Anxiety, Defense, and Attention Control

  • Uwe Hentschel
  • Manfred Kießling
  • Arn Hosemann
Chapter
Part of the Springer Series in Neuropsychology book series (SSNEUROPSYCHOL)

Abstract

Having read the title of this chapter, the reader might expect a rather short story, some kind of condensed, shorthand information on the theoretical and empirical interrelatedness of the variables in question. This could be seen as an easy task, but our experience during the time of planning the study, the data recording, and interpretation has convinced us that for the story to be understandable, it will have to be rather complex. The first reason for this concerns the theoretical part of the study and its relation to the experimental design; the second is more a question of adequately describing the necessary technical details.

Keywords

Defense Mechanism Trait Anxiety Attention Control Reaction Formation Information Load 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Becker, P. (1982). Interaktions-Angst-Fragebogen (IAF) [Interaction-AnxietyQuestionnaire, IAF]. Weinheim, Germany, Beltz Test.Google Scholar
  2. Birbaumer, N. (1977). Angst als Forschungsgegenstand der experimentellen Psychologie [Anxiety as research topic in experimental psychology]. In N. Birbaumer (Ed.), Psychophysiologie der Angst [Psychophysiology of anxiety] (pp. 1–14). Munich: Urban & Schwarzenberg.Google Scholar
  3. Born, C., Lazarus-Mainka, G., & Stölting, E. (1980). Die paradoxe Reaktion nichtängstlicher Personen [The paradoxical reaction of non-anxious persons]. Zeitschrift Für Experimentelle und Angewandte Psychologie, 27, 369–383.Google Scholar
  4. Brunswik, E. (1955). Representative design and probabilistic theory in a functional psychology. Psychological Review, 62,193–217.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cattell, R.B., & Scheier, I.H. (1961). The meaning and measurement of neuroticism and anxiety. New York: Ronald.Google Scholar
  6. Chance, M.R.A. (1976). Social attention: Society and mentality. In M.R.A. Chance & R.A. Larsen (Eds.), The social structure of attention (pp. 315–333). London: Wiley.Google Scholar
  7. Cooper, L.A., & Regan, D.T. (1982). Attention, perception, and intelligence. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of human intelligence (pp. 123–169). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Dixon, N.F. (1981). Preconscious processing. Chichester, UK: Wiley.Google Scholar
  9. Dixon, N.F., Hentschel, U., & Smith, G.J.W. (1986). Subliminal perception and microgenesis in the context of personality research. In A. Angleitner, A. Furnham, & G. van Heck (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe: Vol. 2. Current trends and controversies (pp. 239–255). Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
  10. Dixon, W.D., Brown, M.B., Engleman, L., Frane, J.W., Hill, M.A., Jennrich, R.I., & Toporek, J.D. (Eds.). (1981). BMDP statistical software 1981. Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  11. Draguns, J.G. (1984). Why microgenesis? An inquiry into the motivational sources of going beyond the information given. In G.J.W. Smith, W.D. Fröhlich, & U. Hentschel (Eds.), From private to public reality (pp. 5–16). Bonn: Bouvier.Google Scholar
  12. Eriksen, C.W., & Pierce, J. (1968). Defense mechanisms. In E.F. Borgatta & W W Lambert (Eds.), Handbook of personality theory and research (pp. 1007–1040). Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  13. Eysenck, M.W. (1982). Attention and arousal. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  14. Fleischman, E.A., & Hempel, W.E. (1956). Factorial analysis of complex psy-chomotor and related skills. Journal of Applied Psychology, 40, 96–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Freud, A. (1946). The Ego and the mechanisms of defense. New York: Interna-tional Universities Press.Google Scholar
  16. Freud, S. (1949). The neuro-psychoses of defence. In J. Strachey (Ed. and Trans.), The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 3, pp. 43–61). London: Hogarth Press. (Original work published 1894)Google Scholar
  17. Freud, S. (1959). Inhibitions, symptoms and anxiety. In J. Strachey (Ed. and Trans.), The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Signund Freud (Vol. 20, pp. 77–172). London: Hogarth Press. (Original work published 1926)Google Scholar
  18. Fröhlich, W.D. (1978). Stress, anxiety and the control of attention. In C.D. Spielberger & I.G. Sarason (Eds.), Stress and anxiety (Vol. 5, pp. 99–130). Washington DC: Hemisphere.Google Scholar
  19. Fröhlich, W.D. (1983). Perspektiven der Angstforschung [Perspectives of anxiety research]. In H. Thomae (Ed.), Enzyklopädie der Psychologie. Serie: Motivation und Emotion, Bd. 2: Psychologie der Motive [Encyclopedia of psychology. Series: motivation and emotion, Vol. 2: Psychology of motives] (pp. 110–320). Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
