pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.06477 · v2 · submitted 2026-04-07 · 💻 cs.HC

Breaking Negative Cycles: A Reflection-To-Action System For Adaptive Change

Minsol Michelle Kim , Daniel M. Low , David Lafond , Eugene Shim , Michelle Han , Mohanad Kandil , Chenyu Zhang , Theo Kitsberg
show 3 more authors
Chelsea Boccagno Paul Pu Liang Pattie Maes
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 18:37 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.HC
keywords self-reflection technologyjournaling systemscoping flexibilityaction planningcounterfactual thinkingbehavior changeemotion regulationmental health support
0
0 comments X

The pith

Structured reflection prompts in a voice journaling system increase coping flexibility and the implementation of action plans.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper presents a voice-based journaling system designed to help users reflect on regrets and wishes in ways that lead to real behavioral changes. It incorporates a module for generating alternative outcomes and creating specific plans to address them. A 15-day study with 20 participants compared free journaling to using the structured prompts. Results indicated better coping flexibility after the study for all, but those with the prompts considered more alternatives, made more detailed plans, and put more plans into practice. The work shows how technology can support moving from awareness to action in managing negative thought patterns.

Core claim

The central claim is that a unified reflection-to-action system using structured prompts leads to significant pre-post improvements in coping flexibility, with the guided condition producing more counterfactual alternatives, concrete if-then action plans, and actual implementation of those plans for self-driven change.

What carries the argument

The structured reflection module that combines generating counterfactual alternatives with if-then action planning to bridge reflection and behavioral change.

Load-bearing premise

The study design with random assignment to journaling conditions over 15 days is sufficient to attribute differences in coping and plan implementation to the prompts themselves, rather than other personal or situational factors.

What would settle it

A larger follow-up study in which the structured prompts show no advantage over free-form journaling in measures of coping flexibility or number of implemented plans.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.06477 by Chelsea Boccagno, Chenyu Zhang, Daniel M. Low, David Lafond, Eugene Shim, Michelle Han, Minsol Michelle Kim, Mohanad Kandil, Pattie Maes, Paul Pu Liang, Theo Kitsberg.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Overview of the Reflection-to-Action system. (1) The Voice Journaling mobile platform captures daily regrets or [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Overview of the study interfaces. Participants journaled using a mobile application. Entries were synchronized to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Overview of the study procedure. The horizontal axis shows the timeline (Days 0, 5, 10, 15), and the vertical axis [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Post–Pre Δ scores (bootstrapped 95% CIs) for CFS–R and DERS–SF subscales under each condition (Gross-guided vs Free-form). Positive CFS–R Δ scores indicate improved coping flexibility, while negative DERS–SF Δ scores indicate reduced regulation difficulties. Both groups showed significant improvements in overall coping flexibility (RQ1). No between-condition differences reached statistical significance (𝑝 … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Weekly WhatIf-Planning Review outcomes (Days 5, 10, 15). Mean trajectories (with SEs) for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Weekly system-support ratings for readiness-for-action (Days 5, 10, 15). Mean trajectories (with SEs) for obstacle [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Daily journaling and WhatIf-Planning engagement [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Overview of the system implementation. Participants journaled on mobile in either free-form or Gross-guided condi [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Mean ratings of Intensity, Importance, and Opportu [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Heatmap of mean ratings (1–5) for Emotional In￾tensity, Importance, and Opportunity for Change, separated by relational (R) and non-relational (NR) domains in the Fo￾cus group (𝑛 = 20) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_10.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Breaking negative mental health cycles, including rumination and recurring regrets, requires reflection that translates awareness into behavioral change. Grounded in the Transtheoretical Model (TTM) and Gross's Emotion Regulation (ER) Process Model, we examine how Technologies Supporting Self-Reflection (TSR) bridge reflection and action. In a 15-day in-the-wild study (N = 20), participants used a voice-based journaling system to capture regrets and wishes and engaged in WhatIf-Planning, a novel structured reflection module integrating counterfactual thinking with if-then planning. Participants were randomized to either a free-form condition or a Gross-guided condition, which maps the five processes of Gross's ER model into explicit journaling prompts. We contribute: (1) a unified reflection-to-action TSR system that operationalizes the Preparation stage of TTM to bridge Contemplation and Action, and (2) triangulated empirical evidence from an in-the-wild journaling study that first operationalizes Gross's Process Model, revealing effects on coping flexibility and emotion regulation in daily life. Results show significant pre-post improvements in coping flexibility, indicating adaptive self-regulation across conditions, with the Gross-guided group generating more counterfactual alternatives, articulating concrete if-then action plans, and implementing more plans for self-driven change.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a voice-based journaling system called WhatIf-Planning that integrates counterfactual thinking with if-then planning to bridge reflection and action. Grounded in the Transtheoretical Model and Gross's Emotion Regulation Process Model, it reports results from a 15-day in-the-wild randomized study (N=20) comparing free-form journaling to a Gross-guided condition that maps the five ER processes into prompts. The central claims are significant pre-post improvements in coping flexibility across conditions and advantages for the Gross-guided group in generating more counterfactual alternatives, articulating concrete if-then plans, and implementing more plans.

