Received: 26 March 2021 | Accepted: 28 June 2021

DOI: 10.1111/jasp.12811

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Future orientation helps regulate emotion in the future

Lei Zheng1,2,3,4 | Yidi Chen1 | Yiqun Gan1

1
School of Psychological and Cognitive
Sciences and Beijing Key Laboratory Abstract
of Behavior and Mental Health, Peking Although the adaptive function of future orientation has been demonstrated, whether
University, Beijing, China
2 an individual's orientation toward the future regulates emotions to cope with future
School of Economics and Management,
Fuzhou University, Fujian, China stressors remains unknown. The present study aimed to investigate the emotion
3
Center for China Social Trust Research, regulation function of future orientation in a goal-­related stressful situation. Eighty
Fuzhou University, Fujian, China
4
participants were randomly assigned to an experiment group or a control group. The
Institute of Psychological and Cognitive
Sciences, Fuzhou University, Fujian, China experiment group was primed by a future-­oriented manipulation, whereas the con-
trol group was primed by a neutral condition; then, both groups performed the Trier
Correspondence
Yiqun Gan, School of Psychological and Social Stress Test (TSST). The results showed that the experiment group exhibited
Cognitive Sciences, Peking University, reduced negative mood, increased positive mood, and a lower peak cortisol level
Beijing 100871, China.
Email: ygan@pku.edu.cn after the TSST task. In conclusion, future orientation is considered an effective ap-
proach to regulate future emotions in response to stress. Our results render insights
Funding information
This research was funded by the National to developing strategies in coping with occupational stress.
Social Science Foundation of China (Grant
number: 20BSH139; 20CSH073).

1 | I NTRO D U C TI O N future orientation is particularly important in the emotion regulation

Why are some people able to manage stress and realize their dreams,
while others live in a state of suffering and pain? The famous movie,
The Shawshank Redemption, provides us with part of the answer. In the
film, Andy was wrongly accused of murder and sentenced to life im-
prisonment, yet he dreamed of escaping to a coastal town and living
with freedom. This future-­oriented thinking provided him the strength
to fight with fate, overcome difficulties, and reach his final goal.
Future orientation is a goal-­related concept and is characterized
by thinking about and acting toward future outcomes (Nurmi, 1991;
Seginer, 2008). Prior research has demonstrated the adaptive function
of future orientation (Gan et al., 2017). Thinking about the future may
lead people to weigh the benefits of the distant future more heavily, as
opposed to the present stressful situation, which helps them regulate
emotions and exhibit adaptive behaviors (MacLeod & Conway, 2005).
Numerous studies have investigated the adaptive function of
future orientation (Sze et al., 2017). For instance, people who were
highly future-­oriented exhibited fewer negative outcomes when fac-
ing stress (Zheng et al., 2019). After receiving future-­oriented train-
ing (e.g., goal setting and planning), individuals reported a decrease
in depressive symptoms and higher levels of well-­being compared to
a control group (MacLeod et al., 2008; Vilhauer et al., 2012). Thus,
process and for mental health.
Prior research has proposed that being future-­oriented could be
an approach to help people manage emotions and reduce the poten-
tial adverse impact of stress (Folkman & Moskowitz, 2004). These
studies have shown future orientation enhanced the capacity to reg-
ulate emotions in the face of future possible obstacles, thus result-
ing in fewer negative psychological outcomes (Johnson et al., 2014).
As opposed to reactive cognition, this proactive self-­
regulation
leads people to move toward future goals and self-­
promotion
(Aspinwall, 2006). In particular, being future-­oriented causes indi-
viduals to think about the future in relation to stressful contexts and
helps them to shift their attention to a hopeful future for better lifes-
pan development (Gan et al., 2017; Tucker et al., 2013). Therefore,
future-­oriented people weigh the benefits of long-­term goals more
heavily, which may lead them to focus on the potential for inherent
gain or growth rather than the aspect of harms and losses, suggest-
ing the adaptive function of future-­oriented thinking.
