[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.Still another approach was taken by Goldberger and Holt (33) in their experiment.They emphasized psychoanalytic concepts, such as resistance to regression and modesof handling primary process material.Fourteen subjects were rated for the maturitywith which they handled primary process as manifested in Rorschach test responses.Their verbal behavior during eight hours of isolation and-70-postisolation interview was then assessed by a scheme of content analysis whichstressed modes of dealing with primary process material.Two relatively independent reaction patterns to isolation were identified.In the firstof these, subjects engaged in a variety of behaviors within the limits set by thesituation and instructions.They talked freely, experienced pleasurable affect, littleunpleasant affect, thought rationally, and engaged in daydreams, fantasy, and playfulthinking without being threatened by the situation.In the second reaction pattern, therewas unpleasant affect, anxiety-laden intrusions of the primary process, preoccupationwith terminating the experiment, and impaired efficiency in rational or secondaryprocess thinking.They found these two reaction patterns to be significantly correlatedin the expected direction with the Rorschach measure of maturity of handling primaryprocess materials.Those who on the Rorschach handled primary process in a matureand effective way were those who reacted in an adaptive way to isolation.Conversely,those who on the Rorschach handled primary process with poor control or avoided itreacted negatively to isolation.This finding is consistent with several others whichpoint to the exaggeration of usual personality defenses under the stress of isolation (18,56, 65).From this point of view it should be possible, at least theoretically, to predictthe dimensions of an individual's response to deprivation and isolation.An overview of these data emphasizes the truism of marked individuality ofresponse.Whether differences observed among various studies is a systematic functionof varying experimental conditions is as yet unclear.Whereas the findings of Wexler etal.(80) and Goldberger and Holt (33) indicate a positive relationship betweenemotional relatedness and length of stay in isolation, several others have made adifferent observation.The findings on suggestibility as a personality attribute and thoseon the relationship to satiation and pain thresholds remain conceptually unrelated tothe other work.The Goldberger and Holt demonstration of relationships betweenpreisolation personality attributes and the content of response to isolation is a carefullyexecuted study which has a clear theoretical orientation and makes complex butreliable assessments of verbal and other behavior.Other studies have tended towardutilization of too simplified an index of response such as length of stay which fails totake into account complex behavior during the isolation situation.It may well be thatpersonality variables and their interrelationships are insufficiently reflected in such asimple measure of tolerance for isolation.-71-In addition it would seem desirable that workers in this area offer a conceptualframework within which to view personality response.Thus specification of termssuch as "schizoid" and "withdrawn" may have more meaning, permit replication ofprocedures, and evaluation of results.Although some of this difficulty in the presentstudies stems from their preliminary nature, there appears to be some insensitivity tothe need for both conceptual and operational specification of measurement andassessment techniques.Progress with the problem of personnel selection andutilization for a variety of tasks, as well as theoretical clarification, awaits suchrefinement in research programs.Feeling StatesChanges in subjective feeling in response to reduced environmental input has beena common observation in these studies.These observations range over many differentexperimental conditions, from the uniform visual stimulation presented by W.Cohen(19) in which the pattern of input to one modality is reduced, to sensory deprivation inthe water tank suspension procedure used by Lilly (50) and Cambareri (16), where theeffort is made at a total reduction of sensory input.We have already mentioned thebreakdown in the subjects' ability to concentrate, think clearly, and solve mentalproblems.Bexton et al.(8) emphasized the progressive increase in irritability duringconfinement, followed on release by a sense of being dazed and confused.They alsonoted the presence of headaches, fatigue, and mild nausea, persisting in some cases fortwenty-four hours after confinement.Lilly (50) whose subjects both had a number of trial exposures to the situation inorder to get used to it found in the actual situation early feelings of relaxation andenjoyment, followed by tension, restlessness, and an extremely heightened awarenessof residual stimulation.This course continued into fantasy and reverie, and finally intothe projection of visual imagery.Following the isolation experience, subjects reporteda sense of refreshment as though having just awakened from sleep.Camberari (16), onthe other hand, utilizing a similar procedure without preliminary exposures, found nosuch progressive stages, and subjects came out of the immersion feeling fatigued ratherthan rested.Suggestible subjects felt secure during most of their stay in the tank,although there were some reports of apprehension, fear, and panic.The nonsuggestiblesubjects generally tended to deny any affective or emotional involvement.-72-After prolonged visual stimulation, W.Cohen (19) found that his subjects hadfeelings of drowsiness, excessive yawning, and their voices took on a hesitant,drawling quality.In a study of perceptual deprivation, Hebb, Heath, and Stuart (38)reported that subjects who wore earplugs for three consecutive days while going abouttheir normal activities showed slight to marked irritability, seclusiveness, andpersonality disturbances not due to discomfort.One subject manifested poor speechcoordination while in the experimental conditions.Goldberger and Holt (32) noted thatdespite the individual differences in response, all of their subjects found theexperimental situation frustrating because of lack of things to do, see, and hear, and thephysical discomfort attributed to motor restriction [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]