Significance. If the findings hold after addressing methodological gaps, the work offers a concrete contribution to HCI by operationalizing established psychological models (TTM Preparation stage and Gross's five processes) into a TSR system for daily-life adaptive change. The in-the-wild design and mixed quantitative-qualitative triangulation are positive features that move beyond lab-based reflection studies. However, the small sample and lack of detailed statistical reporting limit the strength of causal claims about the structured prompts' specific effects.

major comments (3)
  1. [Methods] Methods section: The randomized 15-day in-the-wild design with N=20 does not include reported details on baseline balance checks, attrition handling, compliance monitoring, or covariates for daily stressors, leaving open the possibility that pre-post gains and between-group differences reflect regression to the mean, self-selection, or unmeasured life events rather than the Gross-guided prompts.
  2. [Results] Results section: The claim of 'significant pre-post improvements in coping flexibility' is presented without accompanying statistics (p-values, effect sizes, confidence intervals, or exact test details), and no table or figure reports these values, undermining assessment of whether the changes are reliable or clinically meaningful.
  3. [Results] Results section: With total N=20 split across conditions, the reported advantages for the Gross-guided group on counterfactual generation, if-then plans, and implementation lack power analysis or correction for multiple qualitative coding outcomes, making it unclear whether these differences are robust or could be artifacts of small-sample variability.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The phrase 'triangulated empirical evidence' is used but the abstract does not enumerate the specific measures (e.g., which coping-flexibility scale, how plans were coded) that constitute the triangulation.
  2. [Discussion] The paper would benefit from an explicit limitations subsection discussing demand characteristics in self-report emotion-regulation measures and the challenges of isolating prompt effects in daily-life journaling.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed feedback, which highlights important areas for improving transparency in our reporting. We agree that additional methodological details and statistical information will strengthen the manuscript. Below we respond to each major comment, indicating the revisions we will make.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Methods] Methods section: The randomized 15-day in-the-wild design with N=20 does not include reported details on baseline balance checks, attrition handling, compliance monitoring, or covariates for daily stressors, leaving open the possibility that pre-post gains and between-group differences reflect regression to the mean, self-selection, or unmeasured life events rather than the Gross-guided prompts.

    Authors: We appreciate the referee's emphasis on methodological transparency. The original submission omitted some details due to space constraints. In the revised manuscript we will expand the Methods section to report: baseline balance checks (no significant pre-study differences between conditions on coping flexibility or related measures), attrition handling (zero dropouts; all 20 participants completed the full 15 days), compliance monitoring (daily app logs with mean compliance of 87% of prompted sessions), and a discussion of covariates. We will also add an explicit limitations paragraph addressing regression to the mean, self-selection, and unmeasured daily stressors, while noting that randomization and the within-subjects pre-post design provide some protection against these confounds. These additions will be made without changing the study design or core results. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results] Results section: The claim of 'significant pre-post improvements in coping flexibility' is presented without accompanying statistics (p-values, effect sizes, confidence intervals, or exact test details), and no table or figure reports these values, undermining assessment of whether the changes are reliable or clinically meaningful.

