According to Dennett:According to Dennett:

Aware1-the ability to talk about a fact, wish, proposition (P)

Aware2-behave in a manner that an observer would claim

you were taking P into account

Aware1-the ability to talk about a fact, wish, proposition (P)

Aware2-behave in a manner that an observer would claim

you were taking P into account

The Theory of Repressed MemoryThe Theory of Repressed Memory

Triple Threat

Sheila Krogh-Jespersen Alicia Briganti Victoria Cox

Triple Threat

Sheila Krogh-Jespersen Alicia Briganti Victoria Cox

Outline:Outline:

Repression and Awareness

Negative Views

Inhibition

Repression and Awareness

Negative Views

Inhibition

Repression a.k.a. Motivated ForgettingRepression a.k.a. Motivated Forgetting

Motivated Non-Learning

Motivated Overwriting of Memories

Retrieval Failures

Motivated Non-Learning

Motivated Overwriting of Memories

Retrieval Failures

vehicles

According to Dennett:According to Dennett:

Aware1-the ability to talk about a fact, wish, proposition (P)

Aware2-behave in a manner that an observer would claim

you were taking P into account

Aware1-the ability to talk about a fact, wish, proposition (P)

Aware2-behave in a manner that an observer would claim

you were taking P into account

car

Illustrations:Illustrations:

Automated Driving/Animals/Self-Regulating Machines

Sperling’s (1960) T-scope-presents the difference in perception (aware2) and verbalization (aware1)

Automated Driving/Animals/Self-Regulating Machines

Sperling’s (1960) T-scope-presents the difference in perception (aware2) and verbalization (aware1)

bus

Visual Input:Visual Input:

Weiskrantz (1980)- lack of awareness1 of the visual input, yet could still recognize

pictures

Sakheim et al (1979)-effect of hypnotism

Sperry (1968) and Gazzaniga(1970)-split brain awareness

Weiskrantz (1980)- lack of awareness1 of the visual input, yet could still recognize

pictures

Sakheim et al (1979)-effect of hypnotism

Sperry (1968) and Gazzaniga(1970)-split brain awareness

train

Unconscious Processes:Unconscious Processes:

1. Fast, routine information processing 2. Physiological reflexes 3. “Slip of the tongue” 4. “Tics” 5. Behavior tendencies 6. Changing behaviors/attitudes 7. What influences behavior?

1. Fast, routine information processing 2. Physiological reflexes 3. “Slip of the tongue” 4. “Tics” 5. Behavior tendencies 6. Changing behaviors/attitudes 7. What influences behavior?

airplane

What about Retrieval Failures?What about Retrieval Failures?

“They [memories] are like “responses” waiting for the right “stimulus” to release them”

Free Association and Accuracy Issues

“They [memories] are like “responses” waiting for the right “stimulus” to release them”

Free Association and Accuracy Issues

Bicycle

Posthypnotic Amnesia:Posthypnotic Amnesia:

Have awareness2 without awareness1

Bitterman & Marcuse (1945)-no memory, yet enhanced GSR

Obligatory vs. Optional Memory Performance

Have awareness2 without awareness1

Bitterman & Marcuse (1945)-no memory, yet enhanced GSR

Obligatory vs. Optional Memory Performance

motorcycle

“True Amnesia”:“True Amnesia”:

2/3 of the adult population have no response to posthypnotic amnesia suggestions

Spanos & Bodorik (1977)-about 40- to 60% of suggested amnesia subjects could be broken

What about the 1/6 of the population who show “true amnesia”?

2/3 of the adult population have no response to posthypnotic amnesia suggestions

Spanos & Bodorik (1977)-about 40- to 60% of suggested amnesia subjects could be broken

What about the 1/6 of the population who show “true amnesia”?

boat

Nonrecaller Categories:Nonrecaller Categories:

1. Mouths Locked Shut (conscious)

2. Lack of Motivation (conscious)

3. Distracting Thoughts (conscious)

4. “Really Trying” (????????)

1. Mouths Locked Shut (conscious)

2. Lack of Motivation (conscious)

3. Distracting Thoughts (conscious)

4. “Really Trying” (????????)

Roller skates

Bowers’ Final Thoughts:Bowers’ Final Thoughts:

Post-hypnotic amnesia may not be the best model for repression

Does Gordon Bower Believe in Repression?

Post-hypnotic amnesia may not be the best model for repression

Does Gordon Bower Believe in Repression?

moped

WARNING:WARNING:

“The concept of repression has not been validated with experimental research and its use may be hazardous to the accurate interpretation of clinical behavior.”

“The concept of repression has not been validated with experimental research and its use may be hazardous to the accurate interpretation of clinical behavior.”

