Advertisement

Defending Against the Threat of Dementia

  • Richard ChestonEmail author
  • Gary Christopher
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter continues our exploration of dementia as an existential threat by focusing on one way by which we protect ourselves from distress when we encounter reminders of dementia in our everyday lives. The specific coping mechanism we will discuss is known as mnemic neglect. This is a self-protective memory bias that shields us from being consciously aware of information about our self that is threatening. We will outline some of the research from social psychology on mnemic neglect before describing our own research that extends these findings into a clinical domain. This programme of studies shows that older people without dementia, as well as those who are living with dementia, both selectively forget information about the condition that threatens their sense of self. This indicates that the same self-protective strategies are at play in people with and without dementia. We conclude by discussing the therapeutic implications of these findings.

Keywords

Dementia Mnemic neglect Repression Protective Memory Awareness 

References

  1. 1.
    Solomon, S., Greenberg, J., & Pyszczynski, T. A. (2015). The worm at the core: On the role of death in life. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dalgleish, T., Hauer, B., & Kuyken, W. (2008). The mental regulation of autobiographical recollection in the aftermath of trauma. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(4), 259–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Christopher, G., & MacDonald, J. (2005). The impact of clinical depression on working memory. Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, 10(5), 379–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Conway, M. A., & Pleydell-Pearce, C. W. (2000). The construction of autobiographical memories in the self-memory system. Psychological Review, 107(2), 261–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5(4), 323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mather, M. (2006). Why memories may become more positive as people age. In B. Uttl, N. Ohta, & A. Siegenthale (Eds.), Memory and emotion: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 135–158). Malden, MA: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Unkelbach, C., Fiedler, K., Bayer, M., Stegmüller, M., & Danner, D. (2008). Why positive information is processed faster: The density hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(1), 36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sedikides, C., & Gregg, A. P. (2008). Self-enhancement: Food for Thought. Perspectives on Psychological Science: A Journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 3(2), 102–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sedikides, C., & Spencer, S. (2007). The self: Frontiers in social psychology. New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Campbell, W. K., & Sedikides, C. (1999). Self-threat magnifies the self-serving bias: A meta-analytic integration. Review of General Psychology, 3(1), 23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pinter, B., Green, J., & Sedikides C. (2008). How neglect feeds the self: Mechanisms of self-protective memory (Unpublished manuscript). Pennsylvania State University, Altoona.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Brown, S. C., & Craik, F. I. (2000). Encoding and retrieval of information. In E. Tulving & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of memory (pp. 93–107). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sedikides, C., & Green, J. D. (2009). Memory as a self-protective mechanism. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 3(6), 1055–1068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hepper, E. G., Gramzow, R. H., & Sedikides, C. (2010). Individual differences in self-enhancement and self-protection strategies: An integrative analysis. Journal of Personality, 78(2), 781–814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Alicke, M. D., & Sedikides, C. (2009). Self-enhancement and self-protection: What they are and what they do. European Review of Social Psychology, 20(1), 1–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Green, J. D., Pinter, B., & Sedikides, C. (2005). Mnemic neglect and self-threat: Trait modifiability moderates self-protection. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35(2), 225–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Roese, N. J., & Olson, J. M. (2007). Better, stronger, faster: Self-serving judgment, affect regulation, and the optimal vigilance hypothesis. Perspectives on Psychological Science: A Journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 2(2), 124–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Green, J. D., Sedikides, C., Pinter, B., & Van Tongeren, D. R. (2009). Two sides to self-protection: Self-improvement strivings and feedback from close relationships eliminate mnemic neglect. Self and Identity, 8(2–3), 233–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Watkins, M. J., & Gardiner, J. M. (1979). An appreciation of the generate-recognise theory of recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 18(6), 687–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nobel, P. A., & Shiffrin, R. M. (2001). Retrieval processes in recognition and cued recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27(2), 384–413.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rovee-Collier, C., Hayne, H., & Colombo, M. (2000). The development of implicit and explicit memory. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Erdelyi, M. H. (2006). The unified theory of repression. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 29(5), 499–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Anderson, M. C., & Green, C. (2001). Suppressing unwanted memories by executive control. Nature, 410(6826), 366–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Depue, B. E., Banich, M. T., & Curran, T. (2006). Suppression of emotional and nonemotional content in memory: Effects of repetition on cognitive control. Psychological Science, 17(5), 441–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Clare, L. (2002). Developing awareness about awareness in early-stage dementia: The role of psychosocial factors. Dementia, 1(3), 295–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Health and Social SciencesUniversity of the West of EnglandBristolUK

Personalised recommendations