Abstract
Subliminal psychodynamic activation methodology has recently been the subject of an exchange of views between Birgegärd and Sohlberg (1999) and Fudin (2000). The agreements and some remaining points of contention are summarized here. The main difference of opinion appears to concern unconscious verbal encoding in relation to subjective experience in subliminal stimulation and whether subliminal psychodynamic activation results are unreliable until a full explanation of how verbal encoding works is at hand. We conclude that clarifying perspectives is important and that those suggesting alternative explanations of results on subliminal psychodynamic activation must now empirically investigate their claims.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
