To test whether Freud's theory of repression actually works when using negative and neutral words in a laboratory setting.

Background research

Sigmund Freud developed a lot of theories, which have formed the basis of the psychodynamic approach to psychology. Freud’s theories have been derived from what he learnt from his patients when they underwent therapy. The theory that we are interested in so as to observe it, is Freud’s theory of personality. Freud described his approach as ‘depth psychology’ and likened himself to an archaeologist digging away layers of the human mind.

Freud says that there are three main parts to personality and these are shown in the diagram below:

ID (I want)

Tension EGO (negotiates the tension)

SUPEREGO (You can’t)

The ID is our desire for things or our want. We are born with this want and there is nothing we can do to try and avoid this. The ID is pulling one side towards itself but the other side is the SUPEREGO, which is saying that you can’t so it is acting as our conscience. We are not born with our conscience but rather are taught laws of behaviour by our parents while we are growing up. The ID and SUPEREGO build up tension between them so the EGO comes into place to negotiate the tension between them.

One way that Freud says this is done is through dreams. An example of this is that if you have just had an argument with one of your parents say your father, and you go to sleep annoyed and dream about strangling him to release this tension but when you wake up you feel a bit guilty. Freud says that we replace the father for any kind of object like a tree. In our dream we take an axe and chop down this tree and by doing this we let go of tension and when waking up we don’t feel any guilt because we have not hurt our parents in any way.

The idea of releasing tension through dreams works in harmony with Freud’s idea of ego-defences. These are unconscious mechanisms by which we protect ourselves from painful or guilty thoughts and feelings. The following are some of Freud’s defence mechanisms:

Denial, which occurs when smokers refuse to admit to themselves that they are endangering there lives by smoking
Displacement, which takes place when we redirect emotions, most commonly anger, away from those who have caused them on to a third party. This can be seen when a parent comes home from work and the manager has been getting on their nerves but they do not say anything to the manager but rather take out on the kids and act moody all day.
Regression, in which we use childlike strategies like crying helplessly or nail biting in order to find comfort when under stress.
Rationalisation, where we may find an acceptable excuse for something which is really quite unacceptable. An example could be a ‘cover story’ which preserves your self-image.
Reaction formation, is where you feel the very opposite of what you truly (unconsciously) feel.
Regression, is when we engage in behaviour characteristics of an earlier stage of development. An example is taking to your bed when upset or eating when your depressed.
Sublimation, is a form of displacement, which a substitute activity is found to express an unacceptable impulse. The activity is usually socially acceptable, if not desirable.
The last I will talk about and will be basing my work on for defence mechanisms is repression, and this is where we force a dangerous /threatening memory/idea/feeling/wish out of consciousness and making it unconscious. Often used in conjuction with one or more other defences; one of the earliest used by the child. An example of this is a 5-6 year old child repressing its incestuous desire for the opposite-sex parent as part of its attempt to resolve the Oedipus complex.

Levinger and Clarke (1961) found that subjects tended to forget more word associations to emotional rather than neutral words. Kline (1981) regarded this study as providing 'irrefutable evidence for the Freudian concept of repression'.

Rationale

The reason I am going to conduct this experiment is ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Rationale

The reason I am going to conduct this experiment is to see whether or not Freud’s theory of repression actually works. By testing whether participants forget more negative words then neutral will show whether there is a link between defense mechanisms and repression in particular. This is because if they forgot more negative words Freud would say this was because the participant’s would try to repel the negative associations. If this does prove to be the case then it will show that Freud was right in believing that repression is a defense mechanism.

Aim

To test whether Freud’s theory of repression actually works when using negative and neutral words in a laboratory setting.

Hypothesis

H1: In the two conditions more neutral associated words will be recalled than negative associated words.

H0: There will be no difference between the two conditions.

Method and Design

We are going to test Freud’s theory of repression using a laboratory experiment. The reason for this is because there is an obvious independent variable and dependent variable. Another reason that we will be using a lab experiment is that we will be using repeated measures design. By repeating the experiment this will eliminate the problem of individual differences.

Variables

The independent variable is Word type, which had two levels, negative and neutral words. Negative words were operationalised as words, which evoked negative emotions, and the neutral words were operationalised as words, which did not evoke any sort of emotions, which could also be considered as a type of control.

