SELF-REGULATION, EMOTION EXPRESSION & CLASSROOM ...

Kaufmann et al., 2000). In fact, research has found that cool executive control remains a
critical aspect of readiness and classroom functioning well into primary school and
beyond (Blair, 2002; Gathercole & Pickering, 2000; Fabes et al., 2003; Kurdek & Sinclair,
2000; Rimm-Kaufmann et al., 2000).
Hot executive control. Early research on executive control typically focused on
only the cool, or wholly cognitive, processes of executive control (Zelazo et al., 2010),
while neglecting the consideration that there are scenarios where executive control is
not fully captured by cognitive processes in certain, more emotionally-charged
experiences (Frye, Zelazo, & Palfai, 1995; Hongwanishkul et al., 2005; Walden & Smith,
1997; Zelazo et al., 2010). Recently, there has been growing focus on children’s selfregulation
in situations that are emotionally or motivationally significant, involving
meaningful, relevant rewards and punishers (Hongwanishkul et al., 2005; Zelazo &
Cunnigham, 2007; Zelazo et al., 2010), thus necessitating the consideration of a hot
executive control distinction.
Hot executive control can be referred to as a continuation of cool executive control
with the inclusion of motivational or emotional reaction to stimuli (Carlson, 2007;
Hongwanishkul et al., 2007; Kochanska, Murray, & Harlan, 2000; Murray & Kochanska,
2002; Rothbart & Ahadi, 1994). Hot executive control takes on a more emotional flavor
than cool executive control, and is thought to be elicited by problems that involve the
delaying of gratification, voluntarily inhibiting or activating behavior, resisting negative
or socially unpopular emotions or reappraising the motivational significance of a
10