Swiss Journal of Psychology 66 (1), 2007, 33–40

Original Communication

Is Forgetting of Dreams due

to Repression?
Experimental Investigations Using
Free Associations
Thomas Köhler and Michael Prinzleve
University of Hamburg, Germany

This study investigated whether forgetting of dream material is due to repression. Under this assumption, free associations starting from for-
gotten elements are expected to encounter successively growing resistance. In Experiment 1, 25 participants brought along notes of dreams and
were asked to freely associate to five elements from their own dreams and five stimuli from someone else’s dreams. One week later, they were
tested for recognition of sequences of their dreams. Afterwards they produced free associations to five elements they had remembered and to
five elements not identified (Experiment 2). Skin conductance responses (SCR) and perceived unpleasantness were recorded. Results of Ex-
periment 1 were in line with previous findings from our laboratory: Associations starting from own dream material provoke greater SCRs. Re-
sults of Experiment 2 were: In comparison to recognised dream material, unrecognised elements elicited associations accompanied by greater
activation. During associations to the latter stimuli, increase of SCR was more frequent, and unpleasant feelings were reported more often. Our
findings are in line with Freud’s assumptions on forgetting of dreams.

Keywords: resistance, repression, dreams, free associations, experimental study

The Freudian concept of repression, although most inter-
esting and by no means trivial, has never been widely ac-
knowledged in academic psychology. This is at least part-
ly due to the fact that it has been conceived more or less
exclusively on the basis of clinical evidence and has rarely
been subjected to experimental testing.
Freud considered repression as a psychological mecha-
nism to exclude psychic contents (e.g., memories) from con-
scious thinking. Although not observable by itself, repres-
sion is inferred from the existence of resistance: According
to Freud, certain psychic contents cannot be retrieved spon-
taneously, but – if at all – only by means of considerable ef-
fort accompanied by feelings of uneasiness. This led him
to conclude that these contents are banned from conscious
thinking in order to avoid unpleasant feelings associated
with them. The best method to reveal repressed thoughts is
free association, starting from certain psychic elements,
preferably parts of the manifest dream. In approaching the
repressed material by free association resistance develops.
Unpleasant feelings become apparent when closer associ-
ates of the repressed elements come into mind (Freud,
1915). Clinical experience leads to the conclusion that re-
sistance becomes stronger and stronger the closer one gets
to the repressed material: In the beginning, associates come
to mind easily, whereas in later stages they are much more
difficult to retrieve (Freud, 1900, pp. 288f).
As noted above, the validity of this concept remains most
controversial. Observations of patients who were finally
able to remember impressions not accessible for a long time
are supposed to supply some evidence for the existence of
repression. Impressive cases have been described (Loftus,
1993). However, such evidence is mostly based on uncon-
trolled case studies. In addition, the fact that memories can
be brought back by means of some effort does not neces-
sarily mean that they have indeed been repressed (Holmes,
1990, p. 97; see also Grünbaum, 1984 for a discussion of
the flaws in clinical evidence). On the other hand, experi-
mental testing of repression is by no means easy. It seems
most difficult, albeit impossible, to induce individuals to
exclude important impressions from their conscious think-
ing. To the best of our knowledge, very few experiments
have been carried out so far which have a real bearing on

