A brief repression-sensitization scale was included in a mail survey of response to public information designed to help people save water and mitigate a water shortage. Hypotheses predicting repressers, moderate scorers, and sensitizers differ in recall and use of the information were rejected, even though respondents rated water shortage as an important matter that could affect them.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ByrneD. (1964) Repression-sensitization as a dimension of personality. In MaherB. A. (Ed.), Progress in experimental personality research. Vol. 1. New York: Academic Press. Pp. 169–220.
2.
GossettJ. T. (1964) An experimental demonstration of Freudian repression proper. (Doctoral dissertation, Univer. of Arkansas, Fayetteville, 1964)Dissertation Abstracts, 25(03), 2047.
3.
IngoldC. H. (1983) Locus of control and use of public information. Psychological Reports, 64, 603–607.
4.
Simpson-HousleyP. (1978) Locus of control, repression-sensitization and earthquake hazard. Otago, New Zealand: Univer. of Otago, Department of Geography. (Working Paper 36)
5.
TemponeV. J. (1962) Differential thresholds of repressers and sensitizers as a function of a success and failure experience. (Doctoral dissertation, Univer. of Texas, Austin, 1962)Dissertation Abstracts, 24(10), 4292.
6.
UllmanL. P. (1962) An empirically derived MMPI scale which measures facilitation-inhibition of recognition of threatening stimuli, Journal of Clinical Psychology, 18, 127–132.
7.
UllmanL. P.WeissR. L.KrasnerL. (1963) The effect of verbal conditioning of emotional words on recognition of threatening stimuli, Journal of Clinical Psychology, 19, 182–183.
