<P> Recent research by Geraerts, Merckelbach, Jelicic, & Smeets (2006) found that for individuals with low anxiety and high desirability traits (repressors), suppressed anxious autobiographical events initially intruded fewer times than in other groups (low, high, and high defensive anxious groups), but intruded more often after one week . This difference in coping style may account for the disparities within the literature . That said, the problem remains that the cause of the paradoxical effect may be in the thought tapping measures used (e.g. bell ringing). Evidence from Brown (1990) that showed participants were very sensitive to frequency information prompted Clarke, Ball and Pape (1991) to obtain participants' aposterio estimates of the number of intrusive target thoughts and found the same pattern of paradoxical results . However, even though such a method appears to overcome the problem, it and all the other methodologies use self - report as the primary form of data - collection . This may be problematic because of response distortion or inaccuracy in self - reporting . </P> <P> Thought suppression also has the capability to change our behavior . Macrae, Bodenhausen, Milne, and Jetten found that when people were asked not to think about the stereotypes of a certain group (e.g. a "skinhead"), their written descriptions about a group member's typical day contained less stereotypical thoughts . However, when they were told they were going to meet an individual they had just written about, those in the suppression group sat significantly farther away from the "skinhead" (just by virtue of his clothes being present). These results show that even though there may have been an initial enhancement of the stereotype, participants were able to prevent this from being communicated in their writing; this was not true for their behavior though . </P> <P> Further experiments have documented similar findings . In one study, when participants were given cognitively demanding concurrent tasks, the results showed a paradoxical higher frequency of target thoughts than controls . However other controlled studies have not shown such effects . For example, Wenzlaff and Bates found that subjects concentrating on a positive task experienced neither paradoxical effects nor rebound effects--even when challenged with cognitive load . Wenzlaff and Bates also note that the beneficiality of concentration in their study participants was better optimized when the subjects employed positive thoughts . </P> <P> Some studies have shown that when test subjects are under what Wegner refers to as a "cognitive load" (for instance, using multiple external distractions to try to suppress a target thought), the effectiveness of thought suppression appears to be reduced . However, in other studies in which focused distraction is used, long term effectiveness may improve . That is, successful suppression may involve less distractors . For example, Wegner, Schneider, Carter & White found that a single, pre-determined distracter (e.g., a red Volkswagen) was sufficient to eliminate the paradoxical effect post-testing . Evidence from Bowers and Woody is supportive of the finding that hypnotized individuals produce no paradoxical effects . This rests on the assumption that deliberate "distracter activity" is bypassed in such an activity . </P>

Discuss the white bear research on suppression and the rebound effect