Taken together, people who are strongly oriented toward the fu-
ture tend to be affected by future goals (Gan et al., 2013; MacLeod
& Conway, 2005). However, there is no empirical evidence showing
that being oriented toward the future is able to effect one's emo-
tional reactions against stress in an acute stressful situation. Given

J Appl Soc Psychol. 2021;00:1–7. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/jasp© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC | 1

2 |
the literature review above, a benefit of having long-­term goals is
that they are able to promote adaptive behaviors (Sze et al., 2017),
and thereby result in positive outcomes.
This study employed a widely used paradigm—­the Trier Social
Stress Test (TSST) (Kirschbaum et al., 1993), which has an impact
on both the affective system and hypothalamic–­
pituitary–­
adrenal
(HPA) axis activity (Liu et al., 2017). In this study, salivary cortisol
was chosen as the biomarker to characterize HPA axis responses to
stress levels. Salivary cortisol offers a more objective physiological
significance compared to the self-­report subjective stress method
(Hellhamamer et al., 2009). Previous studies have found the peaks
of salivary cortisol lag behind the self-­reported stress after the TSST
because the release of salivary cortisol triggered by HPA axis gradu-
ally increases following a stressor, reaching peak levels at about 20–­
30 min after the onset of stressors (Helminen et al., 2019). Moreover,
previous studies on subjective stress and cortisol levels have not
reached a consistent conclusion (Jentsch & Wolf, 2020). Dickerson
and Kemeny (2004) did not find a correspondence between cortisol
responses and subjective distress, while a weak correlation was ob-
tained between perceived stress and HPA axis activities (i.e., corti-
sol levels) in a large sample of adolescents (Oldehinkel et al., 2011).
A meta-­analysis reported that only 25% of studies found a correla-
tion between subjective stress and cortisol under TSST (Campbell &
Ehlert, 2011). Therefore, in this study, we reported both self-­reported
stress and salivary cortisol levels following TSST. In addition, this
study only employed the speech content part of the TSST, which has
been shown to have an effect on the affective system and cortisol
level as well (Liu et al., 2017). We hypothesized that future-­oriented
participants would report less negative affect, more positive affect,
and lower levels of peak cortisol concentration in response to the
stress situation when compared to control group participants.
2 | M E TH O DS
2.1 | Sample size calculation
Previous studies that examined the relationships between future
temporal perspective and moods (i.e., positive mood and nega-
tive mood) reported effect sizes ranging from r = .29 to r = .44
(MacLeod, 1996). Based on these effect sizes, we first transformed
them to Cohen's f, and selected the minimum Cohen's f as the prior
effect size to calculate the minimum-­required sample size. For the
between factors design of a 2 × 2 mixed model with an alpha = .05,
power = .80, and correlations among repeated measures = .5, we
obtained a sample size of n = 68. Therefore, we used a sample size of
68 as the minimum sample size for the present study.
2.2 | Participants
Participants were recruited by providing information about the study
on a campus bulletin board at a University in Beijing, China. Due to
ZHENG et al.
potential health risks caused by the acute stress associated with
performing the TSST (Kirschbaum et al., 1993; Liu et al., 2017), we
excluded participants with cardiovascular disease or psychiatric dis-
orders including anxiety and depression. Students who majored in
psychology were also excluded because many of them had already
heard of the TSST. In order to control individual factors that may have
an effect on the measurement of cortisol responses to stress, par-
ticipants confirmed that they did not have a chronic or acute illness,
use drugs or alcohol, or take medication regularly. Additionally, female
participants confirmed that they were not in their menstrual cycle.