DOI 10.1024/1421-0185.66.1.33 Swiss J Psychol 66 (1), © 2007 by Verlag Hans Huber, Hogrefe AG, Bern
34 T. Köhler & M. Prinzleve: Forgetting of Dreams
the idea of repression (Erdelyi, 1985; Kline, 1972, pp.
151ff.; Fisher & Greenberg, 1985, pp. 21ff.; however,
Shevrin & Smith, 1970, for an interesting approach).
Freud considered the interpretation of dreams as the best
access to the unconscious (“via regia zum Unbewussten im
Seelenleben”). Indeed, there has been some research on the
psychoanalytic theory of dreams. Freud himself, in the third
edition of The Interpretation of Dreams (1900, pp. 384),
mentioned studies by Schrötter (1912), who was able to
demonstrate that hypnotically induced sexual material was
not unaltered transferred into dreams, but by use of sym-
bols. In a series of studies, Pötzl (1917) presented pictures
by means of a tachistoscope and asked the participants to
draw them. In addition, he instructed them to draw what
they remembered of their dreams during the following
night. It was interesting to see that what had been drawn in
daytime did not appear in the manifest dream. What did ap-
pear, however, were details of the pictures which obvious-
ly were not perceived consciously in the experiment.
Leuschner (1985) modified Pötzl’s experiments and pre-
sented verbal material tachyacoustically (i.e., at such a high
velocity that conscious understanding is impossible). How-
ever, this material appeared in dreams, altered in such a way
as described by Freud in his concept of Traumarbeit (dream
work). Also of interest are the studies by Rosalind
Cartwright and her colleagues, which indicate that wishes
and impressions resulting from the previous day can be in-
duced into dreams (Cartwright, Bernick, Borowitz & Kling,
1969; Cartwright, 1974). Jovanovič (1974), in his review
of experimental research in sleep and dreams, cited studies
in which participants were woken up in dreams. As pre-
dicted by Freud’s theory that the dream functions as a
guardian of sleep, it was found that it was harder to wake
persons up during phases of REM activity.
There is a very interesting phenomenon that has not been
studied systematically, but that may be related both to the
theory of dreams and to repression. As experienced practi-
cally every day, vivid dreams are more or less inaccessible
to memory shortly after waking up, and those parts kept in
mind for the first minutes or hours are likely to elapse fur-
ther over the course of the day (Strauch & Meier, 1992, for
empirical evidence). Freud himself was convinced that this
phenomenon was due to repression (Freud, 1900, p. 678).
Although this cannot be taken for granted from the evidence
he presents, Freud’s observation may lead to an experi-
mental design to test whether spontaneous forgetting is
associated with resistance. The so-called manifest dream,
as it is remembered immediately after awakening, provides
quite impressive psychic material, part of which becomes
inaccessible very quickly. If this were indeed a consequence
of repression we would derive from the Freudian theory that
contents falling easily into oblivion should differ in some
respect from those kept in mind: Thus, free associations
starting from elements of the first category should encounter
greater resistance as indicated by physiological activation
and elicit feelings of uneasiness more often. In addition, as
they are supposedly in closer relation to the repressed un-
Swiss J Psychol 66 (1), © 2007 by Verlag Hans Huber, Hogrefe AG, Bern
conscious, there should be an increase of resistance (and
hence physiological activation) in the course of free asso-
ciation. On the other hand, if forgetting of these impres-
sions was due to their unimportance, we would rather ex-
pect greater physiological activation when associations start
from dream elements that are kept in mind (and hence are
presumably more important). However, one has to rule out
that, due to its novelty, forgotten material is more difficult
to handle and that this causes increased activation.
Obviously, parts of dreams that are forgotten immedi-
ately after awakening cannot be used for experimental in-
vestigations, although they would be the most fascinating
material to study. However, contents of dreams which were
written down in the morning and subsequently fail to be ac-
cessible to memory also provide interesting material.
To test the above assumptions, two experiments were car-
ried out. Both had the same basic design but different stim-
uli for free associations. In Experiment 1, elements of the
participants’own dreams and parts of other persons’dreams
were used as stimuli. This was designed to rule out the pos-
sibility that the novelty of stimuli per se leads to greater ac-
tivation. In Experiment 2 (with the same participants and
the same experimenter), irretrievable and retrievable ele-
ments of the participants’ dreams were compared to see
whether they elicited different physiological reactions and
different feelings of unpleasantness.
Method
Participants and Experimental Design
Participants were 25 students of the University of Hamburg,
16 females and 9 males. Age varied from 20 to 43 years
(mean 28.8 years). All of them were native German speak-
ers, none had ever undergone psychoanalytic therapy.
In a preliminary session, participants were acquainted
with the technique of free association. The experimenter
told them to start association from a given stimulus and use
the resultant associate as a stimulus for the next association,
etc. This was practiced loudly with a few stimuli. In this
context, participants were made familiar with the funda-
mental psychoanalytic rule of uttering everything coming
into mind. They were informed that during the actual ex-
periments they had to associate in low voice and that no-
body would be able to understand what they said.
Participants were then instructed how to write down their
dreams, namely to note everything they remembered, clear
or not. This was explained using examples of a few of
Freud’s dreams presented in his Interpretation of Dreams
(Freud, 1900). Apart from the information that associations
