IntroductionDehumanization is defined as the denial to people of their humanness. It is distinguished into animalistic and mechanistic dehumanization. The aim of this study is to examine whether professionals in a public hospital dehumanize the patient and self-dehumanize. MethodsWe used the Dehumanization Questionnaire, the Mechanistic Self-Dehumanization Scale, the Human Nature and Human Uniqueness Characteristics Questionnaire, the General Causality Orientation Scale and the Adult Attachment Questionnaire. The sample consisted of 135 mental health professionals (20 from a general hospital and 115 from a psychiatric hospital), 134 other health professionals from the general hospital and 84 people from the general population. ResultsHealth professionals dehumanize the hospitalized patient more than the general population. The secure attachment acts protectively on self-dehumanization and negatively on the dehumanization of the hospitalized patient. Finally, autonomous people are not self-dehumanized. ConclusionsOur findings indicate that measures should be taken for health professionals so that they do not dehumanize the patient.

The present study examines the representational content of voluntary and involuntary autobiographical memories (objectification), as well as the anchorings according to age, sex and time contexts. 1.200 individuals of both sexes and different ages participated in this study and were asked to write down three memory events and three "oblivion" events in a personal, family and social framework and to note the date that these events took place. The results highlight the significance of social contexts in the reconstruction of the autobiographical past, which are space, time and different affiliation groups. The content of autobiographical memory is constructed through everyday relationships between the individuals and the members of the groups they belong to. Family, school, friends, the workspace, the socio-historical and political framework of their era provide the individuals with identity references. Both the quality and the time reference of the events depend on the age of the participants.

Résumé L’article présente les résultats de deux recherches. L’une porte sur les stratégies utilisées par les individus pour se rappeler ou oublier quelque chose, et l’autre, sur le contenu de la mémoire individuelle volontaire et involontaire. La première étude, qui porte sur 150 sujets, montre que les gens utilisent des mnémostratégies externes et des léthostratégies internes. La deuxième étude, qui porte sur 690 individus, d’âge et de sexe différents, monte que le contenu de la mémoire et d’oubli constitue le côté pile et le côté face d’une même pièce. Les gens mémorisent les événements qui leur procurent une intégrité identitaire et se débarrassent des événements qui menacent leur identité. Ces événements dépendent de la génération des interrogés.

Résumé L’objectif de cette étude concerne les mnémotechniques et léthotechniques que les individus déclarent utiliser pour se rappeler ou oublier quelque chose. 1 210 sujets, hommes et femmes d’âges différents devaient répondre, dans un cadre de soi personnel (« Vous personnellement... ») ou de soi social (« Un individu... »), à des questions ouvertes de stratégies de mémoire et d’oubli. Le résultat le plus important se réfère à la force universelle des mnémostratégies et léthostratégies : les premières sont extraverties tandis que les deuxièmes sont introverties. Les stratégies mentionnées ne dépendent ni de l’âge ni du sexe des répondants. À la base de ces stratégies se construit une pensée sociale de mémoires et d’oublis qui nous lient au passé, au présent et au futur.

IntroductionDehumanization is the phenomenon that concerns the non-attribution of humanness to other human beings and has two dimensions, animalistic and mechanistic. The aim of the present study is to study dehumanization and self-dehumanization in patients with psychosis and organic disease. MethodsThe sample consisted of 200 people who were hospitalized in Athens, Greece, in 2017. Participants were asked to answer the dehumanization questionnaire, the mechanistic self-dehumanization scale, the human nature and human uniqueness characteristics questionnaire, and the adult attachment questionnaire. ResultsIt was found that patients with organic disease and patients with psychosis do not perform mechanistic and animalistic dehumanization of themselves. Still, it seems that insecure attachment (anxiety and obsession) contributes positively to their mechanistic dehumanization and negatively to their mechanistic selfdehumanization. From the insecure attachment, only the dimensions of stress and obsession affect the mechanistic dehumanization. ConclusionsIt is important to take measures to train specialists in the hospital so that they can establish a safe therapeutic relationship with the patient so that patients will not resort to dehumanization and selfdehumanization as a defense against the stress of hospitalization.