A core problem of self- and emotion-regulation is how to strike a proper bal-
ance between two sometimes competing goals and strategies. On one hand,
good self-regulation requires that individuals optimize affect. To do so en-
sures a sufficiently positive balance of affect and the ability to resiliently re-
cover from negative affect. On the other hand, good self-regulation often re-
quires that individuals forgo the personal need for affect optimization as they
accept tension and delay of positive affect and endure prolonged negative af-
fect in the interest of adapting to the external demands of reality.
The tension between these two goals is reflected in the fact that theories of
affect and self-regulation often emphasize either one or the other of those strat-
egies. Some researchers point out that regulating emotions through the mainte-
nance of relatively high levels of positive and low levels of negative affect has
been consistently related to better psychological outcomes and adjustment
(Fredrickson, 1998; Isen, 1987; Salovey, Rothman, Detweiler, & Steward,
2000; Taylor, Kemeny, Reed, Bower, & Gruenewald, 2000; Watson & Penne-
baker, 1989). Nevertheless, a growing body of research suggests that the proc-
essing of negative affect also is an important aspect of psychological health,
and that exclusive focus on positive aspects of experience can be related to un-
desirable outcomes (Baumeister & Cairns, 1992; Norem, 1998; Showers &
Kevlyn, 1999; Showers & Kling, 1996; Taylor & Brown, 1988; Weinberger,
1990).
Since maintaining positive affective balance, though one important adap-
tive outcome, is not the only criterion of well-being, there has been a growing

9

tttttttt

Dynamic Integration:

Affect Optimization and

Differentiation in Development

Gisela Labouvie-Vief
Wayne State University

María Márquez González
Universidad Autónoma de Madrid

237