCESS method,³⁷ mediation analysis was performed to examine whether SSE and negative ER mediated the relationship between CSE and depressive symptoms. Separate models were run for each mediator using Model 4 in PROCESS for SPSS. Results are shown in Table 2.

Table 2.

Direct and Indirect Relationships Among Variables.

Path	Nature	β	p Value
CSE → Depressive symptom	Direct	−0.507	<.01
SSE as mediator
CSE → SSE	Direct	0.667	<.01
SSE → Depressive symptom	Direct	−0.580	<.01
CSE → SSE → Depressive symptom	Indirect	−0.436	<.05
Negative ER as mediator
CSE → Negative ER	Direct	0.321	<.01
Negative ER → Depressive symptoms	Direct	β = 0.296, p < .01	<.01
CSE → Negative ER → Depressive symptom	Indirect	−0.049	<.05

Table 2 presents the results of the mediation analysis. Results revealed both direct and indirect effects of CSE on depressive symptoms through SSE and negative ER. The direct effect of CSE on depressive symptoms was significant (β = –0.507, p < .01), indicating that higher CSE predicted fewer depressive symptoms. When examining SSE as a mediator, CSE significantly predicted SSE (β = 0.667, p < .01), and SSE in turn negatively predicted depressive symptoms (β = –0.580, p < .01). The indirect effect through SSE was also significant (β = –0.436, p < .05), suggesting that higher CSE reduces depressive symptoms by enhancing SSE. For negative ER as a mediator, CSE was positively related to negative ER (β = 0.321, p < .01), which subsequently predicted higher depressive symptoms (β = 0.296, p < .01). The indirect effect via negative ER was significant but smaller (β = –0.049, p < .05), indicating that part of the protective influence of CSE on depression operates through reducing ER. Overall, the findings suggest that SSE serves as a stronger mediator than negative ER, but both pathways significantly explain the link between CSE and depressive symptoms.

Discussion

The present study examined the direct impact of CSE on depressive symptoms and examined the mediating influence of SSE and ER-N. The hypothesised model is supported by the results. Higher CSE is linked to lower depressive symptoms both directly and indirectly via enhanced SSE and reduced ER-N.

CSE has a strong direct impact on depressive symptoms (β = –0.507, p < .01), indicating that individuals with more favourable self-views are less susceptible to depressive symptomatology. This is in accordance with prior work that highlights the role of CSE in psychological well-being.³⁸ Low CSE makes an individual susceptible to negative self-schemas, cognitive biases and maladaptive coping responses, all of which lead to an increased risk for persistent low moods. Empirically, studies show robust negative associations between CSE and depression.^{15, 39, 40}

In the current study, the mediation results explain the role of SSE as the mechanism linking CSE and depressive symptoms. Individuals with high CSE tend to report higher momentary or situational self-esteem (β = 0.667, p < .01). Higher SSE, in turn, strongly predicts lower depressive symptoms (β = –0.580, p < .01), producing a sizeable indirect effect (β = –0.436, p < .05). Positive and stable self-beliefs help in creating positive day-to-day self-evaluations, which then work as a buffer against depressive feelings. This finding is also supported by previous research showing that self-esteem mediates the relationship between traits and depression.^{15, 41} Thus, SSE appears to be the central cognitive mechanism through which CSE exerts its protective influence.

The mediational pathway, involving ER-N, was significant but weaker (β = –0.049, p < .05) as compared to SSE, indicating that poorer CSE might play a modest protective role by reducing emotional sensitivity to negative stimuli or stressors, thereby reducing the risk for depressive symptoms. That is, individuals with higher CSE might experience less intense or enduring negative emotional responses, which lessens the likelihood of spiralling into depressive states. The positive path from ER to depressive symptoms (β = 0.296, p < .01) supports the assumption that those more emotionally reactive to negative events are at elevated risk for depression. This is supported by the existing literature on ER and depression^{42, 43} where heightened negative reactivity has been found to be instrumental in the emergence or maintenance of depressive symptoms. Individuals with low CSE tend to perceive stressors as threatening and consequently respond with stronger negative affect, which is likely to contribute to emergence of depressive symptoms.⁴²

Interestingly, the results point out that the mediating role of SSE is substantially stronger than that of ER-N, suggesting that the self-esteem route is more central in this dataset. One possible explanation is that the emotional reactivity pathway is more distal or moderated by other regulatory processes (e.g., emotion regulation strategies). In other words, while being reactive emotionally may contribute to depression, it is the cognitive–self processes (i.e., self-view) that more strongly channel the influence of CSE on depressive outcomes. Comparatively, the negative ER mediator is weaker than SSE, suggesting that the self-esteem route is more central in this dataset.