There were 90 participants who were randomly assigned to ei-
ther a control or experiment group. After the removal of 10 par-
ticipants who reported minimal stress after the Trier Social Stress
Task, the current study analyzed the remaining data containing 80
participants: 41 in the control group and 39 in the experiment group,
32 males and 48 females, age ranging from 17 to 29 years (Mean =
22.01, SD = 2.75). Among them, 50 were undergraduate students,
and the rest were graduate students. Their average number of in-
ternships was 1.45 (SD = 1.71). In addition, ten participants only
completed the psychological assessments, and therefore, heart rate
data and salivary samples were collected from 70 participants.
2.3 | Materials
2.3.1 | Positive affect and Negative affect scale
PANAS is a Chinese version of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule
(Guo & Gan, 2010), which was adapted from Watson, Clark, and Tellegen
(1988). As some of the dimensions are unrelated to the present research
(i.e., guilty), positive affect and negative affect were measured by the 7-­
item, respectively. Responses were provided using a scale ranging from
1 (not at all) to 7 (extremely). Each dimension has been demonstrated to
have good psychometric properties in previous studies. The Cronbach's
alpha ranged from .88 to .97 for the present research.
2.3.2 | Chinese resilience scale
Chinese resilience scale was measured with a Chinese resilience
scale (Hu & Gan, 2008). The scale includes two subscales, personal
strength, and support strength. Based on the current research pur-
pose, only the personal strength subscale was selected to assess
participants' resilience. The measure has 15 items, such as “I always
felt sad when I fail.” Responses are measured using a scale ranging
from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The Cronbach's alpha
was .84 in the current research.
2.3.3 | Manipulation checks
Manipulation checks included perceived stress and future
perspective.
ZHENG et al.
1. Perceived stress was assessed by a single item with the state-
ment: “how stressed do you feel right now, please indicate
the degree on a scale from 0 to 7, 0 being not stressed at
all, 10 being extremely stressed.”
2. Future-­oriented thinking was measured using two items: “Please
indicate the temporal locus of the things you just wrote about,
using a scale from 1 to 7, 1 = now, 7 = far future.”, “Please indicate
the vividness of the future that you just thought about, where 0 =
not at all vivid and 7 = extremely vivid.” Person correlation was .68.
2.4 | Procedures
Participant recruitment and study procedures were approved
by the Institutional Review Board of the corresponding author's
University. Informed consent was obtained from all participants
prior to their enrollment in the study. Participants could withdraw
from the study at any time, and they were assured their individual
results would be kept confidential. First, each participant was re-
quested to wear a wrist strap sensor to record his/her heart rate,
rinse their mouth using warm water, and remain calm. Then, par-
ticipants completed the pre-­test including the PANAS, resilience
scale, perceived stress, and providing their saliva sample. Second,
participants were requested to think about and write down either
ordinary events (control group) or future goals (future orientation
group) for the next 10 min. Third, participants completed an in-
terim test including the PANAS, future-­oriented thinking, and a
saliva sample was collected. Fourth, participants completed the
stress test, after which they provided a saliva sample. Fifth, partici-
pants completed the post-­test and their saliva samples were col-
lected at 10 and 20 min right after the stress test (Figure 1). After
completing the study, each participant was carefully debriefed and
was compensated with ¥70.
2.4.1 | Manipulation materials
The control group received the following instructions: “Please recall
the events that happened to you from Monday to Friday, choose an or-
dinary day and describe how you spent the day from the time you got
up, until you went to bed. Avoid including any emotional expressions or
feelings. As you write, do not worry about punctuation or grammar, just
really let go and write as much as you can about your experience.”
Future-
Pre-test Orientation Mid-test
-35 -15 -5 0 +15
t1
FIGURE 1 The protocol of present experiment. TSST, tier social stress test
| 3
The experiment group received the following version of instruc-
tions: “Please imagine your future career goals, map your career path,
and describe a concrete plan and how you deal with difficulties you
might face in the future. Avoid including any emotional expressions or
feelings. As you write, do not worry about punctuation or grammar, just
really let go and write as much as you can about your experience.”
