Research on individual differences in repression, defined as the tendency not to experience negative thoughts and feelings, has led to the development of numerous measures. This article compares six common measures of repression: 1) the Byrne Repression-Sensitization scale, 2) Weinberger's Repressive Coping Scale, 3) the Weinberger Adjustment Inventory, 4) Miller's Monitoring and Blunting Scale, 5) Sackeim and Gur's Self-Deception Questionnaire, and 6) Paulus's Self-Deception Questionnaire. The measures were highly intercorrelated. A maximum likelihood factor analysis revealed that all but the Monitoring and Blunting Scale loaded on a single factor. Moreover, most of the measures correlated significantly with anxiety and social desirability. The instruments were then compared to assess their relative practical utility. Although all but the Monitoring and Blunting scale appear to measure the same construct, the Weinberger Adjustment Inventory appears to be the most psychometrically sound measure of dispositional repression.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ErdelyiM. H.GoldbergB., Let's Not Sweep Repression Under the Rug: Toward a Cognitive Psychology of Repression, in Functional Disorders of Memory, KihlstromJ. F.EvansF. J. (eds.), Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 355–402, 1979.
2.
HolmesD. S., Investigations of Repression: Differential Recall of Material Experimentally or Naturally Associated with Ego Threat, Psychological Bulletin, 81, pp. 632–653, 1974.
3.
KihlstromJ. F., Conscious, Subconscious, Unconscious: A Cognitive Perspective, in The Unconscious Reconsidered, BowerK. S.MeichenbaumD. (eds.), Wiley & Sons, New York, pp. 149–211, 1984.
4.
KihlstromJ. F.HoytI. P., Repression, Dissociation, and Hypnosis, in Repression and Dissociation: Implications for Personality Theory, Psychopathology, and Health, SingerJ. L. (ed.), University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 181–208, 1990.
5.
SingerJ. L. (ed.), Repression and Dissociation: Implications for Personality Theory, Psychopathology, and Health, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1990.
6.
ByrneD., The Repression-Sensitization Scale: Rationale, Reliability, and Validity, Journal of Personality, 29, pp. 334–349, 1961.
7.
ByrneD.BarryJ.NelsonD., Relation of the Revised Repression-Sensitization Scale to Measures of Self-Description, Psychological Reports, 13, pp. 323–334, 1963.
8.
BonannoG. A.SingerJ. L., Repressive Personality Style: Theoretical and Methodological Implications for Health and Pathology, in Repression and Dissociation: Implications for Personality Theory, Psychopathology, and Health, SingerJ. L. (ed.), University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 435–470, 1990.
9.
WeinbergerD. A.SchwartzG. E.DavidsonR. J., Low-Anxious, High-Anxious, and Repressive Coping Styles: Psychometric Patterns and Behavioral and Physiological Responses to Stress, Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 88, pp. 369–380, 1979.
10.
WeinbergerD. A., Social-Emotional Adjustment in Older Children and Adults. I. Psychometric Properties of the Weinberger Adjustment Inventory, Department of Psychology, Stanford University, unpublished manuscript, 1989.
11.
WeinbergerD. A.SchwartzG. E., Distress and Restraint as Superordinate Dimensions of Self-reported Adjustment: A Typological Perspective, Journal of Personality, 58, pp. 381–417, 1990.
12.
GurR. C.SackeimH. A., Self-Deception: A Concept in Search of a Phenomenon, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, pp. 147–169, 1979.
13.
PaulusD. L., Two-component Models of Socially Desirable Responding, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, pp. 598–609, 1984.
14.
PaulusD. L.ReidD. B., Enhancement and Denial in Socially Desirable Responding, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, pp. 307–317, 1991.
15.
SackeimH. A.GurR. C., Self-deception, Other-deception, and Self-reported Psychopathology, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 47, pp. 213–215, 1979.
16.
MillerS. M., Monitoring and Blunting: Validation of a Questionnaire to Assess Styles of Information Seeking under Threat, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, pp. 345–353, 1987.
17.
GolinS.HerronE. W.LakotaR.ReineckL., Factor Analytic Study of the Manifest Anxiety, Extraversion, and Repression-Sensitization Scales, Journal of Consulting Psychology, 31, pp. 564–569, 1967.
18.
SloughN.KleinknechtR. A.ThorndikeR. M., Relationship of the Repression-Sensitization Scales to Anxiety, Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, pp. 378–379, 1984.
19.
SullivanP. F.RobertsL. K., Relationship of Manifest Anxiety to Repression-Sensitization on the MMPI, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 33, pp. 763–764, 1969.
20.
AltrocchiJ.ParsonsO. A.DickoffH., Changes in Self-ideal Discrepancy in Repressors and Sensitizers, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 61, pp. 67–72, 1960.
21.
EriksenC. W.DavidsA., The Meaning and Clinical Validity of the Taylor Anxiety Scale and the Hysteria-psychasthenia Scales from the MMPI, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 50, pp. 135–137, 1955.
22.
PageH. A.MarkowitzG., The Relationship of Defensiveness to Rating Scale Bias, Journal of Psychology, 40, pp. 431–435, 1955.
23.
SpielbergerC. D.SarasonI. G., Stress and Anxiety, Hemisphere, Washington, D.C., 1975.
24.
EysenckH. J., On Extraversion, Wiley, New York, 1973.
25.
BendigA. W., The Development of a Short Form of the Manifest Anxiety Scale, Journal of Consulting Psychology, 20, p. 384, 1956.
26.
CrowneD. P.MarloweD., The Approval Motive: Studies in Evaluative Dependence, Wiley, New York, 1964.