    Authors: We agree that the statistical details supporting the pre-post claim were insufficiently reported. In the revised Results section we will include the full analysis: the specific test (paired t-test or non-parametric equivalent), exact p-value, effect size, and 95% confidence interval. We will add a table presenting pre- and post-study means, standard deviations, and test statistics for coping flexibility in both conditions. This will allow readers to evaluate reliability and practical significance directly. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Results] Results section: With total N=20 split across conditions, the reported advantages for the Gross-guided group on counterfactual generation, if-then plans, and implementation lack power analysis or correction for multiple qualitative coding outcomes, making it unclear whether these differences are robust or could be artifacts of small-sample variability.

    Authors: We acknowledge the limitations imposed by the small sample. In the revision we will add a post-hoc power analysis for the between-group comparisons on the qualitative measures. For the multiple coding outcomes we will report inter-rater reliability and note that the measures were derived from the pre-specified theoretical framework; we will either apply a conservative correction or present the results as exploratory with appropriate caution in the text. The language describing advantages for the Gross-guided condition will be tempered to reflect sample-size constraints while retaining the observed patterns and their triangulation with quantitative data. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: empirical user study without derivations or self-referential reductions

full rationale

The paper reports an in-the-wild randomized journaling study (N=20) that operationalizes existing frameworks (Transtheoretical Model and Gross's Emotion Regulation Process Model) to test a reflection-to-action system. No equations, fitted parameters, predictions, or first-principles derivations are present that could reduce to inputs by construction. Claims rest on direct pre-post observations and between-condition differences in self-reported and coded outcomes, with no self-citation load-bearing steps, ansatzes smuggled via prior work, or renaming of known results as novel unification. The central evidence is triangulated empirical data from the 15-day design, which is self-contained against external benchmarks and does not invoke uniqueness theorems or fitted inputs called predictions.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

The paper relies on established psychological theories as axioms and introduces a new module without independent evidence beyond the study itself.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The Transtheoretical Model (TTM) accurately describes stages of behavior change including Preparation bridging Contemplation and Action.
    The system is designed to operationalize the Preparation stage of TTM.
  • domain assumption Gross's Emotion Regulation Process Model provides five processes that can be mapped to journaling prompts for effective reflection.
    The Gross-guided condition uses these processes.
invented entities (1)
  • WhatIf-Planning no independent evidence
    purpose: A structured reflection module integrating counterfactual thinking with if-then planning.
    Novel contribution of the paper to bridge reflection and action.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5560 in / 1593 out tokens · 41396 ms · 2026-05-10T18:37:19.556179+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Woźniak, and Paweł W

    Marit Bentvelzen, Jasmin Niess, Mikołaj P. Woźniak, and Paweł W. Woźniak. 2021. The Development and Validation of the Technology-Supported Reflection Inven- tory. InProceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1–8. doi:10.1145/3411764.3445673

    work page doi:10.1145/3411764.3445673 2021

  2. [2]

    Woźniak, Pia S.F

    Marit Bentvelzen, Paweł W. Woźniak, Pia S.F. Herbes, Evropi Stefanidi, and Jasmin Niess. 2022. Revisiting Reflection in HCI: Four Design Resources for Technologies that Support Reflection.Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol.6, 1, Article 2 (2022), 27 pages

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    George A Bonanno and Chad L Burton. 2013. Regulatory flexibility: An individ- ual differences perspective on coping and emotion regulation.Perspectives on Psychological Science8, 6 (2013), 591–612

    work page 2013

  4. [4]

    Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using Thematic Analysis in Psy- chology.Qualitative Research in Psychology3, 2 (2006), 77–101. doi:10.1191/ 1478088706qp063oa

    work page 2006

  5. [5]