2.4.2 | The trier social stress test
The present study revised the instructions of the TSST by dispensing
with the mental arithmetic task to make it more like a job interview
(Liu et al., 2017). Participants in both groups received the following
instructions: Please imagine that you have applied for a job and have
been invited for an interview. In contrast to a real interview, however,
you are supposed to give a talk in which you are to convince the panel in
five minutes why you think that you would be the best candidate for this
position. Please note that your performance will be recorded by a cam-
era and a microphone for subsequent voice and behavioral analysis. The
members are trained in behavioral analysis and will take notes during
your talk. You should try to leave the best possible impression and as-
sume the role of the applicant for the duration of the talk as best as you
can. The panel will reserve the right to ask follow-­up questions in case of
uncertainties to receive all necessary information from you. Following
your talk, you will be given a second task by the panel, which will only be
explained to you by the panel. You may take some notes now, which you
must not use during your talk. Do you have any questions?
Each participant was given five minutes for preparation, and
then he or she was brought to another room where he or she gave
a 10-­min talk in front of two trained researchers and a camera
(Kirschbaum et al., 1993).
2.5 | Cortisol measurement
For the purpose of monitoring the HPA axis stress response, Sarstedt
tubes (Genebase Gene-­Tech, Inc., China) were utilized to collect
saliva sample. Participants were informed to abstain from eating,
drinking, smoking, or rigorous exercise for at least one hour before
arrival at the laboratory. They were requested to arrive from 13:00
p.m. to 17:00 p.m. and to remain calm before the experiment. Saliva
sample collections were performed four times for each participant.
After each experiment, saliva samples were immediately stored at
TSST Post-test
+25 +35 Time (minutes)
t2 t3 t4
Salivary Cortisol Sample
4 |
−20°C in a refrigerator prior to extraction. Before biochemical analy-
sis, saliva samples were first centrifuged at 2,500 rpm for 15 min at
20°C to obtain supernatant. During the centrifuge process, samples
from 6 participants (2 from the Future orientation group, 4 from
the control group) were excluded due to insufficient supernatant.
The chemiluminescence assay method was then employed to detect
optical density, which was transformed into cortisol concentrations
through fitting in a 4-­parameter logistic curve (R 2 = .986).
3 | R E S U LT S
3.1 | Preliminary analysis
The results of the Chi-­square for independence indicated that de-
mographic variables did not significantly differ between the two
groups (Gender: 𝜒 2[1] = 0.41, p = .523; Age: t[78] = 0.36, p = .718;
Education: 𝜒 2[1] = 0.77, p = .773; Number of internship: t[78] = 1.51,
p = .134). There were also no significant differences in pre-­test
results between the two groups (Stress: t[77.68] = 0.42, p = .676;
Positive Affect: t[78] = 0.83, p = .412; Negative Affect: t[61.16] = 1.37,
p = .176; Resilience: t[78] = 1.13, p = .264).
3.2 | Manipulation check
The experiment group scored higher in future (F[1,78] = 92.89,
p < .001, 𝜂 2p = 0.54), indicating the future temporal perspective prim-
ing was successful. Stress was successfully induced for both groups
by the TSST (F[1,78] = 149.06, p < .001, 𝜂 2p = 0.66). However, neither
the between group effect (F[1,78] = 0.91, p = .343, 𝜂 2p = 0.01) nor the
interaction (F[1,78] = 0.09, p = .772, 𝜂 2p = 0.001) reached significance
for perceived stress, indicating that both groups perceived the same
level of stress after the TSST.
3.3 | Self-­report measures
To examine mood changes across pre-­, mid-­, and post-­measurement,
a 2 × 3 mixed ANOVA with time as the within-­groups factor (pre-­,
mid-­, and post-­test) was conducted and revealed a significant inter-
active effect on negative affect (F[2,156] = 6.17, p = .005, 𝜂 2p = 0.07;
Figure 2a) and positive affect (F[2,156] = 7.73, p = .001, 𝜂 2p = 0.09;
Figure 2b). Individuals in the experiment group exhibited a stronger
capacity for emotion regulation to reduce negative affect and to en-
hance positive affect after the social stress test.
