• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Behavioral and Brain Sciences >The unified theory of repression
【24h】

The unified theory of repression

机译：统一的压制理论

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Repression has become an empirical fact that is at once obvious and problematic. Fragmented clinical and laboratory traditions and disputed terminology have resulted in a Babel of misunderstandings in which false distinctions are imposed (e.g., between repression and suppression) and necessary distinctions not drawn (e.g., between the mechanism and the use to which it is put, defense being just one). "Repression" was introduced by Herbart to designate the (nondefensive) inhibition of ideas by other ideas in their struggle for consciousness. Freud adapted repression to the defensive inhibition of "unbearable" mental contents. Substantial experimental literatures on attentional biases, thought avoidance, interference, and intentional forgetting exist, the oldest prototype being the work of Ebbinghaus, who showed that intentional avoidance of memories results in their progressive forgetting over time. It has now become clear, as clinicians had claimed, that the inaccessible materials are often available and emerge indirectly (e.g., procedurally, implicitly). It is also now established that the Ebbinghaus retention function can be partly reversed, with resulting increases of conscious memory over time (hypermnesia). Freud's clinical experience revealed early on that exclusion from consciousness was effected not just by simple repression (inhibition) but also by a variety of distorting techniques, some deployed to degrade latent contents (denial), all eventually subsumed under the rubric of defense mechanisms ("repression in the widest sense"). Freudian and Bartlettian distortions are essentially the same, even in name, except for motive (cognitive vs. emotional), and experimentally induced false memories and other "memory illusions" are laboratory analogs of self-induced distortions.
机译：镇压已经成为一个经验事实，这一事实既明显又成问题。支离破碎的临床和实验室传统以及有争议的术语导致误解，造成了错误的区分（例如，压制和抑制之间）和未作的必要区分（例如，机制和使用目的之间的区分，防御）只是一个）。赫尔巴特（Herbart）提出了“镇压”，以指称其他观念在意识斗争中对观念的（非防御性）抑制。弗洛伊德使镇压适应了对“难以忍受”的精神内容的防御性抑制。存在大量有关注意力偏见，回避思维，干扰和故意遗忘的实验文献，最早的原型是埃宾豪斯的著作，这些文献表明，故意避免记忆会导致他们随着时间的推移而逐渐忘记。如临床医生所声称的，现在已经变得很清楚，难以获得的材料通常是可用的，并且是间接地出现的（例如，程序上，隐性上）。现在还确定，Ebbinghaus保留功能可以部分逆转，从而导致意识记忆随着时间的推移而增加（睡眠不足）。弗洛伊德的临床经验很早就表明，意识的排斥不仅受到简单的压制（抑制）的影响，而且还受到多种扭曲技术的影响，其中一些技术被用来降解潜在的内含物（否认），最终被归类为防御机制（“最广泛的镇压”）。弗洛伊德式和巴特利式式的失真在本质上是相同的，除了动机（认知与情感）外，甚至在名称上也是如此，并且实验诱发的错误记忆和其他“记忆错觉”是自我诱发失真的实验室类似物。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号