to dream elements were studied, participants did not obtain
any hint as to the purpose of the study. In the week follow-
ing this first meeting, they wrote down their dreams as ex-
actly as possible. They were told to do so immediately af-
ter waking up. All participants gave their assurance that they
had fulfilled the requirements properly. It is, of course,
 T. Köhler & M. Prinzleve: Forgetting of Dreams
worth noting that we had no control over what they had
done, and indeed we see no efficient means to control this
aspect of the study (see also Discussion). At the end of the
week, participants came into the laboratory and handed their
notes to the experimenter. Experiment 1 was carried out im-
mediately afterwards, and Experiment 2 one week later.
At the beginning of each laboratory study, participants
were seated in a chair, and electrodes for assessment of elec-
trodermal activity were attached. Thereafter they sat quiet-
ly for 20 min in order to become accustomed to the labora-
tory situation and enable skin conductance values to attain
a stable level.
In Experiment 1, participants were presented five stim-
uli (usually a noun or a noun plus an adjective) from their
own dreams and five stimuli from dreams of the person stud-
ied before them (stimuli which the previous participant had
associated to). This was done in alternating order: Half of
the participants started with associations from a part of their
own dream, the other half were presented with a stimulus
from another person’s dream first. Participants were then
asked to free associate to the verbal stimuli read to them by
the experimenter. To ascertain strict obedience to the psy-
choanalytic rule of uttering everything coming into mind,
participants were told to associate in a very low voice. The
instruction given was the same as the one given in the pre-
liminary session. In addition, it was stressed that nothing
would be recorded and that the experimenter was unable to
understand their associations, given that he was several me-
ters away from the participant hidden behind a wall. Free
associations were interrupted after 2 min. This period was
chosen on the basis of previous studies with similar design
(Köhler & Borchers, 1995; Köhler & Borchers, 1996).
Longer intervals had proved to be inadequate as participants
lost interest after some time. Immediately afterwards, par-
ticipants had to press a button in case they had experienced
feelings of unpleasantness during the preceding associa-
tions. After a break of 75 s the next verbal stimulus was pre-
sented. Two stimuli taken from dreams of other persons
served as warm-up conditions.
In Experiment 2 (one week later), the experimenter had
prepared a list with 40 verbal stimuli, single words or short
sequences of words, 20 of them taken from the dreams re-
ported by the person under examination and another 20 from
the dream reports obtained from other participants in order
to make the task more difficult. This list was read aloud to
participants. They were instructed to recall whether the
stimulus just presented was part of their dreams or not. They
were offered three ways to answer: (a) “yes, it is from one
of my dream reports”; (b) “no, it is not from one of my
dream reports”; (c) “I cannot really tell”. Using this method,
dream contents were obtained which in fact originated from
the participants’ own dreams, but were not recognised as
such (unrecognised elements). On the other hand, dream el-
ements were found that the participants had written down
and identified as their own product (recognised elements).
To avoid any interference with the association test, partici-
pants were not told whether recognition was correct or not.
Swiss J Psychol 66 (1), © 2007 by Verlag Hans Huber, Hogrefe AG, Bern
35
Again, participants had to produce free associations to
the verbal stimuli read to them by the experimenter. In al-
ternating turn, unrecognised and recognised stimuli from
their own dreams were presented. The maximum number
of such pairs presented was five. In a few participants who
showed good recognition of their dream contents this num-
ber was lower but was not less than three.
Apparatus, Measurements, and Variables
To assess electrodermal activity, 2 Ag/AgCl-electrodes (8
mm in diameter) were attached at the hypothenar eminence
of the left hand. Isotonic NaCl solution in Unibase served
as the electrolyte medium. Skin conductance responses
(SCR) were amplified (Natic EDA 300) and displayed on
a polygraph (Graphtec Linearcorder FWR 3701). In order
to obtain large peaks on the polygraph for better evaluation,
we used different amplification factors for the participants.
To express SCR in µS and thus make values comparable,
this individual amplification factor had to be taken into ac-
count. Unpleasant feelings, as indicated by pressing a but-
ton with the participant’s right hand, were also recorded on
the polygraph by means of an event marker.
The very first peak of the SCR recording was regarded
as a reaction to the presentation of the verbal stimulus it-
self and hence not taken into consideration. For the rest of
the interval, the area under the curve was determined and
adjusted by the individual amplification factor used for the
person under consideration (see above). The weaker the per-
son’s SCR responses, the more the signal had to be ampli-
fied in order to obtain large peaks. This manipulation had
to be taken into account when participants were compared
for SCR values over the association interval. The person
measuring the areas of amplification was blind to the ex-
perimental conditions. To adjust for different durations of
the first peak, the remaining area was divided by 120 s di-
minished by the duration of the first peak and multiplied by
120 s. The resulting value thus gives information of inte-
grated SCR activity (more or less equivalent: averaged SCR
activity) during the associations (in µSxsec), related to a
duration of 120 s.
Every presentation of a stimulus pair, e.g., Experiment
1: first stimulus from own dream, first stimulus from an-