Fruits

Holmes’ Take on 60 Years of ResearchHolmes’ Take on 60 Years of Research

Has the role of “critic” at the conference on “Repression, Dissociation, and the Warding off of Conflictual Cognitive Contents”

Claims there is no reliable evidence in support of repression.

(Holmes, 1974)

Has the role of “critic” at the conference on “Repression, Dissociation, and the Warding off of Conflictual Cognitive Contents”

Claims there is no reliable evidence in support of repression.

(Holmes, 1974)

Apple

ELEMENTS OF REPRESSIONELEMENTS OF REPRESSION1. “Repression is the selective forgetting of

materials that cause the individual pain”2. “Repression is not under voluntary

control”3. “Repressed material is not lost but

instead is stored in the unconscious and can be returned to consciousness if the anxiety that is associated with the memory is removed”

(Freud [1915] 1957)

1. “Repression is the selective forgetting of materials that cause the individual pain”

2. “Repression is not under voluntary control”

3. “Repressed material is not lost but instead is stored in the unconscious and can be returned to consciousness if the anxiety that is associated with the memory is removed”

(Freud [1915] 1957)

Kiwi

DIFFERENTIAL RECALL:PLEASANT vs. UNPLEASANT EXPERIENCES

DIFFERENTIAL RECALL:PLEASANT vs. UNPLEASANT EXPERIENCES

Early claim: unpleasant events are less likely to be recalled; therefore, they are being repressed

(Jerslid, 1931; Meltzer, 1931; Stagner, 1931)

Intensity of affect

Alternative explanation: Reduced recall of unpleasant experiences is due to a decline in the affective intensity over time associated with the experience, rather than to repression.

(Holmes, 1970)

Early claim: unpleasant events are less likely to be recalled; therefore, they are being repressed

(Jerslid, 1931; Meltzer, 1931; Stagner, 1931)

Intensity of affect

Alternative explanation: Reduced recall of unpleasant experiences is due to a decline in the affective intensity over time associated with the experience, rather than to repression.

(Holmes, 1970)

Strawberry

DIARY STUDYDIARY STUDY

Measured differential recall and changes in affect for pleasant and unpleasant experiences.

Affective intensity of unpleasant experiences had greater declines than pleasant experiences, and as a consequence, unpleasant experiences were less likely to be recalled.

Why the decline in intensity of unpleasant experiences?

Measured differential recall and changes in affect for pleasant and unpleasant experiences.

Affective intensity of unpleasant experiences had greater declines than pleasant experiences, and as a consequence, unpleasant experiences were less likely to be recalled.

Why the decline in intensity of unpleasant experiences?

Peach

TWO EXPLANATIONSTWO EXPLANATIONS

The experience may not have been as bad as the subject thought at the time of the experience, or it did not result in the severe consequences that were expected.

Since people think more about intense experiences than neutral ones, and repeated exposure results in more positive attitudes toward the experience, attention given to negative experiences results in their becoming less unpleasant and less intense.

The experience may not have been as bad as the subject thought at the time of the experience, or it did not result in the severe consequences that were expected.

Since people think more about intense experiences than neutral ones, and repeated exposure results in more positive attitudes toward the experience, attention given to negative experiences results in their becoming less unpleasant and less intense.

Orange

DIFFERENTIAL RECALL:COMPLETED AND INCOMPLETED TASKS

DIFFERENTIAL RECALL:COMPLETED AND INCOMPLETED TASKS Some tasks completed, some not

Incompleted tasks = high stress

Stress = repression

Evidence for repression?

Some tasks completed, some not

Incompleted tasks = high stress

Stress = repression

Evidence for repression?Cantaloupe

REPRESSING AND UNCOVERING MEMORIESREPRESSING AND UNCOVERING MEMORIES

Claim: Repression follows stress, but repressed material can be returned to consciousness with the removal of stress.

(e.g., Zeller, 1950, 1951; Merrill, 1954)

Alternative explanation: Decreased recall following stress could be due to interference rather than repression.

(Holmes, 1972)

Claim: Repression follows stress, but repressed material can be returned to consciousness with the removal of stress.

(e.g., Zeller, 1950, 1951; Merrill, 1954)

Alternative explanation: Decreased recall following stress could be due to interference rather than repression.