    Carver and Michael F

    Charles S. Carver and Michael F. Scheier. 1982. Control Theory: A Useful Con- ceptual Framework for Personality–Social, Clinical, and Health Psychology.Psy- chological Bulletin92, 1 (1982), 111–135. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.92.1.111

    work page doi:10.1037/0033-2909.92.1.111 1982

  6. [6]

    Carver and Michael F

    Charles S. Carver and Michael F. Scheier. 1998.On the Self-Regulation of Behavior. Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139174794

    work page doi:10.1017/cbo9781139174794 1998

  7. [7]

    Crozier and Catherine M

    Sarah E. Crozier and Catherine M. Cassell. 2016. Methodological considerations in the use of audio diaries in work psychology: Adding to the qualitative toolkit. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology89, 2 (2016), 396–419. doi:10.1111/joop.12132

    work page doi:10.1111/joop.12132 2016

  8. [8]

    Doré, Jennifer A

    Bryan P. Doré, Jennifer A. Silvers, and Kevin N. Ochsner. 2016. Toward a Person- alized Science of Emotion Regulation.Social and Personality Psychology Compass 10, 4 (2016), 171–187. doi:10.1111/spc3.12240

    work page doi:10.1111/spc3.12240 2016

  9. [9]

    Angela Lee Duckworth, Heidi Grant, Benjamin Loew, Gabriele Oettingen, and Peter M Gollwitzer. 2011. Self-regulation strategies improve self-discipline in adolescents: Benefits of mental contrasting and implementation intentions.Edu- cational Psychology31, 1 (2011), 17–26

    work page 2011

  10. [10]

    Thomas Ehring and Edward R. Watkins. 2008. Repetitive Negative Thinking as a Transdiagnostic Process.Psychological Bulletin134, 6 (2008), 822–848

    work page 2008

  11. [11]

    Kai Epstude and Neal J. Roese. 2008. The Functional Theory of Counterfactual Thinking.Personality and Social Psychology Review12, 2 (2008), 168–192. doi:10. 1177/1088868308316091

    work page 2008

  12. [12]

    Expo. 2024. Expo Go. https://expo.dev. Mobile application framework for running React Native projects

    work page 2024

  13. [13]

    Gollwitzer

    Peter M. Gollwitzer. 1999. Implementation Intentions: Strong Effects of Simple Plans.American Psychologist54, 7 (1999), 493–503

    work page 1999

  14. [14]

    Macchione, Autographs, Memorabilia, and the Aesthetics of Collecting, in: H

    Adam M. Grant and Jihae Shin. 2012. Work Motivation: Directing, Energizing, and Maintaining Effort (and Research). InThe Oxford Handbook of Human Motivation, Richard M. Ryan (Ed.). Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. doi:10. 1093/oxfordhb/9780195399820.013.0028 Online edition accessed 27 Nov. 2025

    work page arXiv 2012

  15. [15]

    James J. Gross. 1998. The Emerging Field of Emotion Regulation: An Integrative Review.Review of General Psychology2, 3 (1998), 271–299

    work page 1998

  16. [16]

    James J. Gross. 2015. The Extended Process Model of Emotion Regulation: Elabo- rations, Applications, and Future Directions.Psychological Inquiry26, 1 (2015), 130–137

    work page 2015

  17. [17]

    Chenxu Hao, Tiffany Matej Hrkalovic, Daniel Balliet, Hayley Hung, and Bernd Dudzik. 2025. Technologies Supporting Self-Reflection on Social Interactions: A Systematic Review. InProceedings of IUI 2025. ACM

    work page 2025

  18. [18]

    Gyuwon Jung and Uichin Lee. 2025. CounterStress: Enhancing Stress Coping Planning through Counterfactual Explanations in Personal Informatics. (2025)

    work page 2025

  19. [19]