  20. Glanzmann, P.G., & Fröhlich, W.D. (1986). Anxiety and covert changes of attention control. In U. Hentschel, G. Smith, & J.G. Draguns (Eds.), The roots of perception (pp. 381–400). Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  21. Glass, A.L., Holyoak, K.J., & Santa, J.L. (1979). Cognition. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  22. Gleser, G.C., & Ihilevich, D. (1969). An objective instrument for measuring defense mechanisms. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,33, 51–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gray, J.A. (1971). The psychology of fear and stress. London: World University Library.Google Scholar
  24. Hall, R.C.W. (1980). Anxiety. In R.C.W. Hall (Ed.), Psychiatric presentation of medical illness (pp. 13–35). Lancaster, England: MTP Press.Google Scholar
  25. Heinrich, D., & Spielberger, C.D. (1982). Anxiety and complex learning. In H.W. Krohne & L. Laux (Eds.) Achievement, stress and anxiety (pp. 145–165). Washington, DC: Hemisphere.Google Scholar
  26. Hentschel, U. (1984). Microgenesis and process description. In W.D. Fröhlich, G. Smith, J.G. Draguns, & U. Hentschel (Eds.), Psychological processes in cognition and personality (pp. 59–70). Washington, DC: Hemisphere.Google Scholar
  27. Hentschel, U. (1988, June). Empirical referents for the concept of defense. Paper presented at the Fourth European Conference on Personality. Stockholm, Sweden.Google Scholar
  28. Hentschel, U., Kießling, M. & Wiemers, M. (in press). Fragebogen zu Konfliktbewältigungsstrategien [Conflict solving strategy inventory]. Weinheim: Beltz Test.Google Scholar
  29. Hentschel, U., & Kießling, M. (1990). Are defense mechanisms valid predictors of performance on cognitive tasks? In G. van Heck, S. Hampson, J. Reykowsky, & J. Zakrzewski (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe: Vol. 3. Foundations, models, and inquiries (pp. 203–223). Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
  30. Hentschel, U., & Schneider, U. (1986). Psychodynamic personality correlates of creativity. In U. Hentschel, G.J.W. Smith, & J.G. Draguns (Eds.), The roots of perception (pp. 249–275). Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  31. Hentschel, U., Smith, G.J.W., & Draguns, J.G. (1986). Subliminal perception, microgenesis and personality. In U. Hentschel, G.J.W. Smith, & J.G. Draguns (Eds.), The roots of perception (pp. 3–36). Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  32. Hentschel, U., & Ternes, G. (1984). Moderating effects of trait anxiety on electordermal reactions in different learning conditions. Psychological Reports, 54, 803–809.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hunt, E. (1980). Intelligence as an information processing concept. Journal of British Psychology, 71, 449–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. James, W. (1890). Principles of psychology. New York: Holt.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Janke, W. (1986). Angst: Definition und somatische Grundlagen [Anxiety: definition and somatic basis]. In W. Janke & P. Netter (Eds.), Angst und Psychopharmaka [Anxiety and psychopharmacy] (pp. 19–42). Stuttgart, Germany: Kohlhammer.Google Scholar
  36. Johanson, A.M., Risberg, J., Silfverskiöld, P., & Smith, G.J.W. (1986). Regional changes in cerebral blood flow during increased anxiety in patients with anxiety neurosis. In U. Hentschel, G.J.W. Smith, & J.G. Draguns (Eds.), The roots of perception (pp. 353–360). Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  37. Kahnemann, D., Ben-Ishai, R., & Cotan, M. (1973). Relation of a test of attention to road accidents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 58, 113–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Karsten, A. (1928). Psychische Sättigung [Psychic satiation] Psychologische Forschung, 10, 142–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kießling, M., & Hentschel, U. (1989). Literaturrecherche: Persönlichkeitsvariablen als Prädiktoren für das Verhalten im Strassenverkehr [Review: Personality variables as predictors for traffic behavior]. Report for the Daimler-Benz Research Unit in West-Berlin, University of Mainz. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  40. Klebelsberg, D. (1982). Verkehrspsychologie [Traffic-psychology]. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  41. Kragh, U. (1955). The actual-genetic model of perception-personality. Lund, Sweden: Gleerup.Google Scholar
  42. Kragh, U. (1969). Manual till DMT—Defense Mechanism Test [Manual for the DMT—Defense Mechanism Test]. Stockholm: Skandinaviska Testförlaget.Google Scholar
  43. Kragh, U. (1970a). The Defense Mechanism Test (DMT) as a method for diagnosis and personnel selection. In U. Kragh & G.J.W. Smith (Eds.), Percept-genetic analysis (pp. 179–189). Lund, Sweden: Gleerup.Google Scholar