other person’s dream; Experiment 2: first unrecognised
word, first recognised word, was considered as a separate
session of the experiment. For each of the five sessions of
Experiment 1, integrated SCR activity was compared be-
tween corresponding elements using matched pairs t-tests.
Finally, for each participant, SCR values were averaged
across all stimuli taken from other persons’dreams and their
own dreams. These values were again compared by means
of a t test. As this implied six simultaneous tests, we car-
ried out Bonferroni adjusting. This means, results were on-
ly considered as significant when the error probability p was
lower than .05/6 = .0083.
Furthermore, we examined whether SCR activity in-
36 T. Köhler & M. Prinzleve: Forgetting of Dreams
creased to a greater extent during associations to words from
one’s own dream. For this purpose, the association interval
(diminished by the time necessary to attain baseline after
the first peak) was divided into equal halves, and integrat-
ed SCR activity was determined for each of them. Again,
pairs of corresponding stimuli were compared using a Mc-
Nemar test. Participants were assigned to one cell of a four-
fold table: (a) those whose SCR activity increased both in
the course of associations to words from own dreams and
other persons’ dreams; (b) those whose SCR activity in-
creased during associations to elements from other persons’
dreams and decreased when associations were made start-
ing from a word of the own dream, and so forth. Only the
following findings have a bearing on the theory of repres-
sion: increase during association to an item from one’s own
dream and decrease during associations to a stimulus tak-
en from another person’s dream (in favour of the hypothe-
sis); decrease during the first condition, increase during the
second condition (contradictory to the hypothesis). The bi-
nomial test was used to determine whether the number of
participants with results in favour of the hypothesis signif-
icantly exceeded the number of those whose results con-
tradicted it. This was computed for each session separate-
ly, and Bonferroni adjustments were carried out (i.e.,
differences were considered as significant if p < .05/5 = .01).
To test the combining result, we used a procedure known
as Fisher’s inverse chi-square method (Hedges & Olkin,
1985, pp. 37–38). We rejected H0 if
5
df = 10 = 18.3
2
P = –2 Y log pi exceeded r5%;
i=l
On the basis of earlier findings (Köhler & Borchers, 1995;
Köhler & Borchers, 1996) we expected that stimuli from
own dreams would produce greater activation and show a
more pronounced increase of activation during associations.
Therefore, one-sided testing was carried out. Exactly the
same evaluations were made to compare unrecognised and
recognised dream elements with respect to elicited activa-
tion and increase of physiological activation (Experiment
2). In addition, we used the McNemar test to assess whether
feelings of unpleasantness developed more often during as-
sociations starting from unrecognised elements taken from
own dreams. To test the combined result, we used Fisher’s
Table 1
Experiment 1: Integrated SCR values (means and standard deviations) during associations starting from own dream elements and from
stimuli taken from other persons’ dreams
own dreams other persons’ dreams
M (± SD) M (± SD)
1st pair 35.78 (± 25.19) 34.43 (± 22.41)
2nd pair 36.56 (± 25.07) 33.33 (± 20.60)
3rd pair 35.08 (± 24.70) 32.35 (± 21.58)
4th pair 34.55 (± 24.47) 30.29 (± 17.73)
5th pair 36.67 (± 28.49) 31.81 (± 22.82)
across all pairs 35.73 (± 25.63) 32.44 (± 21.10)
Note. t test for matched samples; *: significant following Bonferroni adjusting (p < α = .05/6 = .0083); df = N–1
Swiss J Psychol 66 (1), © 2007 by Verlag Hans Huber, Hogrefe AG, Bern
inverse chi-square method as described above. It should be
noted that in some of the subsessions of this experiment the
number of participants was slightly lower. As mentioned,
this was due to the fact that a few persons were able to iden-
tify nearly all dream elements written down. Again, given
clear predictions, one-sided testing was carried out.
Results
In Table 1, elements from own dreams and other participants’
dreams are compared in terms of elicited SCR activity during
association (Experiment 1). As can be seen in this table, in all
sessions sample means of SCR activity in response to own
dream parts exceed those in response to elements of other per-
sons’ dreams. However, these differences fail to attain signif-
icance. When averaged across all sessions, differences attain
significance, even after Bonferroni adjusting.
Table 2 presents fourfold tables supplying information
about increase and decrease of SCR during associations to
corresponding pairs of words. In all sessions, results are as
predicted by our hypotheses. However, significance is not
attained for any of them. Combined findings did not attain
significance either.
In Table 3, associations starting from unrecognised and
recognised dream elements are compared with respect to
induced physiological activation (Experiment 2). As can be
seen, in all sessions sample means of SCR activity in re-
sponse to unrecognised words exceed those in response to
recognised stimuli. Due to the rather rigorous procedure of
Bonferroni adjusting, none of the differences was signifi-
cant, although in Sessions 2 and 4 they were tending toward
significance. It should be noted that data from the whole
sample could only be taken into consideration for three pairs
of words. When averaged across all sessions, differences
attained significance.
Table 4 shows comparisons of SCR increase between un-
recognised and recognised dream elements for single ses-
sions of Experiment 2. Except for Session 3, increase of
activation occurs more often during associations to un-
recognised stimuli, and this finding is significant in Session
5. Significance is also attained when results from the dif-
ferent sessions are combined.
t df p
0.58 24 0.28
1.01 24 0.16
1.17 24 0.13
1.37 24 0.09
1.42 24 0.08
2.79 24 0.005*
 T. Köhler & M. Prinzleve: Forgetting of Dreams 37