Conclusion

These findings reinforce the mediating role of SSE and ER-N and lend explanatory support to the direct relationship between CSE and depressive symptoms. Findings also extend support to frameworks that integrate both cognitive and emotional factors in explaining the development of psychopathology. The significant mediating role of SSE suggests that interventions aimed at enhancing domain-specific self-worth might be effective in mitigating the development of depressive symptoms among individuals with low CSE. Moreover, the presence of an ER route (although modest) highlights that ER-N is also an important linking variable. Trait self-evaluations influence mental health through cognitive and affective pathways.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge all the participants of the research.

Authors’ Contribution

Dr Prashasti Jain and Dr Bhavana Arya planned, supervised and assisted in the statistical evaluation of the study. They provided guidance to Simran Bharol, who was involved in data collection, data analysis and drafting the manuscript. Dr Vikas Sharma, Dr Mridula Sharma and Dr Suprithy Paliwal handled manuscript editing and proofreading. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Statement of Ethics

The study was conducted in accordance with the ethical principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki (World Medical Association, 2013).

Declaration of Conflict of Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

The data may be obtained from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Patient Consent

NA.

ORCID iDs

Prashasti Jain

Bhavana Arya

References

World Health Organization: WHO. Depressive disorder (depression), https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/depression (2025).

Yang

C-H

, Lv

J-J

, Kong

X-M

, . Global, regional and national burdens of depression in adolescents and young adults aged 10–24 years, from 1990 to 2019: Findings from the 2019 Global Burden of Disease study. Br J Psychiatry 2024; 225: 311–320.

Koskie

Depression facts and statistics. Healthline , https://www.healthline.com/health/depression/facts-statistics-infographic#symptom-stats (2023).

Keyes

, Kreski

and Patrick

ME.

Depressive symptoms in adolescence and young adulthood. JAMA Network Open 2024; 7: e2427748.

Cherian

, Armstrong

, Sobhana

, . Mental health, suicidality, health, and social indicators among college students across nine states in India. Indian J Psychol Med 2024. DOI: 10.1177/02537176241244775.

Purba

NSP

, Kastanya

, Sherly

, . Silent struggles: Depression and its link to suicide attempts in emerging adulthood. Jurnal Ilmiah Psikologi . Epub ahead of print 18 August 2025. DOI: 10.30872/psikoborneo.v13i3.19574.

Greer

, Kurian

and Trivedi

MH.

Defining and measuring functional recovery from depression. CNS Drugs 2010; 24: 267–284.

Kupferberg

and Hasler

The social cost of depression: Investigating the impact of impaired social emotion regulation, social cognition, and interpersonal behavior on social functioning. J Affect Disord Rep 2023; 14: 100631.

Navarro

, De Roo

, Oldehinkel

, . Intergenerational continuity of depressive symptoms: Genetic and environmental pathways. Psychol Med 2025; 55. Epub ahead of print 1 January 2025. DOI: 10.1017/s0033291725101633.

10.

Kwong

ASF

, López-López

, Hammerton

, . Genetic and environmental risk factors associated with trajectories of depression symptoms from adolescence to young adulthood. JAMA Network Open 2019; 2: e196587.

11.

Abdurazakova

An integrative approach to understanding the causes of depression: The interplay of genetic, biological, psychological, and sociocultural factors. Med Sci Uzb 2024; 16–21.

12.

Iwanaga

, Chan

, Smedema

, . Evaluating positive person-environment variables and overall health as parallel mediators for the relationship between core self-evaluations and subjective well-being in people with multiple sclerosis. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin . Epub ahead of print 28 July 2025. DOI: 10.1177/00343552251349515.

13.

Shiloh

, Peleg

and Nudelman

Core self-evaluations as resilience and risk factors of psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychol Health Med 2022; 28: 95–109.

14.

Koh

KB.

Stress, vulnerability, and resilience. In: Springer eBooks , 2018, pp.3–16.

15.

Dou

, Wang

Y-J

, Bin

, . Core self-evaluation, regulatory emotional self-efficacy, and depressive symptoms: Testing two mediation models. Soc Behav Personal Int J 2016; 44: 391–399.

16.

Orth

, Robins

and Meier

LL.

Disentangling the effects of low self-esteem and stressful events on depression: Findings from three longitudinal studies. J Pers Soc Psychol 2009; 97: 307–321.

17.

Steinberg

, Karpinski

and Alloy

LB.