  44. Kragh, U. (1970b). Defensive organisation in percept-genesis. In U. Kragh & G. Smith (Eds.), Percept-genetic analysis (pp. 105–118). Lund, Sweden: Gleerup.Google Scholar
  45. Kragh, U. (1985). Manual for the Defense Mechanism Test (DMT). Stockholm: Persona.Google Scholar
  46. Kreitler, S., & Kreitler, H. (1984). Meaning assignment in perception. In W.D. Frölich, G.J.W. Smith, J.G. Draguns, & U. Hentschel (Eds.), Psychological processes in cognition and personality (pp. 173–191). Washington, DC: Hemisphere.Google Scholar
  47. Lewin, K. (1935). A dynamic theory of personality Selected papers New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  48. Linschoten, J. (1959). Aktualgenese und heuristisches Prinzip [Microgenesis and the principle of heuristics]. Zeitschrift für experimentelle und angewandte Psychologie, 6, 449–473.Google Scholar
  49. Meldman, M.J. (1970). Diseases of attention and perception. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  50. Moscovici, S. (1961). La psychanalyse, son image et son public. Etude sur la représentation sociale de la psychanalyse [The psychoanalysis, its image and its public. A study on the social representation of psychoanalysis]. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  51. Murray, H.A. (1938). Explorations in personality. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Neuman, T. (1967). Personlighet och anpassning till militärflygning (II). Försvarsmekanismer som stabila personlighetsstrukturer: Tvâ studier över DMT-seriers reliabilitet. [Personality and adaptation to military flying (II). Defense mechanisms as stable personality structures: Two studies on the reliability of the DMT-series] MPI-rapport No. 52. Google Scholar
  53. Neuman, T. (1978). Dimensionering och validering av perceptgenesens förvarsmekanismer. En hierarkisk analys mot pilotens stressbeteende [Structure and validity of perceptgenetic defense mechanisms. A hierarchical analysis of the behavior of pilots under stress]. FOA rapport (No. 55020-H6). Stockholm: Fösvarets forskningsanstalt.Google Scholar
  54. Pribram, K.H. (1981). The brain as the locus of cognitive controls on action. In G. d’Ydewalle & W. Lens (Eds.), Cognition in human motivation and learning (pp. 141–157). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  55. Prinz, W. (1986). Looking at some New Look problems from an information processing point of view. In U. Hentschel, G.J.W. Smith, & J.G. Draguns (Eds.), The roots of perception (pp. 419–426). Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  56. Rompe, K., & Heißing, B. (1985). Menschliches Fehlverhalten und technische Unfallursachen [Human errors and technical reasons for accidents]. In K. Rompe (Ed.), Verkehrssicherheit und Wirksystem Fahrer-Fahrzeug-Umwelt [Traffic safety and systems effects of driver-car-outside conditons] (pp. 115–138). Cologne, Germany: TÜV Rheinland.Google Scholar
  57. Schlesinger, K. (1980–1981). On the creative process and the human capacity to construe. International Journal of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy,8, 483–500.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Smith, G.J.W., Fröhlich, W.D., & Hentschel, U. (Eds.). (1984). From private to public reality. Bonn: Bouvier.Google Scholar
  59. Smith, G.J.W., Johnson, G., & Almgren, P.E. (1982). MCT—Metakon- trasttekniken [MCT—Metacontrasttechnique]. Stockholm: Psykologiförlaget.Google Scholar
  60. Smith, G.J.W., Kragh, U., & Hentschel, U. (1980). Perceptgenetische Vefahren: Historische und methodologische Übersicht [Perceptgenetic techniques: Historical and methodological overview]. In U. Hentschel & G. Smith (Eds.), Experimentelle Persönlichkeitspsychologie [Experimental personality psychology] (pp. 31–63). Wiesbaden, Germany: Akademische Verlagsge sellschaft.Google Scholar
  61. Spielberger, C.D., Gorsuch, R.L, & Lushene, R.E. (1970). Manual for the State–Trait Anxiety Inventory. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
  62. Taylor, J.A. (1953). A personality scale of manifest anxiety. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,48, 285–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Uexküll, J. von (1921). Umwelt und Innenwelt der Tiere [Outer and inner world of animals]. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  64. Vaernes, R. (1982). The Defense Mechanism Test predicts inadequate performance under stress. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology,23, 37–43.Google Scholar
  65. Vaillant, G.E. (1974). Adaptation to life. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
  66. Weizsäcker, V. von (1947). Der Gestaltkreis [Gestalt region theory] (3rd ed.). Stuttgart, Germany: Thieme.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Uwe Hentschel
  • Manfred Kießling
  • Arn Hosemann

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations