The convenience sample consisted of Brazilians from a region of the Brazilian northeast. Of these, 632 are university students and 80 are users of a public health service, totaling 712 volunteers. The analyses were performed with the total number of volunteers (n = 712). Descriptive analyses revealed participants aged between 18 and 60 years old (M = 23.8; SD = 8.13). In terms of marital status, the majority were single (83.66%), with an incomplete higher education (90.96%). Concerning the higher education courses, 48.62% were taking psychology and 51.38% were taking other undergraduate degrees. From the sample, 11.70% of participants reported by self-relation a diagnosis of depression, and 14.60% reported having made at least one suicide attempt. All public health service participants self-reported a diagnosis of depression (Table 1).

Table 1

Variable	n	%	M	SD
Marital Status
Single	594	83.66
Married/Stable union	93	13.10
Divorced/Separated	21	2.96
Widowed	2	0.28
Schooling
Incomplete elementary	11	1.55
Complete elementary	4	0.56
Incomplete high school	2	0.28
Complete high school	14	1.98
Incomplete higher education	644	90.96
Complete higher education	26	3.67
Specialization	5	0.71
Master’s/Doctorate	2	0.28
Course
Psychology	335	48.62
Others	354	51.38
Diagnosis
Without depression	617	86.90
With depression	86	11.70
Not reported	9	1.40
Years of diagnosis			16.79	8.16
Suicide attempt	101	14.60
Number of suicide attempts			1.72	1.04

Identification Questionnaire - The identification questionnaire consisted of questions designed to investigate sociodemographic, gender, education, and marital status variables, as well clinical information like as depression diagnosis and a history of suicide attempts. All questions and instruments are self-reported.

Escala de Desregulação Emocional Versão Adulto (EDEA, Emotional Dysregulation Scale, Adult Version, Baptista et al., 2023) - The Emotional Dysregulation Scale was developed to assess the respondent’s emotional self-regulation strategies and characteristics related to the sadness emotion. It was constructed from the Emotional Self-Regulation Scale, Adult version (EARE-A, Noronha et al., 2019). The EDEA is composed of 15 items arranged in 4 factors called: (1) Appropriate Coping Strategies (e.g. "I try to calm down") with reliability through coefficient α = 0.72; (2) Externalization of Aggressiveness (e.g. "I want to hit others") α = 0.92; (3) Pessimism (e.g. "I believe that everything will get worse"), α = 0.96; and (4) Paralysis (e.g. "I don’t know what to do") α = 0.68. Regarding the internal consistency for the general EDEA scale, the results were obtained through Cronbach’s alpha (α = 0.94) and McDonald’s omega (ω = .96) (Cremasco, et al., 2020; Noronha, et al., 2019).

Escala Baptista de Depressão Versão Adulto (EBADEP-A, Baptista Depression Scale, Adult Version, Baptista, 2012) - This is a self-administered instrument for the assessment of depressive symptoms. It is unifactorial, with 45 items divided into two sentences per item, with a four-point Likert-type response scale (e.g. "I solve my problems x I feel less able to face my problems"). The score for each item ranges from zero to three. Psychometric data were obtained based on the Item Response Theory and on the Classical Test Theory. Initially, regarding the fit parameters of the model, both with regard to items and people, the values were considered to indicate good adequacy, with a misfit percentage considered low. Regarding reliability, the EBADEP-A showed excellent reliability indices, both in relation to Cronbach’s alpha (α = 0.95) and the actual reliability found according to the Rasch model (α = 0.92). The EBADEP-A can be applied both individually and collectively.

Escala de Percepção do Suporte Social (EPSUS, Social Support Perception Scale, Adult Version, Cardoso & Baptista, 2015) - assesses how much people perceive social relationships in terms of affectivity, social interactions, and practical aids that help them in the decision-making process and coping with problems. It is intended for people aged 18 to 62 years and can be applied both individually and collectively, consisting of 36 items, grouped into four factors, namely: affective (composed of 17 items; e.g. "They show me affection"; α = 0.92); social interactions (five items, e.g. "They invite me to social activities"; α = 0.75); instrumental (seven items, e.g. "They provide me with as much food as I need"; α = 0.82) and coping with problems (seven items; "They discuss my problems"; α = 0.83).