    Tsukasa Kato. 2012. Development of the Coping Flexibility Scale: Evidence for the coping flexibility hypothesis.Journal of Counseling Psychology59, 2 (2012), 262–273. doi:10.1037/a0027770

    work page doi:10.1037/a0027770 2012

  20. [20]

    Tsukasa Kato. 2020. Coping Flexibility: Execution and Adjustment of Coping. Stress and Health36, 4 (2020), 375–383. doi:10.1002/smi.2946

    work page doi:10.1002/smi.2946 2020

  21. [21]

    Tsukasa Kato. 2020. Examination of the Coping Flexibility Hypothesis Using the Coping Flexibility Scale-Revised.Frontiers in Psychology11 (2020), 561731

    work page 2020

  22. [22]

    Kaufman, Mengya Xia, Gregory Fosco, Mona Yaptangco, Chloe R

    Erin A. Kaufman, Mengya Xia, Gregory Fosco, Mona Yaptangco, Chloe R. Skid- more, and Sheila E. Crowell. 2016. The Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale Short Form (DERS-SF): Validation and replication in adolescent and adult samples. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment38, 3 (2016), 443–455

    work page 2016

  23. [23]

    Taewan Kim, Seolyeong Bae, Hyun Ah Kim, Su-Woo Lee, Hwajung Hong, Chanmo Yang, and Young-Ho Kim. 2024. MindfulDiary: Harnessing Large Language Model to Support Psychiatric Patients’ Journaling. InProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’24) (CHI ’24). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–13. d...

    work page doi:10.1145/3613904.3641952 2024

  24. [24]

    Nora Rebekka Krott and Gabriele Oettingen. 2018. Mental contrasting of counter- factual fantasies attenuates disappointment, regret, and resentment.Motivation and Emotion42, 1 (2018), 17–36

    work page 2018

  25. [25]

    James R Lewis. 2018. The system usability scale: past, present, and future.Inter- national Journal of Human–Computer Interaction34, 7 (2018), 577–590

    work page 2018

  26. [26]

    Caldwell, and Susan Nolen-Hoeksema

    Sonja Lyubomirsky, Neill D. Caldwell, and Susan Nolen-Hoeksema. 1998. Effects of rumination and distracting responses on dysphoric moods: A replication and extension.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology75, 1 (1998), 166–177. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.166

    work page doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.166 1998

  27. [27]

    L. C. Michl, K. A. McLaughlin, K. Shepherd, and S. Nolen-Hoeksema. 2013. Rumi- nation as a Mechanism Linking Stressful Life Events to Symptoms of Depression and Anxiety: Longitudinal Evidence in Early Adolescents and Adults.Journal of Abnormal Psychology122, 2 (2013), 339–352. doi:10.1037/a0031994

    work page doi:10.1037/a0031994 2013

  28. [28]

    Heinz, Ashmita Kunwar, Eunsol Soul Choi, Xuhai Xu, Joanna Kuc, Jeremy F

    Subigya Nepal, Arvind Pillai, William Campbell, Talie Massachi, Michael V. Heinz, Ashmita Kunwar, Eunsol Soul Choi, Xuhai Xu, Joanna Kuc, Jeremy F. Huckins, et al. 2024. MindScape Study: Integrating LLM and Behavioral Sensing for Personalized AI-Driven Journaling Experiences.Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologi...

    work page 2024

  29. [29]

    Wisco, and Sonja Lyubomirsky

    Susan Nolen-Hoeksema, Blair E. Wisco, and Sonja Lyubomirsky. 2008. Rethinking Rumination.Perspectives on Psychological Science3, 5 (2008), 400–424. doi:10. 1111/j.1745-6924.2008.00088.x

    work page arXiv 2008

  30. [30]

    Gabriele Oettingen, Doris Mayer, A Timur Sevincer, Elizabeth J Stephens, Hyeon- ju Pak, and Meike Hagenah. 2009. Mental contrasting and goal commitment: The mediating role of energization.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin35, 5 (2009), 608–622

    work page 2009

  31. [31]

