Abstract:This study examined legal practitioners' emotion regulation strategies and subjective moral emotions related to legal cases they handle. Forty-two participants recalled a civil law case and the emotions they experienced while handling the case. They completed the Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire to identify emotion regulation strategies they usually use. Results showed that attorneys often experienced anger and empathy and used strategies that tend to be adaptive across a wide range of contexts. There was a moderate positive correlation between Anger and Positive Refocusing, Contempt and Other-Blame, Guilt and Maladaptive emotion regulation strategies, and the Difference between parties' agreeableness (understood as how sympathetic they seemed) and Anger. As the experience of negative emotions paired with maladaptive emotion regulation techniques might be associated with negative consequences both for the self and for the relationship with clients, the present study suggests that adding emotion regulation into legal curricula is crucial.

How to judge emotions? Measuring moral emotions of lawyers in a retrospective situation