(Holmes, 1972) Pear

INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCESINDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES

R-S Scale (Byrne, Barry, and Nelson, 1963)

Complete and Incomplete task recall paradigm and the need for achievement

(Coopersmith, 1960; Weiner, 1965)

Social desirability and anxiety (e.g., Davis and Schwartz, 1987; Weinberger, Schwartz, and Davidson, 1979)

R-S Scale (Byrne, Barry, and Nelson, 1963)

Complete and Incomplete task recall paradigm and the need for achievement

(Coopersmith, 1960; Weiner, 1965)

Social desirability and anxiety (e.g., Davis and Schwartz, 1987; Weinberger, Schwartz, and Davidson, 1979)

Grapes

PERCEPTUAL DEFENSEPERCEPTUAL DEFENSE

Primary repression

Stressful vs. non-stressful words (Eriksen and Pierce, 1968)

Primary repression

Stressful vs. non-stressful words (Eriksen and Pierce, 1968)

Banana

Where do we go from here?Where do we go from here?

“Let’s Not Sweep Repression under the Rug”

(Erdelyi and Goldberg, 1979)

“Let’s Now Sweep Repression under the Rug”

(Mischel, 1986 [534])

“Let’s Not Sweep Repression under the Rug”

(Erdelyi and Goldberg, 1979)

“Let’s Now Sweep Repression under the Rug”

(Mischel, 1986 [534])

The Case for InhibitionThe Case for Inhibition

Vehicles

Question and HypothesisQuestion and Hypothesis

What mechanisms permit people to limit awareness of interfering memories?

Executive control mechanisms→

Response-override situations →

Inhibitory processes

(Levy and Anderson 2002)

What mechanisms permit people to limit awareness of interfering memories?

Executive control mechanisms→

Response-override situations →

Inhibitory processes

(Levy and Anderson 2002)Car

Evidence of inhibitory processesEvidence of inhibitory processes

Two memory situations:

Need for selection during retrieval Need to stop retrieval

Two memory situations:

Need for selection during retrieval Need to stop retrieval

Bus

Selective Memory RetrievalSelective Memory Retrieval Inhibitory control might be recruited to

override competition so that a target trace can be retrieved.

Demonstrated by the ‘retrieval practice paradigm’

Inhibitory control might be recruited to override competition so that a target trace can be retrieved.

Demonstrated by the ‘retrieval practice paradigm’

Train

retrieval practice paradigm

retrieval practice paradigm

*percent items recalled correctly on final cued recall test

Airplane

Stopping retrieval: think-no-thinkStopping retrieval: think-no-think Subjects studied pairs of weakly related

words Recall and say aloud the response word Or avoid thinking of the response word

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

Recall of “no-think” words was impaired compared to baseline pairs and was

independent of original vs. novel cue.

Subjects studied pairs of weakly related words

Recall and say aloud the response word Or avoid thinking of the response word

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

Recall of “no-think” words was impaired compared to baseline pairs and was

independent of original vs. novel cue.

BicycleAnderson & Green 2001

Hmmm…Hmmm…

Do these results provide a mechanistic basis for the voluntary form of repression proposed by Freud?

Actively inhibited?

What else could be at work other than inhibitory processes?

Do these results provide a mechanistic basis for the voluntary form of repression proposed by Freud?

Actively inhibited?

What else could be at work other than inhibitory processes?

Motorcycle

Kihlstom’s ResponseKihlstom’s Response

Repression operates unconsciously on threatening mental contents.

Repressed material continues to affect the person’s experience

Repressed memories have to be recoverable

(Kihlstrom 2002)

Repression operates unconsciously on threatening mental contents.

Repressed material continues to affect the person’s experience

Repressed memories have to be recoverable

(Kihlstrom 2002)

Boat

Reply from Anderson and LevyReply from Anderson and Levy Evaluation of Freudian theory no our

goal – but Freud did write about repression in terms that sometimes allow for active intentional process.

After only 1 minute of active suppression, subjects were up to 10% worse at recalling these memories

(Anderson & Levy 2002)

Evaluation of Freudian theory no our goal – but Freud did write about repression in terms that sometimes allow for active intentional process.

After only 1 minute of active suppression, subjects were up to 10% worse at recalling these memories

(Anderson & Levy 2002)Roller Skates

Reply…Reply…

With time and repeated effort, trying to keep an unwanted memory out of awareness does render that memory less accessible.

(Anderson & Levy 2002)

With time and repeated effort, trying to keep an unwanted memory out of awareness does render that memory less accessible.

(Anderson & Levy 2002)

Moped

Smith et.al. finds…Smith et.al. finds…

Filler items reduced the recall of critical items as much as 63% on a free recall test

Appropriate cues produced nearly complete recovery on a cued recall test

Forgetting effect does not appear to involve inhibition

Same results for emotional, memorable and distinctive words

Filler items reduced the recall of critical items as much as 63% on a free recall test

Appropriate cues produced nearly complete recovery on a cued recall test

Forgetting effect does not appear to involve inhibition

Same results for emotional, memorable and distinctive words