Inductions versus suggestions: Effects of direct and indirect wording on hypnotic responding and experience.

This study examined the effects of direct wording (authoritative language, specific responses) versus indirect wording (permissive language, choice of responses) of hypnotic inductions and suggestions in measures of behavioral and subjective responding. Subjects experienced suggestion-related involuntariness and suggested effects to a greater degree in response to direct-word suggestions (Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility: Form A; Shor & Orne, 1962) than in response to indirect-worded suggestions (Alman-Wexler Indirect Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale; Pratt, Wood, & Alman, 1984). No difference in behavioral responding was observed. Furthermore, induction wording did not have an effect on these measures, nor did the wording of the induction and the wording of the suggestion types interact with each other. Female subjects attributed less of their responsiveness to their own efforts when they received direct suggestions, and male subjects were less likely to attribute their responsivity to the hypnotist's ability when they received indirect suggestions. Rapport with the hypnotist did not vary as a function of induction or suggestion wording. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Nonvolition, expectancies, and hypnotic rapport.

Prior to hypnosis, 49 Ss were informed either that hypnotizable Ss can resist motoric suggestions or that such control does not characterize good hypnotic Ss. During hypnosis, susceptible and simulating Ss (as determined by a 10-point version of the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility–Form A) received countersuggestions involving inhibiting suggestion-related movements. Susceptible Ss' responses were sensitive to prehypnotic normative information. There was a corresponding tendency for reports of involuntariness to be sensitive to the expectancy manipulation. Ss were able to feel deeply hypnotized and to rate themselves as good Ss yet concomitantly experience themselves as in control over their actions when normative information supported this attribution. Reports of suggestion-related sensations were associated with movements in response to countersuggestion. Simulators were unable to fake susceptibles' reports of sensations and involuntariness. However, for all Ss, movements paralleled expectancies about appropriate response, supporting the hypothesis that involuntary experiences are sensitive to the broad expectational context and are mediated by active cognitive processes. Rapport with the hypnotist was also a factor in resolving hypnotic conflict. (33 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The impact of conflicting communications on response to hypnotic suggestion.

Two experiments with 182 Australian undergraduates examined how hypnotized Ss respond when information is presented that conflicts with hypnotic suggestions. Three hypnotic suggestions (hand lowering, finger lock, and hallucination) and 3 levels of conflict communication (low, medium, or high) were used, and real and simulating Ss (as determined by the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility) were tested in each experiment. In Exp I, the hypnotist presented the suggestion and then the conflicting communication. Increased conflict appreciably lessened the responding of Ss; an appreciable behavioral difference occurred between real and simulating Ss on the hallucination item. In Exp II, the hypnotist presented the conflicting communication and then the suggestion. Increased conflict did not appreciably lessen the responding of Ss on any item. Findings are discussed in terms of the apparent tendency of Ss to respond to the more recent message of the hypnotist. (22 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Experiential analysis of hypnosis: Some new observations on hypnotic phenomena.

10 Ss who were assessed on the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility as being highly susceptible to hypnosis were shown videotaped versions of their previous hypnotic sessions in the presence of an independent inquirer who attempted to foster Ss' personal comments on their own experiences. A special method of inquiry called the "experiential analysis technique" was constructed to study Ss' recall, which was examined for fantasy involvement, rapport, and individual modes of cognition. Data from the application of the method indicate the idiosyncratic ways in which Ss interpret routine suggestions, the degree to which they become personally involved with the hypnotist, and 3 distinct modes of cognizing, which were labeled "concentrative-cooperative," "cognitive-independent," and "cognitive-constructive." (9 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Suggestion and countersuggestion in hypnotic behavior.

It is widely believed that the successful response to hypnotic suggestions requires the S to focus his attention on the content of these suggestions and to avoid incompatible and conflicting cognitive activities. This assumption was tested by exposing 12 undergraduates continuously to incompatible suggestions and images as they attempted to respond to the direct suggestions of the hypnotist. The effect of incompatible suggestions on task-motivated behavior was also assessed with 8 additional undergraduates. (All Ss had been administered the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale.) Performance under these circumstances was just as effective as in baseline sessions (without incompatible suggestions) for 9 hypnotic and 6 task-motivated Ss. Performance of the remainder of the Ss was partially successful. The behavior of most Ss was more closely related to their beliefs about how the experimenter expected them to respond than to whether they engaged in incompatible cognitive activities. Results are viewed as consistent with a dissociation interpretation of hypnosis. (19 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Transient positive and negative experiences accompanying stage hypnosis.

