Among the personality characteristics which Rokeach hypothesized to be associated with dogmatism were repressing and denying defense mechanisms. To test this hypothesis two independent studies (Ns = 76, 138), conducted at the Universities of Texas and Illinois, employed the Repression-Sensitization (R-S) Scale and Rokeach's Dogmatism and Opinionation Scales. In each sample there was a significant positive correlation between dogmatism and repression-sensitization (r = .36, p < .01; r = .44, p < .001). Thus, dogmatism was associated with sensitizing rather than with repressing defenses. Possible explanations for the relationship are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AltrocchiJ.ParsonsO. A.DickoffH.Changes in self-ideal discrepancy in repressers and sensitizers. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1960, 61, 67–72.
2.
AndersonC. C.A developmental study of dogmatism during adolescence with reference to sex differences. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1962, 65, 132–135.
3.
BirdC.MonachesiE. D.Prejudice and discontent. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1954, 49, 29–35.
4.
ByrneD.The Repression-Sensitization Scale: rationale, reliability, and validity. Journal of Personality, 1961, 29, 334–349.
5.
ByrneD.Repression-sensitization as a dimension of personality. In MaherB. A. (Ed.), Progress in experimental personality research. Vol. I. New York: Academic Press, 1964. Pp. 169–220.
6.
ByrneD.BarryJ.NelsonD.Relation of the revised Repression-Sensitization Scale to measures of self-description. Psychological Reports, 1963, 13, 323–334.
7.
DavisonL. A.Adaptation to a threatening stimulus. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, 1963.
8.
GossettJ. T.An experimental demonstration of Freudian repression proper. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Arkansas, 1964.
9.
HuttL. D.Jr.An experimental investigation of perceptual defense and vigilance: prediction from the Byrne scale of repression-sensitization. Paper read at Southwest. Psychol. Assn, Oklahoma City, April, 1965.
10.
JoyV. L.Repression-sensitization and interpersonal behavior. Paper read at Amer. Psychol. Assn, Philadelphia, August, 1963.
11.
LibertyP. G.Jr.LunneborgC. E.AtkinsonG. C.Perceptual defense, dissimulation, and response styles. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1964, 28, 529–537.
12.
LomontJ. F.The repression-sensitization dimension in relation to anxiety responses. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1965, 29, 84–86.
13.
RokeachM.The open and closed mind. New York: Basic Books, 1960.
14.
SilberL. D.GrebsteinL. C.Repression-sensitization and social desirability responding. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1964, 28, 559.
15.
TabachnickB. R.Some correlates of prejudice toward Negroes in elementary age children. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 1962, 100, 193–203.
16.
TemponeV. J.Extension of the repression-sensitization hypothesis to success and failure experience. Psychological Reports, 1964, 15, 39–45. (a)
17.
TemponeV. J.Some clinical correlates of repression-sensitization. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1964, 20, 440–442. (b)
18.
UllmannL. P.An empirically derived MMPI scale which measures facilitation-inhibition of recognition of threatening stimuli. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1962, 18, 127–132.
19.
UllmannL. P.McReynoldsP.Differential perceptual recognition in psychiatric patients: empirical findings and theoretical formulation. Paper read at Amer. Psychol. Assn, Philadelphia, August, 1963.
20.
VeldmanD. J.WorchelP.Detensiveness and self-acceptance in the management of hostility. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1961, 63, 319–325.
