Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Free Access - Register Here

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wenzlaff, R. M.
Right arrow Articles by Bates, D. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Wenzlaff, R. M.
Right arrow Articles by Bates, D. E.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 26, No. 10, 1200-1212 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/0146167200262003

The Relative Efficacy of Concentration and Suppression Strategies of Mental Control

Richard M. Wenzlaff

The University of Texas at San Antonio, rwenzlaff{at}utsa.edu

Danielle E. Bates

The University of Texas at San Antonio

Mental control research has found that attempts to suppress unwanted thoughts can backfire when cognitive demands arise or intentional control subsides. The present research examined the relative efficacy of an alternative form of mental control that involves concentrating on desirable thoughts instead of trying to suppress unwanted material. Using a novel cognitive measure that addresses some of the methodological issues associated with previous suppression research, a series of three studies indicates that a concentration strategy of mental control circumvents the problems associated with thought suppression. The findings are consistent with ironic process theory, which maintains that suppression invokes a monitoring process that is exclusively focused on goal-antithetical thoughts, whereas a concentration strategy involves a broader range of monitored thoughts that is less likely to undermine mental control.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
D. A. Reich and R. D. Mather
Busy Perceivers and Ineffective Suppression Goals: A Critical Role for Distracter Thoughts
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, May 1, 2008; 34(5): 706 - 718.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
E. H. Gordijn, I. Hindriks, W. Koomen, A. Dijksterhuis, and A. Van Knippenberg
Consequences of Stereotype Suppression and Internal Suppression Motivation: A Self-Regulation Approach
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, February 1, 2004; 30(2): 212 - 224.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
R. M. Wenzlaff and J. P. LePage
The Emotional Impact of Chosen and Imposed Thoughts
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, December 1, 2000; 26(12): 1502 - 1514.
[Abstract] [PDF]