Frequency of positive and negative experiences accompanying stage hypnosis was assessed in follow-up interviews with 22 participants of university-sponsored performances. Most Ss described their experience positively (relaxing, interesting, exciting, satisfying, illuminating, and pleasurable), but some described it negatively (confusing, silly, annoying, and frightening). Five Ss (22.7%) reported partial or complete amnesia; all were highly responsive to the stage hypnosis suggestions. One S was completely unable to breach amnesia and felt annoyed and frightened. Five Ss (22.7%) believed the hypnotist had control over their behavior. Participants (n?=?15) tested subsequently on the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C (A. M. Weitzenhogger and E. R. Hilgard, 1962) were most moderately to highly hypnotizable (M?=?7.07), and the scores correlated significantly (r?=?.68) with percentage of passed stage hypnosis suggestions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Goal-directed fantasy, hypnotic susceptibility, and expectancies.

We conducted an initial screening session in which hypnosis was presented as a "test of imagination" and administered with other imagination measures. In a 2nd session, we instructed high- and low-hypnotizable Ss to imagine along with suggestions but to resist responding to motoric suggestions. Ss received either instructions to use goal-directed fantasies (GDFs) or no facilitative instructions. Sizable individual difference effects were secured. Hypnotizable Ss exhibited more suggestion-related movements and reported greater involuntariness than did low-hypnotizable Ss. With GDF instructions, low- and high-hypnotizable Ss reported equivalent GDF absorption and frequencies. However, hypnotizable Ss exhibited greater responsiveness and reported greater involuntariness than did those low in hypnotizability, even when their GDFs were equivalent. Thus, no support was generated for the hypotheses that sustained, elaborated suggestion-related imagery mediates response to suggestion or that absorption in suggestions is of particular importance for low-hypnotizable Ss. Findings support the hypothesis that expectancies mediate the relation between imagination, involuntariness, and responding. Hypnotizable imagining Ss exhibited greater responsiveness than a comparable sample of Ss did in a previous countersuggestion study (Lynn, Nash, Rhue, Frauman, & Stanley, 1983). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Factors influencing rapport in hypnosis.

The phenomenon of countering expresses the tendency of some highly susceptible Ss to favor the intent of the hypnotist when placed in a conflict situation where social influences of another kind dictate an alternative response. The present research explored the parameters of this objective index of involvement with the hypnotist to investigate the special relevance of rapport processes to the hypnotic setting. Rapport was manipulated in 5 different experiments with highly susceptible Ss (Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A), varying either the warmth or genuineness of the hypnotist. It was predicted from transference theorizing that countering would decrease in the negative context and increase in the positive one. Results confirm predictions for highly susceptible Ss tested in the former context but not the latter. In the negative setting, Ss were inhibited in their rate of countering, but maintained their previous level of response to the hypnotist when rapport was facilitated. Results highlight the relevance of interpersonal processes to theorizing about hypnosis. (32 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Posthypnotic amnesia as disrupted retrieval.

Investigated the process of remembering during posthypnotic amnesia by exploring the organization of recalled material in Ss displaying only partial amnesia. During 3 standardized hypnosis scales (Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility and Forms B and C of the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale) suggestions of posthypnotic amnesia were administered to 112 male undergraduates. Hypnotizable Ss tended to recall the scale items in random chronological order, compared to the relatively sequential recall of insusceptible Ss. The difference in temporal sequencing of recall during amnesia indicates that, for the hypnotizable S, posthypnotic amnesia is characterized primarily by a disruption or disorganization of part of the recall process, leaving other aspects of memory processing relatively unimpaired. Results suggest a resolution of the apparent paradox between the subjective reports of amnesic Ss and the objective evidence that the apparently forgotten memories remain available for other cognitive operations. (26 ref.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Behavioral predictions from hypnotic responsiveness scores when obtained with and without prior induction procedures.

Administered the Barber Suggestibility Scale (BSS) and the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form A (SHSS) to 80 high school students, half with imagination instructions and half with hypnotic induction instructions. The Stanford Profile Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form I (SPS), was subsequently administered to test the predictive effectiveness of the scales. The SPS has both different induction procedures and different item content from the BSS and the SHSS, which are very similar in their test-suggestion topics. Correlations with the SPS were much higher following prior testing under induction rather than imagination conditions, and induction conditions raised both objective and subjective scores above imagination conditions. Although both the BSS and the SHSS yielded similar results, some differences were noted. The subjective correction makes a greater difference for BSS than for SHSS scores, so that the subjective correction is to be recommended especially when the BSS is used. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Hypnotizability, daydreaming styles, imagery vividness, and absorption: A multidimensional study.