Inventário de Percepção de Suporte Familiar (IPSF, Family Support Perception Inventory, Baptista, 2009) - The purpose of this inventory is to identify the individual’s perception of family support and family relationships in terms of affection, autonomy, and adaptation among the members. It can be applied to the basic family structure (father, mother, siblings, others) or to the foster family (uncles, godparents, others), which will not necessarily be nuclear or traditional in structure. The perception of the current family can also be evaluated, whether the individual is married or cohabiting, with or without children. Intended for people between 11 and 57 years of age, the instrument has 42 items distributed in three dimensions: Affective-Consistent (composed of 21 items; e.g. "The people of my family know when something bad has happened to me, even if I don’t say"; α = 0.91); Family Adaptation (13 items, scored inversely; e.g. "In my family we fight and yell at each other"; α = 0.83); and Family Autonomy (eight items; e.g. "My family allows me to be the way I want to be"; α = 0.80). The IPSF can be applied both individually and collectively.

The database used for the present study is composed of two convenience samples: (1) university students and (2) users of a public health service. The project was submitted to the Research Ethics Committee of Universidade São Francisco (CAAE: 42917015.4.0000.5514, protocol nº 2.493.832). After approval, the project was presented to the Health Department of the State of Sergipe and to a private university in a large city in the interior of the State of Sergipe, and received consent from both. Participants who agreed received, read, and signed the Free and Informed Consent Form. Important: this occurs only after institutional approval.

Data collection with university students was carried out in groups, collectively, and the instruments were applied in classrooms. With the public health service users, the instruments were applied individually. The collections took place during the 2018 school year, and both samples responded to all instruments. It took approximately 50 minutes for application and explanations about the research and instruments.

For the data analysis, samples were joined, descriptive statistics in relation to the sample were initially observed, followed by correlation matrices between the totals of the scales, and later a Path Analysis was carried out with the constructs, Family Support and Social Support, predicting Emotional Regulation (mediation), and having the symptoms of depression as an outcome variable. After this procedure, mean comparisons were performed using Student’s t-test for the total scores of the scales used and the prior diagnosis of depression and suicide attempt variables. The analyses were performed using the IBM®SPSS® version 21 and AMOS programs (Arbuckle, 2014).

The correlation analysis significantly (p < 0.001) demonstrated that ED was positively associated with depressive symptoms (r = 0.75), and negatively associated with PSS (r = -0.45) and PFS (r = -0.46). It was possible to assess that depression was negatively correlated with PSS (r = -0.53) and PFS (r = -0.42) in the sample (Table 2).

Table 2

Variable and measurement	EDEA	EPSUS	IPSF	EBADEP
Escala de Desregulação Emocional Versão Adulto	1	-0.45***	-0.46***	0.75***
Escala de Percepção do Suporte Social		1	0.46***	-0.53***
Inventário de Percepção de Suporte Familiar			1	-0.42***
Escala Baptista de Depressão Versão Adulto				1

Note: ***p < 0.001. EDEA: Escala de Desregulação Emocional Versão Adulto; IPSF: Inventário de Percepção de Suporte Familiar; EPSUS: Escala de Percepção do Suporte Social; EBADEP-A: Escala Baptista de Depressão Versão Adulto.

The Path Analysis model is presented in Figure 1. In the proposed model, both the perception of family support (PFS) and the perception of social support (PSS) were used as exogenous variables, with depression mediated by Emotional Dysregulation (ED) as the endogenous variable.

Figure 1. Note: EDEA: Escala de Desregulação Emocional Versão Adulto; IPSF: Inventário de Percepção de Suporte Familiar; EPSUS: Escala de Percepção do Suporte Social; EBADEP-A: Escala Baptista de Depressão Versão Adulto.