The exploration of implicit aspects of self-esteem in vulnerability – stress models of depression. Self Identity 2007; 6: 101–117.

18.

Alessandri

and Vecchione

Dynamic self-esteem: Assessment, correlates and predictors. Identity 2023; 23: 1–3.

19.

Evans

, Blossom

, Canter

, . Self-reported emotion reactivity among early-adolescent girls: Evidence for convergent and discriminant validity in an urban community sample. Behav Ther 2016; 47: 299–311.

20.

Gross

and Jazaieri

Emotion, emotion regulation, and psychopathology. Clin Psychol Sci 2014; 2: 387–401.

21.

Gross

and John

OP.

Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: Implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. J Pers Soc Psychol 2003; 85: 348–362.

22.

Claes

, Norré

, Van Assche

, . Non-suicidal self-injury (functions) in eating disorders: Associations with reactive and regulative temperament. Personal Individ Differ 2013; 57: 65–69.

23.

Judge

, Erez

, Bono

, . Are measures of self-esteem, neuroticism, locus of control, and generalized self-efficacy indicators of a common core construct. J Personal Soc Psychol 2002; 83: 693–710.

24.

C-H

Chang

, Ferris

, Johnson

, . Core self-evaluations. J Manage 2011; 38: 81–128.

25.

Beck

AT.

Cognitive therapy and the emotional disorders . International Universities Press, 1976.

26.

Crocker

and Wolfe

CT.

Contingencies of self-worth. Psychol Rev 2001; 108: 593–623.

27.

Cole

, Michel

and Teti

LO.

The development of emotion regulation and dysregulation: A clinical perspective. Monogr Soc Res Child Dev 1994; 59(2–3): 73–100.

28.

Beck

AT.

Depression: Clinical, experimental, and theoretical aspects . Haper & Row. 1967.

29.

Ingram

and Luxton

DD.

Vulnerability-stress models. In: Hankin

and Abela

JRZ

(eds) Development of psychopathology: A vulnerability-stress perspective . Sage Publications, Inc., 2005, pp.32–46.

30.

Burke

, McArthur

, Daryanani

, . Latent classes of trait affect and cognitive affective regulation strategies are associated with depression, non-suicidal self-injury, and well-being. J Affect Disord 2017; 225: 180–187.

31.

Judge

, Bono

and Locke

EA.

Personality and job satisfaction: The mediating role of job characteristics. J Appl Psychol 2000; 85: 237–249.

32.

Judge

, Erez

, Bono

, . The core self‐evaluations scale: Development of a measure. Pers Psychol 2003; 56: 303–331.

33.

Heatherton

and Polivy

Development and validation of a scale for measuring state self-esteem. J Personal Soc Psychol 1991; 60: 895–910.

34.

Becerra

and Campitelli

Emotional reactivity: Critical analysis and proposal of a new scale. Int J Appl Psychol 2013; 3: 161–168.

35.

Rush

, Trivedi

, Ibrahim

, . The 16-Item quick inventory of depressive symptomatology (QIDS), clinician rating (QIDS-C), and self-report (QIDS-SR): A psychometric evaluation in patients with chronic major depression. Biol Psychiatry 2003; 54: 573–583.

36.

Fritz

and MacKinnon

DP.

Required sample size to detect the mediated effect. Psychol Sci 2007; 18: 233–239.

37.

Hayes

AF.

Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A Regression-Based Approach . Guilford Publications, 2022.

38.

Judge

, Locke

, Durham

, . Dispositional effects on job and life satisfaction: The role of core evaluations. J Appl Psychol 1998; 83: 17–34.

39.

Interpersonal adjustment and depression in college students: Mediation of core self-evaluation and moderating effects of gender. Res Sq (Res Sq) Epub ahead of print 5 February 2024. DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-3908488/v1.

40.

Collard

, Chatzimike-Levidi

, Cross

, . The influence of core self-evaluation, rumination, and forgiveness on the experience and expression of anger. J Ration Emot Cogn Behav Ther 2023; 42: 1–24.

41.

Orth

and Robins

RW.

Understanding the link between low self-esteem and depression. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 2013; 22: 455–460.

42.

Herres

, Ewing

ESK

and Kobak

Emotional reactivity to negative adult and peer events and the maintenance of adolescent depressive symptoms: A daily diary design. J Abnorm Child Psychol 2015; 44: 471–481.

43.

Charbonneau

, Mezulis

and Hyde

JS.

Stress and emotional reactivity as explanations for gender differences in adolescents’ depressive symptoms. J Youth Adolesc 2009; 38: 1050–1058.