Examined the interrelationships between the following measures: hypnotic susceptibility (Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Forms A and C), imagery vividness (Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire; VVIQ), involvement in everyday imaginative activities (Tellegen Absorption Scale; TAS), and daydreaming styles (28 scales of the Imaginal Processes Inventory). Ss were 56 university students and staff members. Factor analysis produced a factor characterized as a positively vivid and absorptive imagination style. Hypnotic susceptibility, VVIQ, TAS, and positive-affect daydreaming styles all loaded on this factor. Two other factors were a dysphoric daydreaming style and a lack-of-attentional-control style. Stepwise multiple regressions suggested that males and females exhibit different relationships between hypnotic susceptibility and predictor variables. Similar differences were found for the VVIQ and the TAS and their daydreaming-scale predictor variables. (39 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The reality of hypnotic analgesia: A comparison of highly hypnotizables with simulators.

Used the real–simulator design to investigate the reality of hypnotic analgesia when normally painful stress was induced by immersing a hand and forearm in circulating ice water (cold pressor response). 2 groups of Ss (12 14–22 yr old selected highly hypnotizable "reals" and 12 13–27 yr old insusceptible "simulators"), determined by the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility (Form A) and the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale (Form C), participated in a single session during which suggestions for pain reduction were given in both the waking and hypnotic conditions. The simulators proved remarkably successful in predicting and imitating the responses of the reals, except for a tendency to overreact and exaggerate compliance with suggestions. The genuineness of hypnotic analgesia was attested, however, by the differences between the honesty reports of the reals and those of the simulators who attempted to behave as hypnotized Ss are expected to do. (17 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Hypnotic involuntariness: A social cognitive analysis.

The experience of involuntariness is a hallmark of hypnosis. A framework for understanding involuntary experiences that draws from social psychological and cognitive perspectives on hypnotic responding is presented. There are at least 5 reasons to reject the hypothesis that hypnotic responding is automatic and involuntary: (a) Hypnotic responses have all of the properties of behavior that are typically defined as voluntary. That is, they are purposeful, directed toward goals, regulated in terms of subjects' intentions, and can be progressively changed to better achieve subjects' goals. (b) Hypnotizable subjects can resist suggestions when resistance is defined as consistent with the role of a good hypnotized subject. (c) Hypnotic behaviors are neither reflexes nor manifestations of innate stimulus–response connections. (d) Hypnotic performances consume attentional resources in a manner comparable with nonhypnotic performances. (e) Hypnotic subjects' cognitive activities clearly demonstrate their active attempts to fulfill the requirements of hypnotic suggestions, which include experiencing suggestion-related effects as involuntary. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The Computer-Assisted Hypnosis Scale: Standardization and norming of a computer-administered measure of hypnotic ability.

In a counterbalanced, within-subjects, repeated measures design, 130 participants were administered both the Computer-Assisted Hypnosis Scale (CAHS; C. D. Grant, 1993) and the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C (SHSS:C; A. M. Weitzenhoffer & E. R. Hilgard, 1962). For each hypnotic procedure, responsiveness was assessed along three dimensions: behavioral (CAHS, SHSS:C), subjective depth (Field Depth Inventory; P. B. Field, 1965), and relational involvement (Archaic Involvement Measure; M. R. Nash & D. Spinler, 1989). The CAHS was shown to be a psychometrically sound instrument for measuring hypnotic ability. The various dimensions of CAHS hypnotic responsiveness were highly positively related, and the CAHS compared favorably with the SHSS:C across the three dimensions assessed. Results are discussed in terms of the theory and practice of clinical assessment, noting directions for future research. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effect of subliminal symbiotic activation on hypnotic rapport and susceptibility.