In Figure 1, it is possible to observe that PFS had a weak negative direct relationship with Depression (β = -0.07) and PSS had a negative relationship with this variable (β = -0.22). Furthermore, PFS also predicted ED (β = -0.28) as did PSS (β = -0.33). Conversely, ED proved to be able to positively predict Depression with high magnitude (β = 0.62). That is, according to the indications of these analyses, individuals with low ED are at greater risk for depression, predicted by family and social support, which predict emotional regulation. The analysis estimates are presented in Table 3.

In addition, analyses were conducted only with undergraduate students. The number of participants was reduced from 712 to 644, but there were only small variations in age (M = 23.8; SD = 8.13 versus M = 22.61; SD = 6.6). Minor changes occurred on the path from PSS to ED (β = -0.33 to β = -0.35) and ED to Depression (β = -0.62 to β = -0.63). Thus, the total sample (n = 712) was maintained.

Table 3

Associate between variables			Estimate	S.E.	C.R.	p
EDEA	🡠	IPSF	-0.275	0.030	-6.666	*
EDEA	🡠	EPSUS	-0.333	0.026	-8.0079	*
EBADEP	🡠	IPSF	-0.071	0.050	-2.217	0.027
EBADEP	🡠	EPSUS	-0.219	0.044	-6.786	*
EBADEP	🡠	EDEA	0.624	0.066	20.751	*

Note: *p <0.001. EDEA: Escala de Desregulação Emocional Versão Adulto; IPSF: Inventário de Percepção de Suporte Familiar; EPSUS: Escala de Percepção do Suporte Social; EBADEP-A: Escala Baptista de Depressão Versão Adulto.

For the diagnosis of depression, participants with a diagnosis presented higher scores in the EBADEP-A scale (M = 77.56; SD = 31.23; t = -9.76; d = 1.42 p < 0.001) and in ED (M = 43.13; SD = 12.13; t = 12.08; d = 1.45 p < 0.001). Participants without a diagnosis of depression had higher scores in PFS (M = 55.55; SD = 17.09; t = 4.12; d = 0.56 p < 0.001) and PSS (M = 76.97; SD = 18.82; t = 4.87; d = 0.58 p < 0.001).

Considering suicide attempts, of the 101 participants that responded positively, there was a prevalence of females (n = 77). The mean for depression and ED was higher for those that responded positively in relation to a suicide attempt history (M = 67.24; SD = 27.44; t = 10.35; d = 1.14; p < 0.001; M = 43.18; SD = 11.68; t = -10.44; d = 1.18 p < 0.001, respectively). Those with higher means in PFS (M = 55.94, SD = 17.52; t = -4.93; d = 0.59 p < 0.001), and PSS (M = 77.12 SD = 19.78, t = -5.70; d = 0.66 p < 0.001) answered the question negatively (Table 4).

Table 4

Depression diagnosis	With depression		Without depression		Statistics
	M	SD	M	SD	t	df	Cohen’s d	p
Escala Baptista de Depressão Versão Adulto	77.56	31.23	37.93	24.00	-9.76	70.19	1.42	*
Inventário de Percepção de Suporte Familiar	45.21	19.59	55.55	17.09	4.12	79.38	0.56	*
Escala de Percepção do Suporte Social	61.65	26.07	76.97	18.82	4.87	84.40	0.58	*
Escala de Desregulação Emocional Versão Adulto	43.13	12.13	26.00	11.36	12.08	535	1.45	*
Suicide attempt	Yes		No		Statistics
	M	SD	M	SD	t	df	Cohen’s d	p
Escala Baptista de Depressão Versão Adulto	67.24	27.44	37.33	24.89	10.35	631	1.14	*
Inventário de Percepção de Suporte Familiar	45.93	15.96	55.94	17.52	-4.93	582	0.59	*
Escala de Percepção do Suporte Social	63.66	20.44	77.12	19.78	-5.70	570	0.66	*
Escala de Desregulação Emocional Versão Adulto	43.18	11.68	29.22	11.82	-10.44	588	1.18	*

Note: *p < 0.001.