Why Do People Act In Opposition To Their Internal Desires? The Theory of Reaction Formation

in psychology •  8 years ago  (edited)


Introduction


On the 12th of June, 2016 a 29 year old security guard called Omar Mateen shot dead 49 people at a Florida nightclub.

It initially seemed like a straight forward terrorist/homophobic incident (if there is such a thing).

The fact that it was a gay nightclub seemed particularly significant when later reports emerged suggesting that Mateen was actually gay and perhaps conflicted about his sexuality.

Before these reports even emerged I had heard some commentators suggest that, perhaps Mateen was a closet gay.

Authorities have since attempted to play down this link and we will never know for sure what Mateen's motivations were because he is dead.

On some implicit level the theory that Mateen was a gay man carrying out a deadly attack against other gay men made sense.

Why?

The answer lies in a psychodynamic concept known as "reaction formation".

Psychodynamic Theory


Reaction Formation is part of psychodynamic theory - the branch of psychology that studies the underlying psychological forces behind human behaviour whose most famous proponent was Sigmund Freud.

I must admit I am not a big fan of psychodynamic theory.

I believe that much of it is is concerned with the particular social and sexual peculiarities of the late 19th and early 20th century.

It is also inherently pseudoscientific in nature and difficult to test.

I do not believe it is complete nonsense though - these are a set of theories of mind which helped create the necessary framework for modern psychological thinking.

The idea of reaction formation encompasses a set of psychological defence mechanisms first described by Sigmund Freud in the early 20th century and refined by his daughter Anna Freud.

Before discussing reaction formation further it is useful to cover some basic psychodynamic theory:


The Id, Ego and Superego


Freud believed our psyche was divided into 3 main parts:
  1. The Id.
  2. The Ego.
  3. The Superego.
There is a great article by MacLeod at Simply Psychology [2] that covers this topic very well:

The Id:

According to MacLeod:

The id is the impulsive (and unconscious) part of our psyche which responds directly and immediately to the instincts.

It is sometimes described as the more primitive, irrational and animalistic part of our psyche.

If one thinks of the psyche as an iceberg then the id is the large part of it that is underwater.



Source: Treknews.net

The Ego:

Again from MacLeod:

[The Ego] develops in order to mediate between the unrealistic id and the external real world. It is the decision making component of personality. Ideally the ego works by reason, whereas the id is chaotic and totally unreasonable.

The ego is what we would consider our rational conscious "self".

It is only a small part of what is happening inside our mind but it is the most prominent surface - like the tip of an iceberg.

A shortcut would be to imagine it as Mr Spock from Star Trek- rational and logical but only a small part of the crew.


The Id is Stronger than the Ego

The id is generally seen as the stronger and more powerful of the two with the classic analogy being of a man riding a horse.

The id is the horse and the man is the ego.

Neither the id nor the ego function on a basis of morality.

For that we turn to the superego:


The Superego

The superego incorporates the values and morals of society which are learned from one's parents and others.

So a simplified way of looking at the superego is as a manifestation of our cultural morality and conscience.

It represents what we have been taught and learned throughout our lives and acts almost like a virtual authority figure.

If the ego gives in to the id and does something considered wrong by the superego, the superego punishes it by generating uncomfortable feelings such as anxiety and guilt.

By it's nature the ego will try to avoid such discomfort.


Defence Mechanisms


Defence Mechanisms are what the ego uses to deal with or prevent these uncomfortable feelings from arising.

According to MacLeod [3]:

We use defense mechanisms to protect ourselves from feelings of anxiety or guilt, which arise because we feel threatened, or because our id or superego becomes too demanding. They are not under our conscious control, and are non-voluntaristic. With the ego, our unconscious will use one or more to protect us when we come up against a stressful situation in life. Ego-defense mechanisms are natural and normal. When they get out of proportion, neuroses develop, such as anxiety states, phobias, obsessions, or hysteria.

Another hypthosesis by Fenichel holds that defense mechanisms exist to protect self-esteem [1].

These ideas are not mutually exlusive but I think Fenichel's theory is more consistent with modern thinking and the contemporary way of framing these issues.

Anyway there are a number of defence mechanisms of which reaction formation is just one type.

If you are really interested in the topic I would suggest reading the Simply Psychology article by MacLeod [3] here.

If you are more comfortable with reading papers you can download the one by Baumeister et al. [1] for free here which also looks at some fascinating experiments on testing these defence mechanisms.

OK so after that quick revision we can go back to reaction formation:

Reaction Formation


What is it?

At it's most basic, reaction formation involves conversion of a socially or culturally unacceptable impulse into it's opposite.