Divided 72 male undergraduates into 2 groups matched for susceptibility (high, medium, low) as measured by the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale—Form A. Experimental Ss received symbiotic ("Mommy and I are one") subliminal stimulation via tachistoscope in a double-blind design. The comparison group received a psychodynamically neutral stimulus ("People are walking"). Following subliminal stimulation, Ss were hypnotized individually. Projective tasks that indexed rapport with the hypnotist and the mother were administered during hypnosis. Rapport was also measured by rated intimacy of self-disclosure topics and by valence of topics selected to disclose to the hypnotist. MANOVA showed that symbiotic fantasies had an impact on measures assumed to be relevant to affective, relationship factors in hypnosis. Ss in the "Mommy" group selected more positively valenced topics to disclose to the hypnotist. However, no interaction between hypnotic susceptibility level and symbiotic activation was found, suggesting that susceptibility does not mediate the rapport. (8 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Trance logic, susceptibility screening, and the transparency response.

Two groups of hypnotizable ("real") Ss were screened on the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility and the individually administered Revised Stanford Profile Scales of Hypnotic Susceptibility or on the Group Scale alone. These 26 Ss were compared with 15 simulating Ss (who were group and individually screened) on 5 measures of trance logic (TL). As predicted, the stringently screened Ss passed more of the criterion hallucinations used in the tests of TL than group-screened-alone Ss, whereas simulators passed all the criterion hallucinations. However, the 2 groups of reals were indistinguishable on measures of TL, and only the transparency response differentiated reals and simulators. In their guesses of group assignment, hypnotists were better able to differentiate less stringently screened than stringently screened reals from simulators. Although experimenter blindness may be compromised by the use of less stringently screened Ss in TL research, bias was not associated with differential responding on TL tasks. The finding that reals who reported transparency also reported weakened or imperfect hallucinations supports the hypothesis that less than compelling hypnotic experience, not contralogical responding, is at the heart of transparency reports. (33 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Hypnosis, absorption, and time perception.

Previous research attempting to relate absorption to hypnotic time perception has been inconclusive. The present study provides a more thorough test of the absorption hypothesis by assessing the separate and combined effects of hypnotic responsiveness, hypnotic vs waking context, and involvement of the stimulus content. 60 college students, tested in either a waking or a hypnotic condition, provided retrospective time estimates of 2 taped story narrations, selected to represent opposite extremes of interest and involvement. Assignment to high- or low-responsive groups on the basis of Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility scores was cross-checked with scores on the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale. Overall, duration estimates were shorter for the involving than for the noninvolving content, and high-responsive Ss tended to give shorter estimates than did low-responsive Ss. However, the only substantial underestimation occurred when the high-responsive Ss listened to the involving tape in the hypnotic context, a finding that supports a general absorption hypothesis. (15 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Enhancing hypnotic susceptibility: Interpersonal and rapport factors.

This research supported the hypothesis that hypnosis can be thought of as a set of potentially modifiable social-cognitive skills and attitudes. A low-interpersonal-training treatment devised by Gorasini and Spanos (1986) was compared with a treatment designed to modify not only cognitive factors but also to augment rapport with the trainer and diminish resistance to responding (high-interpersonal training). Fifty percent of the initially unhypnotizable subjects in the high-interpersonal condition tested as being highly susceptible to hypnosis (high susceptibles) at posttest on the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility (Shor & Orne, 1962); 25% of the unhypnotizable subjects in the low-interpersonal condition responded comparably. Eighty-three percent of the medium-susceptibility (medium susceptibles) subjects tested as being highly susceptible at posttest in both conditions. Practice-alone control subjects' performance was stable across testings. The study was the first to demonstrate that treatment gains generalize to a battery of novel, demanding suggestions (generalization index) that have been found to differentiate highly susceptible subjects from unhypnotizable simulating subjects. The importance of rapport was evidenced by the finding that rapport ratings paralleled group differences in hypnotic responding and that rapport correlated substantially with susceptibility scores at posttest and with the generalization index. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Hypnotic time distortion and learning: Another look.

Conducted 2 studies employing different methodologies with a total of 75 undergraduates to test the hypothesis that hypnotic time distortion facilitates verbal learning. All of the Ss in Exp I and most of those in Exp II were given a modified version of the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale-Form C. All Exp II Ss were also given the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility. Analysis of previous research indicated that hypnotic susceptibility and the form of the time-distortion suggestions might be important moderator variables in the relationship. The separate and combined effects of these variables were observed in both studies. No combination of hypnotic susceptibility and time-distortion suggestions in either study raised performance level beyond that of the waking- and/or hypnotic-control conditions. Responses to a postexperimental questionnaire in Exp II indicated that high-susceptible Ss reported subjectively convincing changes in experienced time flow following time-distortion suggestions. (12 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)