The habitual way I’d handle someone exhibiting negative emotions was to try to reassure / help them.

Upset about being turned down for a job? I’d remind them that they’re competent, and there are other jobs, and so on. Rationalisations about why they needn’t be upset (sometimes accompanied by an explicit ‘don’t be upset’).

But what I’ve learnt is that this is almost universally suboptimal—because it implicitly gets received as the notion that their current state (being upset) is invalid or wrong in some way.

Instead I’ve learnt to start with a response that simply validates that their emotion makes sense. “I’m sorry”. “This must be really hard”. “Ooft, yeah, this sucks”. “I totally get why you’re feeling that way”. A compassionate gesture.

Are there some people who want pragmatism first without validation?

Maybe, but I’m not convinced. Even people who don’t realise they want validation seem to benefit once they receive it. And it’s not mutually exclusive: I propose validating first. After that, pragmatism might be called for, in which case it’ll be easier for the recipient to hear once they know you’re on side with how they’re feeling.

What if I don’t think their emotion is valid?

Then I’m looking at it through my lens, not theirs. All you’re validating is: given your situation and your exact thoughts about the situation, it makes sense that you would feel this way. And that’s true 100% of the time (otherwise they wouldn’t be feeling that way!)