Let us return to our earlier example:


The Mateen Situation


Let us try to envision this situation:

You live in society/subculture where being gay is completely socially unacceptable.

Perhaps you believe that your religion is incompatible with homosexuality. Your relatives have expressed their disgust at such tendencies.

You harbour unconscious homosexual feelings which you are unable to express openly.

These internal feelings lead to stress which your ego resolves through hostility to people who are openly gay.

What is more hostile than shooting people?

Although we don't know the exact circumstances in the Mateen case this is certainly a plausible reason for his violent reaction.

It is a lot more extreme than most cases of reaction formation but it is not unheard of for people to become violent and fatally so in order to resolve their psychological discomfort.

By making such an extreme gesture it would seem he was trying to prove both to his community and himself that he couldn't possibly be gay.

Would a gay person kill so many gay people?

Well according to reaction formation they could and would.

That doesn't mean the average person would do it, but human behaviour comes in a spectrum where some people fall into extremes.

Further the idea that people with very homophobic views harbour homosexual tendencies is not purely based on conjecture.

Research such as that done by Adams et al. [4] does seem to back it up.

I think it is particularly telling that in interviews with members of Mateen's family after the shooting they seemed to be more comfortable with him being a terrorist than with him being gay.

They refused to accept the possibility even existed despite being confronted by evidence to the contrary.

As bad as it was for him to be a terrorist being gay was considered worse.

This would suggest that Mateen's superego was wholly incompatible with his sexuality.

The fact that he may have "slipped up" and had gay relationships may have been a considerable source of guilt, anxiety and stress upon his psyche.

Since sexuality is particularly difficult to suppress it could be argued that the only way for him to escape the situation was a hugely violent and suicidal gesture to prove once and for all that he was not gay.

The ironic part is that it may have done the exact opposite.

Conclusion


In summary, reaction formation is a psychological defence mechanism where people act in the opposite manner to their internal desires which they believe to be socially unacceptable.

Though it does not always manifest itself in violent ways, this is a possible consequence and I believe it is entirely possible that such a process may have been at least partly involved in the Orlando shooting tragedy.

It might suit authorities to play this down as a contributory factor but I believe it is important to understand human motivations in order to prevent such incidents in the future.

There is a lot more I could say on this issue but I wanted to keep this brief.

If people are interested in this topic I could do further posts on it to look at some of the research in the area as well as some other examples.

Let me know if you would like more in the comments. Please feel free to add your own examples too.


References


  1. Baumeister, Roy F., Karen Dale, and Kristin L. Sommer. n.d. “Freudian Defense Mechanisms and Empirical Findings in Modern Social Psychology: Reaction Formation, Projection, Displacement, Undoing, Isolation, Sublimation, and Denial.” http://faculty.fortlewis.edu/burke_b/personality/readings/freuddefense.pdf.

  2. McLeod, Saul. 2017b. “Id Ego Superego | Simply Psychology.” Accessed February 7. http://www.simplypsychology.org/psyche.html.

  3. McLeod, Saul. 2017a. “Defense Mechanisms | Simply Psychology.” Accessed February 7. http://www.simplypsychology.org/defense-mechanisms.html.

  4. Adams, H. E., L. W. Wright Jr, and B. A. Lohr. 1996. “Is Homophobia Associated with Homosexual Arousal?” Journal of Abnormal Psychology 105 (3): 440–45.

  5. Wright, Padraig, Julian Stern, and Michael Phelan. 2012. Core Psychiatry. Elsevier Health Sciences.

  6. Glenza, Jessica. 2016. “Orlando Terror Attack: Shooter’s Father Speaks about His Son's ‘horrible Act.’” The Guardian, June 14. http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/14/orlando-shooting-omar-seddique-mateen-father-interview.

  7. Wikipedia contributors. 2017. “Omar Mateen.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. February 4. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Omar_Mateen&oldid=763596255.




Thank you for reading



Before you go have you filled in the Coinbase form to list STEEM? It only takes a few seconds. THIS POST shows you how.


If you like my work please follow me and check out my blog - @thecryptofiend


Uncredited Images are taken from my personal Thinkstock Photography account. More information can be provided on request.


Are you new to Steemit and Looking for Answers? - Try:


HTML tutorial


Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

Hello @thecryptofiend,

Congratulations! Your post has been chosen by the communities of SteemTrail as one of our top picks today.

Also, as a selection for being a top pick today, you have been awarded a TRAIL token for your participation on our innovative platform...STEEM.
Please visit SteemTrail to get instructions on how to claim your TRAIL token today.

