Research Proposal

Cognition is a broad area of science that is very interesting to analyze; in particular, the specific topic of how the brain responds to different forms of trauma brings several questions to the forefront and calls for the analysis of its further implications. The prevalence of this discussion area is clear—individuals have always had to respond to things that were emotionally painful or difficult to handle. In many instances, this mechanism is innate and occurs without conscious thought and awareness; interestingly enough, although this essentially is “normal” it seems to incite uneasiness in people. In other cases, individuals cope through deliberate means, such as through meditation and writing. In my research paper, I plan to discuss the implications of both of these cases. My tentative question becomes: How do individuals cope with trauma both consciously and unconsciously, and to what extent does this mechanism/psychological immune system cause us to misreact to the current realities of life? In other words, how much of the present does coping cause individuals to lose to the past? I may also explore the distinction between conscious and unconscious coping mechanisms and the limitations of each.

Through these research questions, I hope to make meaningful connections between the findings and opinions of several theorists and possibly analyze further enough to bring a new question to the forefront. I find that many discussions concern the concept of the “psychological immune system,” which describes the phenomenon in which individuals’ brains are hardwired to automatically reroute emotionally taxing experiences and thus create a sense of positivity and hope out of what otherwise would not. Studies have found that when individuals are exposed to different stimuli and made to react, they do not know the reasons for their actions yet scramble to create some when prompted, and that when given the opportunity individuals deliberately chase after happiness. Ultimately, many authors of these findings argue the inefficiency of the deliberate concept of coping with different stimuli. Others also discuss the concept of “divided consciousness,” which refers to the innate ability of individuals to mentally withdraw from the world around them and separate themselves emotionally from their physical presence in order to cope with traumatic experiences. Daydreams and other types of escape are mentioned as examples that help people maintain their mental sanity by allowing them to shut out events that are threatening or overwhelming. In my paper, I plan to delve into where these two concepts cross paths in their functions as coping mechanisms. Instead of arguing my opinion on how efficient they are, I will cite data and facts, and I will discuss the implications they have on the individuals employing them, including the effects they have on individual’s actions and reactions in the present day and the extent to which they keep individuals mentally chained to the past.

I will begin the paper by laying a foundation for my argument. I will introduce the concepts that many authors and scientists researching cognition already commonly discuss, such as the concepts of the psychological immune system, which is a term discussed by Daniel Gilbert in “Immune to Reality”, and divided consciousness, which is a term discussed by Martha Stout in “When I Woke Up Tuesday Morning it was Friday”. I will use research and informative sources to provide examples of common coping mechanisms, both conscious and unconscious, and analyze the distinction between the two. I will further discuss and analyze the authors’ views on the coping methods they discuss in order to make broader and more interesting connections. These connections will become the frame for Tim O’Brien’s “How to Tell a True War Story”, which I expect will add an interesting perspective to the discussion. O’Brien essay, which is fluidly a story about his time serving in Vietnam, is in itself the perfect example of a coping initiative in response to a traumatic experience. I plan to pick apart not only the content of this source, but also the unique method in which O’Brien writes in order to get certain ideas and feelings across to the audience, and in this way hope to arrive at an interesting conclusion concerning the loss of the present to the traumatic past.