3.4 | Salivary cortisol concentrations
Baseline-­
corrected salivary cortisol concentrations are shown in
Figure 3. The 2 × 4 ANOVA indicated a main effect of group (F[1,62]
= 4.69, p = .034, 𝜂 2p = 0.05), as well as an interaction (F[3,186] =
ZHENG et al.
2.71, p = .046, 𝜂 2p = 0.02). Simple main effect analysis indicated a
significant difference between the two groups on cortisol secretion
at time 3 (F[1,62] = 6.04, p = .017, 𝜂 2p = 0.09), suggesting that the
experiment group demonstrated significantly lower HPA axis activ-
ity during the TSST task. In this study, we detected the peak cortisol
level about 25 min (time 3) after the onset of TSST. This delayed ef-
fect is because cortisol levels gradually increase caused by HPA axis
activities in the blood and then transfer from blood to saliva (Childs
et al., 2006; Hellhammer et al., 2009; Helminen et al., 2019).
4 | D I S CU S S I O N
What is the relationship between future-­oriented thinking and the
stress response in the future? In the present study, people who were
oriented toward the future reported less negative affect and more
positive affect after a stress-­producing experience. Moreover, this
study demonstrated that having a future orientation not only ad-
justed the affective response but also modulated HPA axis activity
(i.e., cortisol concentration) in response to a stressful event.
Learning how to manage or reduce the detrimental effects of a
stressor in advance is particularly important for mental and physical
health (Folkman & Moskowitz, 2004). Our results provided empir-
ical evidence that future-­oriented thinking enhances the adaptive
capacity to regulate emotions when faced with a stress-­producing
situation. Specifically, thinking in advance about the future was as-
sociated with more positive affect and less negative affect in the
aftermath of a stressful job interview. This is consistent with a previ-
ous study that emphasized the adaptive function of future orienta-
tion in relation to stress management (Gan et al., 2017).
This study is the first study to demonstrate the adaptive function
of future orientation in an acute stressful context. Prior research has
emphasized the benefits of future-­oriented thinking, suggesting it
can be an approach for successful adjustment and health behaviors
(MacLeod et al., 2008; Schacter et al., 2017; Vilhauer et al., 2012;
Zheng et al., 2019). In contrast to prior studies, we examined the
adaptive function of future orientation not only by using multiple
indicators, such as positive affect, negative affect, and salivary cor-
tisol, but also using a job interview, which is a potential stressor that
almost every person is likely to face at some time in their career or
when seeking employment.
In addition, we demonstrated that the group primed to be future-­
oriented had less cortisol concentration after the stress test, sug-
gesting that future-­oriented thinking can moderate their HPA axis
activity. In this study, we detected a difference in cortisol levels at
25 min after the onset of TSST. This is in line with previous studies
that determine the release of salivary cortisol does not instanta-
neously reach their peak after the onset of the stressor (Hellhammer
et al., 2009; Helminen et al., 2019). This delayed effect is because
HPA axis triggers a cascade of physiological activities that causes the
adrenal glands to produce cortisol, gradually increasing and reach-
ing the peak roughly 20–­30 min following the exposure of stressors
(Childs et al., 2006). This study detected a significant difference in
ZHENG et al.
FIGURE 2 The moods changes between two groups across tests. TSST, tier social stress test
FIGURE 3 Baseline corrected salivary cortisol changes between two groups across tests. TSST, tier social stress test
the peak cortisol level at 25th minute after the stress task, suggest-
ing future-­oriented thinking can enhance people's capacity to cope
with stress.
Our results that future orientation can regulate HPA axis activity
in an acute stress are in line with previous studies. Dickerson and
Kemeny (2004) proposed that cortisol responses are not only in-
dicators of the stress response, but also suggest the association of
coping processes with perceived stress. In line with that, a recent
fMRI study proposed a top-­down regulation of the psychological
approach in physiological responses (Mochizuki-­Kawai et al., 2020).