If you wish to not receive comments from SteemTrail, please reply with "Stop" to opt out.

Happy TRAIL!

Thank you:)

Authorities have since attempted to play down this link

...because there was no evidence for it. That whole thing was a media Narrative to move the focus away from Islamic terrorism and Islamic hostility to gays.

The Narrative shift was largely successful; the Southern Poverty Law Center has even falsely labeled the Orlando attack as a "right-wing plot"
https://www.splcenter.org/20100126/terror-right

Laird Wilcox, a long-time researcher of extremism, criticized the SPLC and other groups whose "identity and livelihood depend upon growth and expansion of their particular kind of victimization." (The Watchdogs, 1997)

Remember that the Narrative moved quickly to whitewash the source of terror:

  • The FBI first released redacted references to Islam, 9/11 and any other groups that Mateen pledged an allegiance to during the attack
  • References to 'Allah' were replaced with 'God' throughout

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3650799/Peace-prophet-did-shootings-FBI-releases-complete-transcripts-Orlando-shooter-Omar-Mateen-s-911-calls-scrubs-references-Islam-9-11.html#ixzz4Y2Yv4st2

some commentators suggest that, perhaps Mateen was a closet gay.

..the commenters that were intent on changing the Narrative, and provided no evidence of Mateen's homosexuality.

This is otherwise a well=written and well-researched article, and the premise does make sense. But Mateen was not the right example ;>

Going off hand, I'd suggest that the correlation of unattractive women with 3rd wave feminism makes more sense, as they reject the use of mating strategies that take that unattractiveness into account and rather formulate a "it's society's fault" justification for their rage.

Well it was the most prominent example I could think!

I think there was evidence early on but there is no way of knowing for sure with these things since the MSM is not exactly accurate.

Further extreme professions of religiosity would be consistent with the picture and would be entirely consistent with the mainstream agenda because it keeps people scared enough of terrorist attacks to keep cracking down on liberty.

We will never know for sure though since he is dead.

One of the alternatives I was considering but I couldn't think of a recent specific example was something along the lines of your example but related to an experiment.

If people are interested I could cover it in a future post.

Further extreme professions of religiosity would be consistent with the picture

True. Good point.

I think the major problem with the Islamic terror issue is that so many people take this an an either/or situation
Islam is a violent, xenophobic religion and all of it's adherents are dangerous
versus
Islam is a religion of peace, and anyone who questions that is a racist

My own opinion is that Islam has doctrinal definitions...which do make it xenophobic, violent, and tyrannical...BUT that people are still people and the majority of Muslims are NOT xenophobic, violent,or tyrannical.

The best ...ahem..intimacy I ever got was from a "devout" Christian lady married to someone not me. While I am ashamed I allowed that, it does prove (to me, at least) that people can be defined culturally by their religion without being all devout about it's doctrines.

I am working on a blog about the "Muslim vs Islam" perspective I mentioned

My own opinion is that Islam has doctrinal definitions...which do make it xenophobic, violent, and tyrannical...

I don't agree with that at least no more than most other religions - it is the narrative that we have been fed by the MSM and world governments to justify their own agenda in regards to limiting freedoms.

If you look at history nearly all religions have justified acts of extreme violence on the basis of religious dogma and on the basis of being good Christians/Muslims/Jews/Hindus or whatever.

I think the assumption that Islam is somehow unique in this regard is a mistake and I would be cautious of those who attempt to spread that idea because I believe there is an agenda behind it.

Indeed it serves the agenda of those who are trying to spread the extremist type of thought by creating divisions and making people more polarised.

That isn't to say there is no problem.

What we have right now is a particular definition of Islam which is ultra conservative and dangerous. The reasons for this are complex and in part rooted in the attempts to fight communism at the beginning of the 20th century as well as a variety of imperial interventions in international politics.

I find it worrying that nobody takes action against Saudi Arabia which seems to be encouraging and supporting this kind of thing.

I don't think it can last forever though.

BUT that people are still people and the majority of Muslims are NOT xenophobic, violent,or tyrannical.

Yes that is true of most people. Sadly those that are cause havoc for everyone else.

Nested Reply:
I believe in g*d, but I have no clue about who/what he is. I was once hostile to organized religion, but i have become more tolerant towards Christianity and more hostile to Islam over the last few years.

I used to do a mockery of Christianity on access TV called "The Satanic Tent Revival"...even my Christian friends liked it ;>

What do think about a post on some other less controversial examples of reaction formation? If found a study which had an interesting effect on racism (people overcompensating) and feminism but I'm not sure if people will be interested.

maybe a survey of issues? include every example you can think of. People's interest on Steemit tends to come and go, so why not! You've already laid the groundwork in this post, so the next one could just be a followup with more deatil on the example you choose.