    Harshit Papneja and Neeraj Yadav. 2025. Self-disclosure to conversational AI: a literature review, emergent framework, and directions for future research. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing29 (2025), 119–151. doi:10.1007/s00779-024- 01823-7

    work page doi:10.1007/s00779-024- 2025

  32. [32]

    Prochaska and Wayne F

    James O. Prochaska and Wayne F. Velicer. 1997. The Transtheoretical Model of Health Behavior Change.American Journal of Health Promotion12, 1 (1997), 38–48

    work page 1997

  33. [33]

    Neal J. Roese. 1997. Counterfactual Thinking.Psychological Bulletin121, 1 (Jan. 1997), 133–148. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.121.1.133

    work page doi:10.1037/0033-2909.121.1.133 1997

  34. [34]

    Batuhan Sayis and Hatice Gunes. 2024. Technology-assisted Journal Writing for Improving Student Mental Wellbeing: Humanoid Robot vs. Voice Assistant. In Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction

    work page 2024

  35. [35]

    Sefidgar, Matthew Jörke, Jina Suh, Koustuv Saha, Shamsi Iqbal, Gon- zalo Ramos, and Mary Czerwinski

    Yasaman S. Sefidgar, Matthew Jörke, Jina Suh, Koustuv Saha, Shamsi Iqbal, Gon- zalo Ramos, and Mary Czerwinski. 2024. Improving Work–Nonwork Balance with Data-Driven Implementation Intention and Mental Contrasting.Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact.8, CSCW1, Article 74 (2024)

    work page 2024

  36. [36]

    Petr Slovak and Sean A. Munson. 2024. HCI Contributions in Mental Health: A Modular Framework to Guide Psychosocial Intervention Design. InProceedings of CHI 2024. doi:10.1145/3613904.3642624

    work page doi:10.1145/3613904.3642624 2024

  37. [37]

    Inhwa Song, SoHyun Park, Sachin R Pendse, Jessica Lee Schleider, Munmun De Choudhury, and Young-Ho Kim. 2025. ExploreSelf: Fostering User-driven Exploration and Reflection on Personal Challenges with Adaptive Guidance by Large Language Models. InProceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’25). ACM

    work page 2025

  38. [38]

    Gertraud Stadler, Gabriele Oettingen, and Peter M Gollwitzer. 2010. Intervention effects of information and self-regulation on eating fruits and vegetables over two years.Health psychology29, 3 (2010), 274

    work page 2010

  39. [39]

    Thompson, Matthew T

    Renee J. Thompson, Matthew T. Boden, and Ian H. Gotlib. 2017. Emotional clarity as a buffer in the association between perceived stress and depressive symptoms. Cognition and Emotion31, 8 (2017), 1461–1470. doi:10.1080/02699931.2016.1249464

    work page doi:10.1080/02699931.2016.1249464 2017

  40. [40]

    Trapnell and Jennifer D

    Paul D. Trapnell and Jennifer D. Campbell. 1999. Private self-consciousness and the five-factor model of personality: Distinguishing rumination from reflection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology76, 2 (1999), 284–304. doi:10.1037/ 0022-3514.76.2.284

    work page 1999

  41. [41]

    Troy and Iris B

    Allison S. Troy and Iris B. Mauss. 2021. Emotion Regulation and Mental Health: The Road Ahead.Current Opinion in Psychology39 (2021), 1–5

    work page 2021

  42. [42]

    2024.MAXQDA: Qualitative Data Analysis Software

    VERBI Software. 2024.MAXQDA: Qualitative Data Analysis Software. Berlin, Germany. https://www.maxqda.com

    work page 2024

  43. [43]

    How important is this part of your life?

    Edward R Watkins. 2020. Reflecting on rumination: Consequences, causes, mech- anisms.Behaviour Research and Therapy127 (2020), 103573. CHI ’26, April 13–17, 2026, Barcelona, Spain Kim et al. Supplementary Materials This supplementary section provides additional methodological, system, and qualitative details that support the main paper. We include (1) a f...

    work page 2020