Letting it out may be bad for your emotional health.
Many people assume that sharing feelings openly and often is a positive ideal
that promotes mental health. But some social critics and psychologists now
conclude that repressing one’s feelings may do more good than venting
emotions. "A small number of researchers are taking an
empirical look at the general assumption that speaking out and declaring one’s
feelings is better than holding them in," writes Christina Sommers, a resident
fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. At Suffilk
University, psychologist Jane Bybee classified high-school students on the basis
of their self-awareness: "sensitizers" were extremely aware of their internal
states, "repressors" focused little on themselves, and "intermediates" occupied
the middle range. Bybee then collected student evaluations of themselves and
each other, along with teacher evaluations of the students. On the whole, the
repressors were more socially and academically successful than their more
"sensitized" classmates. Bybee speculated that repressed people, not emoters,
may have a better balance of moods. In a study at Catholic
University in Washington, D.C., researcher George Bonarmo tested the assumption
that, in order to recover mental health, people need to vent negative emotions
by discussing their feelings openly. Bonanno and other researchers found that,
among adolescent girls who had suffered sexual abuse, those who "showed
emotional avoidance" were healthier than those who more openly expressed grief
or anger. One study of Holocaust survivors supports Bonanno in
suggesting that verbalizing strong emotions may not improve a person’s mental
health. Researchers found that Holocaust survivors who were encouraged to talk
about their experiences in the war fared worse than repressors. They concluded
that repression was not pathological response to Holocaust experience and that
"talking through" the atrocities failed to being closure to the
survivors. Sommers note that in many societies it has been
considered normal to repress private feelings, and that "in most cultures
stoicism and reticence are valued, while the free expression of emotions is
deemed a personal shortcoming." She is concerned that pushing someone to be
"sensitizers" may also create a preoccupation with self that excludes outside
interests. Sommers is particularly critical of educational approaches that
attempt to encourage self-discovery and self-esteem through excessive
"openness". Healthy stoicism should not be confused with the
emotional numbness that may be brought on by post-traumatic stress disorder.
Most people experiencing such traumas as war, assault, or natural disaster can
benefit from immediate counseling, according to the National Institute of Mental
Health. According to Jane Bybee, "sensitizers" were ______.
A. extremely sensitive to other’s feelings
B. evaluated positively by the teachers
C. more successful than "intermediates"
D. not as emotionally healthy as "repressors"