Table 2
Experiment 1: Comparisons of SCR increase (observed frequencies) between different types of stimuli
own dreams other persons’ dreams
1st pair of words increase no increase
increase 12 6
no increase 5 2 p = .50
2nd pair of words increase no increase
increase 8 7
no increase 5 5 p = .37
3rd pair of words increase no increase
increase 12 5
no increase 4 4 p = .49
4th pair of words increase no increase
increase 15 7
no increase 3 0 p = .17
5th pair of words increase no increase
increase 13 4
no increase 3 5 p = .50
total increase no increase
increase 60 29
no increase 20 16 P = 9.73, n.s.
Note. Binomial test for comparisons 1–5;
5
for total: P = –2 Σ log pi; n.s.: P < χ5%;
2
df = 10 = 18.3
i=l

Table 3
Experiment 2: Integrated SCR values (means and standard deviations) during associations starting from unrecognised dream elements
and recognised elements
unrecognised recognised
M (± SD) M (± SD) t df p
1st pair 32.55 (± 21.97) 30.14 (± 20.62) 1.23 24 0.11
2nd pair 35.00 (± 23.72) 30.90 (± 21.90) 1.83 24 0.04
3rd pair 36.73 (± 31.09) 32.40 (± 22.00) 1.10 24 0.14
4th pair 41.44 (± 23.72) 32.97 (± 20.57) 2.14 19 0.02
5th pair 42.71 (± 24.13) 36.04 (± 19.83) 1.82 13 0.05
across all pairs 34.95 (± 22.46) 30.25 (± 19.44) 3.09 24 0.003*
Note. t test for matched samples; *: significant following Bonferroni adjusting (p < α = .05/6 = .0083); df = N–1

