Sensitizers were hypothesized to perform significantly better than repressors on a short-term memory task. Ss were presented with pairs of visual displays for brief durations (.75 sec. per display). Each display contained one word, picture, geometric design, and color. After 0, 7.5, or 15 sec., Ss were instructed to recall these display elements. Differences in rate of recall between repression-sensitization (R-S) groups (as measured by the Byrne R-S scale) were not found to be significant. Results were discussed with reference to previous findings (Bergquist, et al., 1968).
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BergquistW. H.An interpersonal-cognitive approach to repression-sensitization: individual differences in short term memory and conceptual skills. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Univer. of Oregon, 1970.
2.
BergquistW. H.LewinsohnP. M.SueD. W.FlippoJ. R.Short- and long-term memory for various types of stimuli as a function of repression-sensitization. Journal of Experimental Research in Personality, 1968, 3, 28–38.
3.
BernhardsonC. S.Dogmatism, defense mechanisms, and social desirability responding. Psychological Reports, 1967, 20, 511–513.
4.
BootzinR. R.NatsoulasT.Evidence for perceptual defense uncontaminated by response bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1965, 1, 461–468.
5.
BootzinR. R.StephensM. W.Individual differences and perceptual defense in the absence of response bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1967, 6, 408–412.
6.
ByrneD.The Repression-Sensitization Scale: rationale, reliability, and validity. Journal of Personality, 1961, 29, 334–349.
7.
ByrneD.Repression-sensitization as a dimension of personality. In MaherB. A. (Ed.), Progress in experimental personality research. New York: Academic Press, 1964. Pp. 169–220.
8.
GormanA. M.Recognition memory for nouns as a function of abstractness and frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1961, 61, 23–29.
LibertyP. G.LunneborgC. E.AtkinsonG. C.Perceptual defense, dissimulation, and response styles. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1964, 28, 529–537.
11.
McReynoldsP.UllmannC. P.Differential recall of pleasant and unpleasant words as a function of anxiety. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1964, 20, 79–80.
12.
MillerG. A.The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 1956, 63, 81–97.
13.
PehleJ. W.Repression-sensitization and psychological adjustment. Dissertation Abtracts, 1966, 27, 1629.
14.
SchillT.AlthoffM.Auditory perceptual thresholds for sensitizers, defensive and nondefensive repressors. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1968, 27, 935–938.
15.
SilberL. D.GrebsteinL. C.Repression-sensitization and social desirability responding. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1964, 28, 559.
16.
TemponeV. J.Extension of the repression-sensitization hypothesis to success and failure experience. Psychological Reports, 1964, 15, 39–45.
17.
TollmanG. A.Multiple associative responses and cognitive-perceptual changes in repressors and sensitizers. Dissertation Abstracts, 1967, 27, 2881.
18.
Van EgerenL.Repression and sensitization: sensitivity and recognition criteria. Journal of Experimental Research in Personality, 1968, 3, 1–8.
19.
WinerB. J.Statistical principles in experimental design. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1962.
