Psychometric Properties and Cross-Language Availability of Emotion Regulation Scales in Clinical and Non-Clinical Populations: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Background: Emotion regulation is a core transdiagnostic construct implicated in a wide range of psychological disorders and adaptive outcomes. Over the past decade, numerous self-report instruments assessing emotion regulation have been translated, validated, and applied across clinical and non-clinical populations worldwide. However, the psychometric robustness and cross-cultural equivalence of these measures have not been comprehensively synthesized.

Objective: This systematic review aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties, cross-cultural validations, and analytical use of emotion regulation scales in peer-reviewed studies published between 2000 and 2025.

Methods: Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, systematic searches were conducted across PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Eligible studies reported psychometric evaluation of emotion regulation self-report instruments in clinical or non-clinical samples. Data were extracted on reliability, validity, factor structure, measurement invariance, language adaptations, population characteristics, and the functional role of emotion regulation measures (predictor, outcome, mediator, moderator).

Results: Forty-six studies met the inclusion criteria. The most frequently validated instruments were the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS), the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ), the Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (CERQ), and the Emotion Regulation Skills Questionnaire (ERSQ). On the whole, total-scale scores were found to be internally consistent and construct valid across populations and languages. The use of deficit-based measures was gaining support on the basis of factorial evidence of bifactor or hierarchical measures, whereas strategy-based measures retained theorized multidimensional designs. The general finding of both cross-cultural studies was the support of configural and metric invariance, but scalar invariance was inconsistently established. Most frequently used predictors and mediators were emotion regulation measures, though few studies measured sensitivity to change due to interventions.

Conclusions: Emotion regulation self-report measures have a largely high psychometric strength as well as wide cross-cultural applicability. However, inconsistency in subscale scores and the scarcity of support for scalar invariance underscore the importance of assuming they should only be interpreted carefully and refined further as methods. This review will offer evidence-based recommendations of the measures that can be used in emotion regulation in both clinical and social science studies.