Until quite recently in the history of science and philosophy, mental life was considered entirely or mainly conscious in nature (e.g., Descartes’ cogito and John Locke’s “mind first” cosmology). How one views the power and influence of the unconscious relative to conscious modes of information processing largely depends on how one defines the unconscious. Regardless of the fate of his specific model, Freud’s historic importance in championing the powers of the unconscious mind is beyond any doubt. Over the years, empirical tests have not been kind to the specifics of the Freudian model, though in broad-brush terms the cognitive and social psychological evidence does support Freud as to the existence of unconscious mentation and its potential to impact judgments and behavior (see Westen, 1999). 31), not the rigorous scientific experimentation on generally applicable principles of human behavior that inform the psychological models. However, the data from which Freud developed the model were individual case studies involving abnormal thought and behavior ( Freud, 1925/1961, p. Freud’s model of the unconscious as the primary guiding influence over daily life, even today, is more specific and detailed than any to be found in contemporary cognitive or social psychology. This research, in contrast with the cognitive psychology tradition, has led to the view that the unconscious mind is a pervasive, powerful influence over such higher mental processes (see review in Bargh, 2006).Īnd, of course, the Freudian model of the unconscious is still with us and continues to exert an influence over how many people think of “the unconscious,” especially outside of psychological science.
Over the past 30 years, there has been much research on the extent to which people are aware of the important influences on their judgments and decisions and of the reasons for their behavior. There, the traditional focus has been on mental processes of which the individual is unaware, not on stimuli of which one is unaware (e.g., Nisbett & Wilson, 1977). Social psychology has approached the unconscious from a different angle. Because subliminal-strength stimuli are relatively weak and of low intensity by definition, the mental processes they drive are necessarily minimal and unsophisticated, and so these studies have led to the conclusion that the powers of the unconscious mind are limited and that the unconscious is rather “dumb” ( Loftus & Klinger, 1992). In cognitive psychology, unconscious information processing has been equated with subliminal information processing, which raises the question, “How good is the mind at extracting meaning from stimuli of which one is not consciously aware?” (e.g., Greenwald, Klinger, & Schuh, 1995).
Contemporary perspectives on the unconscious mind are remarkably varied.
0 kommentar(er)