The dependent variable is memory, which is operationalised as the number of correct words recalled. To explain further this relates to the number of correct associated words recalled.

Participants

A total of 40 people took part in the experiment. 20 males and 20 females. The age range was 16-20 years old. The target population was the students of Harrow. It was an opportunity sample due to the fact that this was a quick an easy way of recruiting participants. All the participants volunteered to take part in the experiment and before they took part they were told that they could withdraw from the experiment whenever they felt they needed too. This was done in order to ensure that none of the ethical guidelines of the BPS were violated. We also realise that harm to the participants is an important aspect, this is why we used participants of whom we had prior knowledge of their previous encounters with negative emotions towards the words. For example, should we have used a member of the public of whom we had no prior knowledge that they had just suffered from depression. The words misery or suffering could have evoked negative emotions on his behalf and we may not have been testing repression but rather neutral words against negative emotions (rather than negative words). This would result in a failure to test the experimental hypothesis.

Apparatus

The materials used were two word lists, consisting of 30 words, 15 neutral and 15 negative words. Each participant was given only one of the two word lists. However, each word list had the same words, except they were counterbalanced so as to eliminate the effect of order effects and also primacy and recency effect. All the words were abstract nouns. Also, standardised instructions, pens, paper were used.

Procedure

Once the participants volunteered to take part in the experiment and then they were taken to a quiet room in order to reduce the level of distraction during the experiment. They were given a set of standardised instructions, which basically explained what they had to do. Also it thanked them for taking part and also stated that should they feel uncomfortable for a certain reason then they could feel free to withdraw from the experiment. Once they were happy with what they were doing they were told orally that they would be given a piece of paper with a list of numbers from 1-30. As we called out the words they had to make paired associations and write the word, which they associated with the given word. Once all 30 words had been called out we gave them another piece of paper consisting of the 30 words, which we had called out. I asked them to write down as many of the associations they made with each word they could remember. Once they finished I would take it and that would be the end of the experiment. Even though this was written on the standardised instructions I explained it aloud in order to clarify.

All students gathered their own data and then we pulled all the data together to form an overall result.

Controls

Standardised instructions were given so that the experiment is fair and to ensure that all the participants are given the same information. The counterbalancing of the word order reduced primacy and recency effects, and also order effects. Using the same number from each sex controlled for gender. Most importantly, the same words were used for every participant so that we can be sure that we were testing repression rather than the effects given from words. Also, another control was the neutral words because they acted as words with no emotions, which could therefore be a base line to compare the negative words to. In addition, the circumstances of the participants was known so we were sure that the words did not evoke negative emotions from previous experiences therefore, we may not have been testing repression but rather neutral words against negative emotions (rather than negative words).

Results

Summary Table

Mean recall of associated Negative/Neutral words

As we can see from the table there were more neutral words recalled than negative words. The difference between the means is 3.20 words. This shows that participants were able to recall more words associated to neutral words than to negative words, which would agree with Freud’s theory of repression. This would lend support to the alternate hypothesis.

Additional graphical description of results

The graph above clearly shows that more words associated to neutral words than to negative words.

Discussion

Validity

From one aspect we can say that the results are valid because we found that participants tended to forget the negative associated words than the neutral. Which would agree with Freud’s theory of repression as they are repressing the negative and emotional words, but the question which can be asked is whether these are really emotional words and are we really testing repression? We say this because if we look closely at the two types of words: negative and neutral, is it really emotional and neutral? So perhaps the effect was not between neutral/negative but rather between neutral/emotional words. If this were the case this would not be looking at repression at all. Also, we found that it was easier to think of negative associated words than neutral, for example, if I was to say hell, you may think fire instantly but if I said walk then you may find you needed a little longer to find an association. Due to this, the processing that has taken place may help you to remember the associated word. This relates to level of processing, it could be argued that it is easier to recall words, which are processed more deeply than other words. Hence, we would be looking at levels of processing rather than repression.

Suggestions for improved validity

The validity could be improved if a pilot study was conducted before the experiment so that the effects of the levels of processing and the effects of types of words that were used could be minimised and then we could be sure that we are only looking at repression. Another improvement could be that we could also test the effects of positive words because if the resembled that of the neutral words, this would further support Freud’s theory.