I probably won't be a gadfly ;>

I used to do a mockery of Christianity on access TV called "The Satanic Tent Revival"...even my Christian friends liked it ;>

I bet you were popular with that - people don't like any kind of criticism of religion - although I think in part that is what makes it more funny because I think it releases tension. I think in general we need to laugh at ourselves and life it makes it easier to cope!

maybe a survey of issues? include every example you can think of. People's interest on Steemit tends to come and go, so why not! You've already laid the groundwork in this post, so the next one could just be a followup with more detail on the example you choose.

Interesting thanks for the suggestion - I will have a think as to how I can do it. Maybe I could combine the two so that those that don't have their own examples can discuss it.

Right now I have a few other topics that I have been working on plus I am trying to get up to speed for returning to work too. It never seems like there is enough time!

Yes that is true of most people. Sadly those that are cause havoc for everyone else.

and it leads to the "guilt by association" problem.

While I will stand by my statement, I'll argue the point on the post I'll publish.

I hate it when folks derail my blogs (even when there is good discussion ;>) so I'll take my penny off the tracks now!

Lol no problem and I am not saying you are wrong. We all have our different points of view.

To be honest I tend to fluctuate between being an atheist and agnostic with anti-organised religion stance.

What do think about a post on some other less controversial examples of reaction formation? If found a study which had an interesting effect on racism (people overcompensating) and feminism but I'm not sure if people will be interested.

I will never understand one human being killing another human being.

Me neither.

Good explanation of an iffy theory. The trouble with "reaction formation" lies in the absence-of-evidence problem, plus it appeals to two psychological biases that might well be present in the would-be assessor: 1) an inference gap, in which the evident motive isn't understandable; 2) sophisticated cynicism, which relishes irony.

These two biases will lead to a lot of false positives through using that theory.

Absolutely. It feels right but we cannot be sure that it is right.

I remember my father was really anti gay, He used to get really angry about it all but I absolutely certain he did not have any hidden gay tendencies. Im sure that was social conditioning.
As for myself, the moment I was born they caught me looking at the breasts of the midwife. So I started early.
However, from age 14 to 16 I stopped chasing girls for a while and knuckled down to study to make sure I got good grades when I left school.
My father noticed this and began to worry I might be gay. Although I did not know this at the time.
Anyways, at 16 I went to art school and cos I had gotten out of practice I was a but shy with girls, and I had acne lol!
The other lads in the class noticed this and one day a brazen punk lad put a porn mag in my sports bag without me knowing.
When I got home I just put my bag in my room and went out to play football.
My mother died when I was a boy and at that time my father had married the bitch from hell and she just loved getting me into trouble in order to watch me squirm from my father chastising me. She often when though my things and this day Christmas had come early.
When I walked into the living room something hit me in the face and landed on the floor. My stepmother had thrown this porn mag at me and now it was lying on the floor with the pages open at the center fold lol!. The women in those days were not bald down there but rather well, lets say Marxist vaginas, and I did not know where to look.
Well my stepmom cursed me calling a pervert and all sorts. My Dad just sat there. I tried to say it wasnt mine but they didnt believe me.
My sent me to my bedroom saying he would be up in minute.
So now I thought, shit my Dad is going give me a belting and Im innocent.
Anyways he comes up and closed the door and just says "Its perfectly normal to like girls at your age. But I wouldnt bring theoe mags in here, you can see whats shes like".
As he went down stairs I heard the wicked witch of the west say "Why didnt you belt him?"
And my Dad said "Im just so relieved he isnt gay" lol!.

I cnan laugh about it now but I reckon if my Dad had beat that day I might possibly have had major emotional sexual ssues when I became older.
When in fact it was like he gave me the green light to start chasing after babes again lol!
Great post again @the cryptofiend they always get my mind going.
Not sure if what I said was so relevant but it was just what came to mind.

Thanks for sharing your experience:)

Thank you:)

Come to Mongolia and realize your dreams here!

I would love to visit Mongolia some day!

Great article with indepth analysis!! We human are such strange creatures. Despite the best efforts of the scientists, there are still so many mysterious aspects of our body that remain unexplained.

Thanks yes:)

Very informative. I had not really thought about this thoroughly, but it makes a lot of sense intuitively. In studies, plants sometimes respond to toxins with more growth as a reaction. I guess there is an equal and opposite reaction to every force?

Yes that is another way of thinking about it.