A dual-process model of defense against conscious and unconscious death-related thoughts: An extension of terror management theory.

Abstract

Distinct defensive processes are activated by conscious and nonconscious but accessible thoughts of death. Proximal defenses, which entail suppressing death-related thoughts or pushing the problem of death into the distant future by denying one's vulnerability, are rational, threat-focused, and activated when thoughts of death are in current focal attention. Distal terror management defenses, which entail maintaining self-esteem and faith in one's cultural worldview, function to control the potential for anxiety that results from knowing that death is inevitable. These defenses are experiential, are not related to the problem of death in any semantic or logical way, and are increasingly activated as the accessibility of death-related thoughts increases, up to the point at which such thoughts enter consciousness and proximal threat-focused defenses are initiated. Experimental evidence for this analysis is presented.

The Influence of Self-Threats on Fairness Judgments and Affective Measures

“…That is, reminders of death should lead to strong negative evaluations of persons whose behaviors or beliefs impinge on the cultural worldview, and lead to strong positive evaluations of persons who uphold or bolster the worldview. A more elaborate introduction to terror management theory and the supporting empirical findings is beyond the scope of the current paper, (for more complete descriptions, see e.g., Arndt et al, 1999;Greenberg et al, 1990;Harmon-Jones et al, 1997;Pyszczynski et al, 1999;Rosenblatt et al 1989;Solomon et al, 1991), but it should be noted here that results are in agreement with the theory's line of reasoning.…”

“…The current line of reasoning needs to be corroborated by further studies, in which for instance different dependent variables, and other cultural concepts such as norms and values are used to investigate the relationship between terror management, uncertainty management and the self, (for suggestions, see, e.g., Greenberg et al, 1997;McGregor et al, 2001;Pyszczynski et al, 1999;Solomon et al, 1991;Van den Bos and Lind, 2002), but findings of the studies presented here indicate that concerns for the self are a key antecedent of reactions toward fair and unfair treatment. Terror management theory focuses strongly on the importance of death to account for social psychological effects and argues, among other things, that mortality salience is a very important antecedent of people's reactions toward transgressions and upholding of cultural norms and values (e.g., Greenberg et al, 1997;Pyszczynski et al, 1999;Solomon et al, 1991).…”

“…As in Experiment 1, we constructed a threat salience manipulation that closely resembled the mortality salience manipulations most often used in terror management studies (for overviews, see, e.g., Greenberg et al, 1997;Pyszczynski et al, 1999;Solomon et al, 1991). Following previous terror management studies (cf.…”

“…In Experiment 1, following and expanding on previous terror management and uncertainty management studies (for overviews, see Greenberg et al, 1997;Pyszczynski et al, 1999;Solomon et al, 1991;Van den Bos, 2001, respectively), the self-threat condition was induced by having participants write down their responses to two questions about their being perceived as being not intelligent. The reason behind this was that, because all our participants were university students, intelligence is a trait that can be assumed to be very central to the participants' selves.…”

“…Terror management theory (for overviews, see, Greenberg et al, 1997;Pyszczynski et al, 1999;Solomon et al, 1991) proposes that people are aware of the inevitability of death, and that this creates the potential for terror. This terror, in turn, is managed by a cultural anxiety buffer, a social psychological construct that consists of things like one's worldview and selfesteem.…”