Page 54 - JCBP-3-4

Journal of Clinical and
Basic Psychosomatics Emotion and blood pressure variability

Table 3. Summary for regression models
Dependent variables Independent variables Regression coefficient (β) Standard error p‑value
Systolic blood pressure range (model 1) Response accuracy −16.08 18.84 0.398
Suppression 0.24 0.24 0.326
Reappraisal −0.23 0.19 0.251
Accuracy by suppression 7.63 3.95 0.060
Accuracy by reappraisal −6.15 3.28 0.067
Systolic blood pressure standard deviation (model 2) Response accuracy −5.43 7.14 0.451
Suppression 0.11 0.09 0.236
Reappraisal −0.10 0.73 0.192
Accuracy by suppression 3.12 1.50 0.043*
Accuracy by reappraisal −2.11 1.24 0.096
Diastolic blood pressure range (model 3) Response accuracy −22.52 14.89 0.138
Suppression 0.08 0.19 0.690
Reappraisal −0.27 0.15 0.082
Accuracy by suppression 3.12 3.10 0.323
Accuracy by reappraisal −5.73 2.59 0.032*
Diastolic blood pressure standard deviation (model 4) Response accuracy −8.59 5.29 0.111
Suppression 0.03 0.07 0.646
Reappraisal −0.11 0.05 0.055
Accuracy by suppression 1.37 1.11 0.225
Accuracy by reappraisal −2.16 0.92 0.023*
Notes: Short-term blood pressure variability indicators were entered into separate regression models as the dependent variables. All regression models
were controlled for covariates, including gender, age, and body mass index. *p<0.05.

A B

Figure 2. The relationships between blood pressure variability and emotion regulation among participants with low and high affective response accuracy.
(A) Positive association between systolic blood pressure standard deviation and expressive suppression among high accuracy individuals. (B) Negative
association between diastolic blood pressure standard deviation and cognitive reappraisal among high accuracy individuals.

the laboratory setting and the face perception task lacked emotional processing at the sensory and perceptual levels
emotional intensity or stress-inducing elements. Therefore, may not elicit ANS responses, as these processes are solely
this null finding suggests that, among healthy populations, cognitive in nature. In contrast, prior studies included

Volume 3 Issue 4 (2025) 48 doi: 10.36922/jcbp.8134