You reported that 11% of cases were identified as outliers but ultimately included them in the final analysis, citing marginal differences when excluded. Given the small sample size (N=99), can you justify this decision and provide the results of the analysis with these outliers excluded? Their inclusion likely exerts a disproportionate influence on your regression models, potentially undermining the validity of your key findings.
Despite being a core hypothesis and a key contribution of the study, your emotional regulation strategies (cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression) accounted for only 0.6% of incremental variance in STS, and all interaction terms were non-significant. Furthermore, in your model, expressive suppression was not a significant predictor of STS. Given these null results, which contradict your stated hypotheses and much of the literature you cite, what is the primary scientific contribution of the study beyond reporting a high prevalence of STS? How do you interpret the lack of any moderating or even direct effect of these well-established strategies?