Table 5 shows comparisons between different types of Discussion

dream elements for feelings of unpleasantness which ac-
company free associations. Except for Session 2, unpleas-
antness develops more easily during associations starting
from unrecognised elements. These findings were not sig-
nificant for single sessions; however, significance was at-
tained when results of all sessions were combined.
In sum, the results of Experiment 2 show that associa-
tions starting from unrecognised dream material differ from
associations to recognised elements in several aspects:
Physiological activation as measured by SCR is higher in
the first category, and unpleasant feelings are more likely
to develop. In addition, associations from elements of own
dreams show a more pronounced increase in SCR.
Our findings can be interpreted as support for the Freudian
theory of repression: Parts of the manifest dream that are
not recognised by participants a few days later elicit free
associations which are accompanied by greater physiolog-
ical arousal as indicated by SCR. This finding was signifi-
cant in Experiment 2 when values were averaged across ses-
sions. If this material were forgotten merely because it had
become irrelevant to the individual concerned, one would
expect associations starting from it to show less strong emo-
tional reactions.
In addition, we found that physiological arousal during
associations from unrecognised words increased more of-
ten than arousal during associations to recognised elements
of dreams. This finding attained significance only in one of

Swiss J Psychol 66 (1), © 2007 by Verlag Hans Huber, Hogrefe AG, Bern
38 T. Köhler & M. Prinzleve: Forgetting of Dreams

Table 4
Experiment 2: Comparisons of SCR increase (observed frequencies) between different types of stimuli
unrecognised recognised
1st pair of words increase no increase
increase 8 9
no increase 4 4 p = .13
2nd pair of words increase no increase
increase 8 8
no increase 3 6 p = .50
3rd pair of words increase no increase
increase 12 4
no increase 5 4 p = .50
4th pair of words increase no increase
increase 6 7
no increase 3 4 p = .17
5th pair of words increase no increase
increase 1 7
no increase 0 6 p = .008*
total increase no increase
increase 35 35
no increase 15 24 P = 23.08*
Note. Binomial test for comparisons 1–5; *: significant following Bonferroni adjusting (p < α = .05/5 = .01)
5
for total: P = –2 Σ log pi; *: significant (P > χ25%; df = 10 = 18.3)
i=l

Table 5
Experiment 2: Comparisons between different types of stimuli for developing feelings of unpleasantness during associations (observed
frequencies)
unrecognised recognised
1st pair of words unpleasantness no unpleasantness
unpleasantness 4 12
no unpleasantness 3 6 p = .02
2nd pair of words unpleasantness no unpleasantness
unpleasantness 3 7
no unpleasantness 10 5 p = .29
3rd pair of words unpleasantness no unpleasantness
unpleasantness 7 8
no unpleasantness 4 6 p = .19
4th pair of words unpleasantness no unpleasantness
unpleasantness 4 6
no unpleasantness 2 8 p = .14
5th pair of words unpleasantness no unpleasantness
unpleasantness 2 4
no unpleasantness 2 6 p = .34
total unpleasantness no unpleasantness
unpleasantness 20 37
no unpleasantness 21 31 P = 19.71*
Note. Binomial test for comparisons 1–5;
5
for total: P = –2 Σ log pi; *: significant (P > χ 5%;
2
df = 10 = 18.3)
i=l