As future-­oriented anticipation leads people to focus on their future
goals, which perhaps induces distraction from the stressor. Such dis-
traction can help regulate emotion and downregulate both psycho-
logical and physiological responses to stressors. Thus, psychological
factors could serve as an approach to actively regulate HPA axis
activity and impact the cortisol concentration (Abelson et al., 2014;
Olivera-­Figueroa et al., 2015).
Although differences in cortisol levels were found, this study
did not find differences in stress levels between the two groups. In
line with our results, Jentsch and Wolf (2020) found that while emo-
tion management did not change perceived stress after TSST, it did
| 5
change cortisol levels. A future-­oriented individual may weigh the
potential benefits of the interview, which may distract them from
the current stressor (being interviewed) and therefore have a quicker
recovery than a non-­future-­oriented individual does. Thus, although
stress was perceived, emotion regulation facilitated a quicker recov-
ery after stress exposure, including emotional recovery and cortisol
recovery (Jentsch & Wolf, 2020).
After removing the mental arithmetic part, the revised TSST was
more like a real job interview. Consistent with previous research, the
speech part of the TSST induced both psychological and physiological
responses to stress (Bagley et al., 2011). This shed light on developing
strategies in coping with occupational stress for career training.
Our study introduces a new direction for understanding emo-
tion regulation in response to the future stress. However, there are
some limitations to the study that have implications for future re-
search. First, it is unknown whether future-­oriented thinking could
buffer the detrimental effects of stress exposure or alleviate feel-
ings of stress associated with a particular event. If the prior state-
ment is true, future orientation may regulate emotions in response
to stress. If the latter statement is true, future-­oriented people may
inherently resist stress or perceive less threat and therefore have
6 |
fewer negative mood states. Future studies should seek to answer
this question using more elaborate experimental designs.
Second, we induced stress by a widely used social evaluation
task (i.e., the TSST). Stressors could be either physiological or psy-
chological (Kogler et al., 2015). This study focused on the responses
to a specific psychological stressor. However, in a physiologically
stressful context, such as a life-­threatening situation, physical in-
jury, or physical discomfort, whether future orientation can regulate
emotions in response to such stressors remains unknown.
Third, future orientation includes several stages, such as goal set-
ting, planning, and evaluation (Nurmi, 1991). Although these stages
play different roles in future orientation, it is still unknown about the
effects of these stages on emotion regulation. Future studies should
test these effects, underlying the relationship between future orien-
tation and emotion regulation.
AC K N OW L E D G E M E N T S
The authors would like to thank Danyang Li, Yuxiu Nie, Li Zhou,
Rui Yang, Zihua Ye, Dongdong Jiang, Qianqian Ju, Chenyang Wang,
Zhaohui Xiang, Yaoyuan Ding, and Kun Liu for data collection.
C O N FL I C T O F I N T E R E S T S
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect
to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
ORCID
Yiqun Gan https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9886-6862
REFERENCES
Abelson, J. L., Erickson, T. M., Mayer, S. E., Crocker, J., Briggs, H., Lopez-­
Duran, N. L., & Liberzon, I. (2014). Brief cognitive intervention
can modulate neuroendocrine stress responses to the trier social
stress test: Buffering effects of a compassionate goal orientation.
Psychoneuroendocrinology, 44, 60–­ 70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
psyne​uen.2014.02.016
Aspinwall, L. G. (2006). The psychology of future-­ oriented thinking:
From achievement to proactive coping, adaptation, and aging.
