(PS1-B45) Cognitive Emotion Regulation Strategies as Predictors of Learning Effectiveness in College Students with ADHD

College students with ADHD experience difficulties with emotion regulation (Sjöwall et al., 2013). These difficulties might be exacerbated as individuals attend college and face increased independence and academic responsibilities (Welle & Graf, 2011). In fact, the use of adaptive cognitive emotion regulation strategies (CERS; e.g., acceptance, positive appraisal) positively influences academic performance (e.g., higher GPA); whereas maladaptive CERS (e.g., self-blame, rumination) negatively influences academic performance (Al-badareen, 2016; Mohammadi-Bytamar et al., 2020). The current exploratory study examined whether the use of various CERS predict aspects of learning effectiveness (i.e., behaviors and attitudes related to learning and academic success) in college students with ADHD.
 

College students at universities across the United States completed multiple self-report measures as part of the multi-site ADHD “U-LEARN” study. They completed measures of current ADHD symptoms (APA, 2013), childhood ADHD symptoms (APA, 1994), and functional impairment (Weiss, 2000) to determine eligibility for ADHD group (i.e., sufficient current symptoms and impairment, plus several symptoms in childhood). College students with ADHD (n = 429, Mage = 19.84, 82.5% biological female, 78.1% gender identity female, 75.3% white) were the participants in the current study. Participants also completed measures of cognitive emotion regulation strategies (Garnefski et al., 2001), learning effectiveness (Newton et al., 2007), and executive functioning (BDEFS; Barkley, 2011).
 

Hierarchical multiple regressions were conducted to assess how CERS predicted different domains of learning effectiveness in college students with ADHD. Executive functioning (EF) difficulties were entered in the 1st step as a covariate (as EF deficits are known to decrease learning effectiveness; Peterson et al., 2006), while adaptive and maladaptive CERS were entered into the 2nd step. CERS accounted for significant variance in Academic Self-Efficacy [ASE; R^2 = .11, ΔR^2 = .10, F(3, 401) = 14.50, p < .001] and Stress and Time Pressure [STP; R^2 = .10, ΔR^2 = .03, F(3, 401) = 12.22, p < .001]. Specifically, adaptive CERS was the only uniquely significant index (β = .20, p < .001) for ASE and maladaptive CERS was the only uniquely significant index (β= -.10, p = .001) for STP. Lastly, analyses were run for women-only to avoid sex-neutral research (Hartung & Lefler, 2019) and results did not differ.
 

Our results indicated that certain CERS predicted different domains of learning effectiveness above and beyond EF. Specifically, the use of adaptive CERS is predictive of increased Academic Self-Efficacy, suggesting that cognitions of acceptance, positive restructuring, and a refocus on planning are predictive of perceptions of academic success and effort towards studying. Additionally, the use of maladaptive CERS strategies is predictive of poor Stress and Time Pressure, indicating that cognitions of self- and other-blaming, rumination, and catastrophizing hinder the ability to meet deadlines and cope with pressure related to academic demands. Thus, this study highlights the potential benefit of targeting CERS when implementing interventions for college students with ADHD.