↓ Skip to main content

The derived generalization of thought suppression

Overview of attention for article published in Learning & Behavior, April 2010
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
Title
The derived generalization of thought suppression
Published in
Learning & Behavior, April 2010
DOI 10.3758/lb.38.2.160
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nic Hooper, Jo Saunders, Louise McHugh

Abstract

Thought suppression appears to be a relatively ineffective and even counterproductive strategy for dealing with unwanted thoughts. However, the psychological processes responsible for unsuccessful suppression are still underspecified. One process that may be implicated is derived stimulus relations, which may underlie the formation of unintentional relations that act to hamper suppression attempts. To test this prediction, participants were trained and tested for the formation of three derived equivalence relations using a match-to-sample procedure. Subsequently, they were instructed to suppress all thoughts of a particular target word that was a member of one of the three relations and were also allowed to selectively remove words that appeared on a computer screen in front of them by pressing the space bar. Results showed, as predicted, that participants not only removed the to-be-suppressed stimulus, but also removed words in derived relations with that stimulus, thus showing transformation of suppression/interference functions via derived equivalence. The theoretical implications of this demonstration, including its potential as a model for a key psychological process involved in unsuccessful thought suppression, are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Japan 1 1%
Italy 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 66 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 16%
Student > Master 11 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 11%
Researcher 8 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 8 11%
Other 17 24%
Unknown 7 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 50 71%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 4%
Arts and Humanities 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 9 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 July 2019.
All research outputs
#17,286,645
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Learning & Behavior
#404
of 904 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,476
of 92,248 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Learning & Behavior
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 904 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 92,248 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them