Motivation and Emotion, 29(4), 203–­ 235. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s1103​1-­0 06-­9013-­1
Bagley, S. L., Weaver, T. L., & Buchanan, T. W. (2011). Sex differences
in physiological and affective responses to stress in remitted de-
pression. Physiology & Behavior, 104(2), 180–­ 186. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.physb​eh.2011.03.004
Campbell, J., & Ehlert, U. (2011). Acute psychosocial stress: Does
the emotional stress response correspond with physiological re-
sponses? Psychoneuroendocrinology, 37(8), 1111–­ 1134. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.psyne​uen.2011.12.010
Childs, E., Vicini, L. M., & De Wit, H. (2006). Responses to the
trier social stress test (TSST) in single versus grouped par-
ticipants. Psychophysiology, 43(4), 366–­ 371. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1469-­8986.2006.00414.x
Dickerson, S. S., & Kemeny, M. E. (2004). Acute stressors and cortisol
responses: A theoretical integration and synthesis of laboratory re-
search. Psychological Bulletin, 130(3), 355–­391. https://doi.org/10.10
37/0033-­2909.130.3.355
Folkman, S., & Moskowitz, J. T. (2004). Coping: Pitfalls and promise.
Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 745–­774. https://doi.org/10.1146/
annur​ev.psych.55.090902.141456
ZHENG et al.
Gan, Y., Miao, M., Zheng, L., & Liu, H. (2017). Temporal Doppler effect
and future orientation: Adaptive function and moderating condi-
tions. Journal of Personality, 85(3), 313–­325. https://doi.org/10.1111/
jopy.12242
Gan, Y., Xie, X., Wang, T., Rodriguez, M. A., & Tang, C. S. (2013). Thriving
in the shadow of the 2008 Sichuan earthquake: Two studies on resil-
ience in adolescents. Journal of Health Psychology, 18(9), 1232–­1241.
https://doi.org/10.1177/13591​05312​459897
Guo, M. Z., & Gan, Y. Q. (2010). Reliability and validity of the Chinese
version of positive and negative affect schedule-­expanded in 660
college students. Journal of Chinese Mental Health, 24(7), 524–­528.
(in Chinese).
Hellhammer, D. H., Wüst, S., & Kudielka, B. M. (2009). Salivary cortisol as
a biomarker in stress research. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 34(2), 163–­
171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyne​uen.2008.10.026
Helminen, E. C., Morton, M. L., Wang, Q., & Felver, J. C. (2019). A meta-­
analysis of cortisol reactivity to the trier social stress test in virtual
environments. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 110, 104437. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.psyne​uen.2019.104437
Hu, Y.-­Q., & Gan, Y. (2008). Development and psychometric validity of
the resilience scale for Chinese adolescents. Acta Psychologica Sinica,
40(8), 902–­912. https://doi.org/10.3724/sp.j.1041.2008.00902
Jentsch, V. L., & Wolf, O. T. (2020). The impact of emotion regulation on
cardiovascular, neuroendocrine and psychological stress responses.
Biological Psychology, 154, 107893. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biops​
ycho.2020.107893
Johnson, S. R., Blum, R. W., & Cheng, T. L. (2014). Future orientation:
A construct with implications for adolescent health and wellbeing.
International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 26(4), 459–­
468. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijamh​-­2013-­0333
Kirschbaum, C., Pirke, K.-­M., & Hellhammer, D. H. (1993). The ‘trier so-
cial stress test’–­A tool for investigating psychobiological stress re-
sponses in a laboratory setting. Neuropsychobiology, 28(1–­2), 76–­81.
https://doi.org/10.1159/00011​9004
Kogler, L., Müller, V. I., Chang, A., Eickhoff, S. B., Fox, P. T., Gur, R. C.,
& Derntl, B. (2015). Psychosocial versus physiological stress—­
Meta-­analyses on deactivations and activations of the neural cor-
relates of stress reactions. NeuroImage, 119, 235–­251. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.neuro​image.2015.06.059
Liu, J. J., Ein, N., Peck, K., Huang, V., Pruessner, J. C., & Vickers, K. (2017).
