Despite being relevant to everyday life, empirical evidence concerning the regulation of self-conscious emotions is underrepresented in this field of research. Dual-process approaches have modelled connections between emotions, cognitive emotion regulation, and decision-making behaviour in moral conflicts. Recent findings suggest that habitual and experimentally induced reappraisal – mediated by emotional arousal – is positively associated with consequentialist judgments and choices. The aim of this paper is to investigate the influence of cognitive emotion regulation on decision-making behaviour in everyday moral dilemmas. Which cognitive strategies are used in the regulation of guilt and shame? What effect do they have on different outcomes (emotional experience, decision-making)? To what extent do forms and tactics of reappraisal differ in their effect? In a first step, guilt and shame-triggering dilemmas were developed and selected based on defined criteria. A series of studies looked at the influence of habitual, cognitive emotion regulation, and experimentally manipulated reappraisal on decision-making behaviour in these dilemmas. There was a tendency for functional strategies from the reappraisal family to favour consequentialist choices. The mediation effect of emotional arousal could not be replicated. A second series of studies using exploratory methodology sought to map the phenomenology of reappraisal tactics in a moral decision-making conflict. Using a category ...