Swiss J Psychol 66 (1), © 2007 by Verlag Hans Huber, Hogrefe AG, Bern
 T. Köhler & M. Prinzleve: Forgetting of Dreams
the sessions of Experiment 2, however, we believe it still
merits discussion. It is important to note that only individ-
ual results which unambiguously support the psychoana-
lytic theory are taken into consideration, namely those
where SCR both increased during associations to unrecog-
nised words and decreased when associations were starting
from a recognised dream element. These numbers are nec-
essarily somewhat smaller, especially as the participants
were less numerous in the last two sessions. When results
of experimental sessions were combined, this finding be-
comes significant at a low level of error probability.
Our kind of evaluation seems somewhat awkward and,
at first glance, appears to be less sensitive than ANOVA
comparisons of absolute SCR values during the first and
second halves of the association interval. However, we pre-
fer this method because it makes comparisons strictly on
individual level first and is not based on the participant’s
absolute SCR value. ANOVA comparisons of absolute SCR
values would give undue consideration to participants with
large electrodermal activity. Given the considerable be-
tween-participants variance of electrodermal reactivity, it
would probably be more appropriate to evaluate data strict-
ly on a single-participant level, that is, to compare whether
the individual under consideration differs in responses to
several types of stimuli, for instance recognised and un-
recognised dream material. This would also result in a more
adequate testing of psychoanalytic hypotheses which refer
to individuals and not to groups. However, in addition to
the difficulty of carrying out proper statistical testing on
such single-participant data, this analysis would have meant
collecting far more data. This would have been possible on-
ly in repeated laboratory sessions with a number of associ-
ations each time. In future research, such designs should be
carried out, and one can hope that under such circumstances
participants would also become increasingly ready to fol-
low the strict rules of free association. With the present da-
ta we had no choice but to collapse results across partici-
pants.
The finding that physiological activation increases more
often when association starts from unrecognised dream ma-
terial can also be interpreted in the frame of psychoanalyt-
ic theory: According to Freud, the closer associations come
to the repressed unconscious, the more resistance increas-
es. Although it is not possible to measure resistance direct-
ly, we were able to show that an increase in physiological
activity in the second half of the association interval is more
likely when unrecognised words serve as stimuli. We in-
terpret this result as evidence for resistance and believe that
it would be difficult to explain by cognitive theories which
do not take some equivalent of repression into account. Al-
though it would have been informative to determine whether
feelings of unpleasantness also increase during such asso-
ciations, this would have meant asking participants repeat-
edly about their feelings during association, which would
have disturbed the association process itself.
Instead we asked participants afterwards whether they
had experienced unpleasantness: Unpleasantness was ex-
Swiss J Psychol 66 (1), © 2007 by Verlag Hans Huber, Hogrefe AG, Bern
39
perienced more often during associations to unrecognised
dream elements, and this was significant when the results
of different sessions were combined. This provides further
support for the repression hypothesis: One would not ex-
pect recognised and unrecognised dream elements to differ
in terms of unpleasant associations if the latter were for-
gotten as a result of their “low importance”.
The possibility that the difference in reactions to un-
recognised and recognised dream elements result from the
novelty of the latter can be refuted by the findings of Ex-
periment 1. In line with others studies carried out in our lab-
oratory (Köhler & Borchers, 1995; Köhler & Borchers,
1996), we observed that associations to elements of the own
dream are accompanied by greater physiological activation.
In addition, activation increases more often during associ-
ations starting from stimuli taken from own dreams, and as-
sociations as reactions to own dream material are more like-
ly to elicit feelings of unpleasantness. All these points are
in line with the concept of repression. Although it is diffi-
cult to rule out the possibility that the participants’ own
dreams are perceived as more intense and interesting than
other persons’ dreams (for discussion of this problem and
possible experimental means to overcome it Köhler &
Borchers, 1995; Köhler & Borchers, 1996), the findings of
Experiment 1 rule out a novelty effect as an explanation for
our main findings, namely those of Experiment 2.
Although we did not tell the participants whether they
started their associations from recognised or unrecognised
dream elements, they may not have been blind to this fact,
and it is possible that such knowledge impacted upon their
physiological activity. However, because participants failed
to recognise the stimuli, it is most likely that they (con-
sciously) considered them as unknown material (such as el-
ements of other persons’ dreams), which makes it all the
more surprising. Given that, it is so much more astonishing
that these physiological reactions were greater. As the ex-
perimenter was also not blind to the conditions, in replica-
tion studies the recognition test should be carried out by an-
other experimenter who was not present in the association
test. One further potential caveat deserves mention: We did
not examine associations from forgotten dream elements,
but from elements remembered after awakening and later
forgotten. Thus, we should take into account that the mate-
rial serving as a starting point for associations had already
been written down and therefore been subjected to some