Sex differences in salivary cortisol reactivity to the trier social stress
test (TSST): A meta-­analysis. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 82, 26–­37.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyne​uen.2017.04.007
MacLeod, A. K. (1996). Affect, emotional disorder, and future-­
directed thinking. Cognition & Emotion, 10(1), 69–­ 86. https://doi.
org/10.1080/02699​93963​8 0394
MacLeod, A. K., Coates, E., & Hetherton, J. (2008). Increasing well-­being
through teaching goal-­setting and planning skills: Results of a brief
intervention. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9(2), 185–­196. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s1090​2-­0 07-­9057-­2
MacLeod, A. K., & Conway, C. (2005). Well-­being and the anticipation
of future positive experiences: The role of income, social networks,
and planning ability. Cognition & Emotion, 19(3), 357–­374. https://doi.
org/10.1080/02699​93044​1000247
Mochizuki-­Kawai, H., Matsuda, I., & Mochizuki, S. (2020). Viewing a
flower image provides automatic recovery effects after psycholog-
ical stress. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 70, 101445. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101445
Nurmi, J.-­E. (1991). How do adolescents see their future? A review of
the development of future orientation and planning. Developmental
Review, 11(1), 1–­59. https://doi.org/10.1016/0273-­2297(91)90002​-­6
Oldehinkel, A. J., Ormel, J., Bosch, N. M., Bouma, E. M. C., Van Roon,
A. M., Rosmalen, J. G. M., & Riese, H. (2011). Stressed out?
Associations between perceived and physiological stress responses
in adolescents: The TRAILS study: Perceived and physiological
ZHENG et al.
stress responses. Psychophysiology, 48(4), 441–­ 452. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1469-­8986.2010.01118.x
Olivera-­Figueroa, L. A., Juster, R.-­P., Morin-­Major, J. K., Marin, M.-­F., &
Lupien, S. J. (2015). A time to be stressed? Time perspectives and
cortisol dynamics among healthy adults. Biological Psychology, 111,
90–­99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biops​ycho.2015.09.002
Schacter, D. L., Benoit, R. G., & Szpunar, K. K. (2017). Episodic future
thinking: Mechanisms and functions. Current Opinion in Behavioral
Sciences, 17, 41–­50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2017.06.002
Seginer, R. (2008). Future orientation in times of threat and challenge:
How resilient adolescents construct their future. International
Journal of Behavioral Development, 32(4), 272–­ 282. https://doi.
org/10.1177/01650​25408​090970
Sze, Y. Y., Stein, J. S., Bickel, W. K., Paluch, R. A., & Epstein, L. H. (2017).
Bleak present, bright future: Online episodic future thinking, scar-
city, delay discounting, and food demand. Clinical Psychological
Science, 5(4), 683–­697. https://doi.org/10.1177/21677​02617​696511
Tucker, R. P., Wingate, L. R., O’Keefe, V. M., Mills, A. C., Rasmussen, K.,
Davidson, C. L., & Grant, D. M. (2013). Rumination and suicidal ide-
ation: The moderating roles of hope and optimism. Personality and
Individual Differences, 55(5), 606–­ 611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
paid.2013.05.013
| 7
Vilhauer, J. S., Young, S., Kealoha, C., Borrmann, J., IsHak, W. W., Rapaport,
M. H., Hartoonian, N., & Mirocha, J. (2012). Treating major depres-
sion by creating positive expectations for the future: A pilot study
for the effectiveness of future-­directed therapy (FDT) on symptom
severity and quality of life. CNS Neuroscience & Therapeutics, 18(2),
102–­109. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-­5949.2011.00235.x
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and valida-
tion of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS
scales. Journal of personality and social psychology, 54(6), 1063.
https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-­3514.54.6.1063
Zheng, L., Lippke, S., Chen, Y., Li, D., & Gan, Y. (2019). Future orientation
buffers depression in daily and specific stress. PsyCh Journal, 8(3),
342–­352. https://doi.org/10.1002/pchj.283
How to cite this article: Zheng, L., Chen, Y., & Gan, Y. (2021).
Future orientation helps regulate emotion in the future.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 00, 1–­7. https://doi.
org/10.1111/jasp.12811