transformation. As a matter of fact, we do not know whether
physiological activation is a reaction to the dream material
itself or to the associations elicited by it. However, in view
of the Freudian theory of repression, this does not matter
very much: Close associates of repressed material are re-
pressed themselves (Freud, 1915).
In the present study, we used a recognition test and not
a recall test to assess forgetting. It would be very hard to
decide whether a reproduced part of the dream is indeed
identical to the one in the initial dream report. And, ac-
cording to Freud, it is crucial to start from the exact stimu-
lus in order to get closer to the repressed material (Freud,
40 T. Köhler & M. Prinzleve: Forgetting of Dreams
1900; pp. 513f). In addition, a characteristic feature of re-
pressed material is that it is not recognised as something ex-
istent in the person’s mind (Freud, 1915, p. 175).
A final few words of caution are in order. Some more
careful replications are required before far-reaching con-
clusions about repression can be drawn. There may be some
flaws we did not realize. For instance, we failed to parallel
unrecognised and recognised dream elements for semantic
and phonematic variables and for frequency of occurrence
in everyday speech. This would have been quite compli-
cated as stimuli often consisted of several words, e.g. an
adjective and a noun. It can be expected that chance pre-
vented extreme differences between recognised and un-
recognised words. However, a more standardized selection
of the control words (the recognised ones) could make the
results more convincing. Furthermore, we cannot decide
whether lack of recognition was the effect of a report bias
or a memory bias (Erdelyi, 1985, p. 257; Baddely, 1990, p.
390). That means, it cannot be ruled out that failing to recog-
nise stimuli was due to a conscious unwillingness to report
them rather than due to an active repression of them. We do
not think that the first version is very likely, however, using
measures of implicit memory (Richardson-Klavehn &
Bjork, 1988) would have yielded more convincing results
in that respect.
Finally, it would be most desirable to obtain indicators
of unpleasant feelings other than the participants’ self re-
ports. Assessment of facial electromyographic activity may
supply valid information about negative feelings during as-
sociation (Dimberg, 1990). This would enable us to study
the development of uneasiness during the association.
In conclusion, the present study employed a method of
free association to investigate repression related to dream
elements. Results provide support for the Freudian concept
of repression: Participants exhibited stronger physiological
response and reported greater feelings of unpleasantness in
response to dream material which they had initially re-
membered but subsequently forgotten.
References
Baddely, A. (1990). Human memory. Theory and practice. Boston:
Allyn & Bacon.
Cartwright, R. D. (1974). The influence of a conscious wish on
dreams: A methodological study of dream meaning and func-
tion. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 83, 387–393.
Cartwright, R. D., Bernick, N., Borowitz, G., & Kling, A. (1969).
The effect of an erotic movie on the sleep and dreams of young
men. Archives of General Psychiatry, 20, 262–271.
Swiss J Psychol 66 (1), © 2007 by Verlag Hans Huber, Hogrefe AG, Bern
Dimberg, U. (1990). Facial electromyography and emotional re-
actions. Psychophysiology, 27, 481–494.
Erdelyi, M. H. (1985). Psychoanalysis. Freud’s cognitive psy-
chology. New York: Freeman.
Fisher, S., & Greenberg, R. P. (1985). The scientific credibility of
Freud’s theory and practice. New York: Columbia University
Press.
Freud, S. (1900). The interpretation of dreams. In J. Strachey (Ed.),
Standard Edition of the complete psychological works of Sig-
mund Freud. Vol. 4 (pp. 9–627). London: Hogarth.
Freud, S. (1915). Repression. In J. Strachey (Ed.), Standard Edi-
tion of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud.
Vol. 14 (pp. 141–158). London: Hogarth.
Grünbaum, A. (1984). The foundation of psychoanalysis. Berke-
ley: University Press.
Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-
analysis. Orlando: Academic Press.
Holmes, D. (1990). The evidence for repression: An examination
of sixty years of research. In J. Singer (Ed.). Repression and
dissociation: Implications for personality theory, psy-
chopathology, and health (pp. 85–102). Chicago: University
Press.
Jovanovič, U. J. (1974). Schlaf und Traum. Stuttgart: Fischer.
Kline, P. (1972). Fact and fantasy in Freudian theory. London:
Methuen.
Köhler, T., & Borchers, H. (1995). Die Traumdeutung als via re-
gia zum Unbewussten? Eine experimentalpsychologische
Überprüfung. Psychotherapie – Psychosomatik – Medizini-
sche Psychologie, 45, 261–265.
Köhler, T., & Borchers, H. (1996). Experimentalpsychologische
Überprüfungen der Freudschen Traumlehre. Replikation und
Ausweitung einer früheren Studie. Psychotherapie – Psycho-
somatik – Medizinische Psychologie, 46, 419–422.
Leuschner, W. (1985). Mitteilung über eine akustische Methode
experimenteller Traumerregung. Psyche, 39, 341–354.
Loftus, E. F. (1993). The reality of repressed memories. American
Psychologist, 48, 518–537.
Pötzl, O. (1917). Experimentell erregte Traumbilder in ihren
Beziehungen zum indirekten Sehen. Zeitschrift für die
gesamte Neurologie und Psychiatrie, 37, 278–349.
Richardson-Klavehn, A., & Bjork, R. A. (1988). Measures of
memory. Annual Review of Psychology, 39, 475–543.
Schrötter, K. (1912). Experimentelle Träume. Zentralblatt für Psy-
choanalyse und Psychotherapie, 2, 638–646.
Shevrin, H., & Smith, W. H. (1970). Subliminally stimulated brain
and verbal responses of twins differing in repressiveness.
Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 76, 39–46.
Strauch, I., & Meier, B. (1992). Den Träumen auf der Spur. Ergeb-
nisse der experimentellen Traumforschung. Bern: Huber.
Thomas Köhler
Psychologisches Institut III
Universität Hamburg
von-Melle-Park 5
DE-20146 Hamburg