A single-treatment method to stop smoking using ancillary self-hypnosis: Final remarics in response to the discussants

The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence on suggested amnesia of 2 variables: hypnotic susceptibility and active versus passive learning. 36 chronic schizophrenic patients, 18 low in hypnotic susceptibility and 18 medium or high in hypnotic susceptibility, were randomly assigned to active or passive learning conditions. These Ss were first tested in a hypnosis condition (Day 1) and were retested in a nonhypnosis condition (Day 2) with the presence of waking suggestion. The results for the hypnosis condition indicated that (a) there were no differences between low susceptible and medium-high susceptible Ss on recall amnesia and reversibility (reversible amnesia); (b) recall amnesia and reversibility were significantly higher (p <.01) in passive than active learning conditions; and (c) in all conditions recall was consistently ordered. The results for the nonhypnosis condition were similar, except that reversibility was not significantly higher in passive than active learning conditions. A secondary analysis which partitioned high susceptible (scoring 8-12) from medium susceptible (scoring 5-7) Ss revealed that reversibility was significantly higher in the high susceptible Ss than in the low susceptible Ss; medium susceptible Ss did not differ from either high or low susceptible Ss. The data suggest that the chronic schizophrenics' failure to recall hypnotic events may involve different mechanisms from those which account for posthypnotic amnesia in normal Ss.     

Toward a theory of “hypnotic” behavior: Replication and extension of experiments by barber and co-workers (1962–65) and Hilgard and Tart (1966)

Responses to test suggestions (e.g., hallucination and amnesia) were assessed under the following treatments: motivational instructions alone; hypnotic procedure with motivational instructions; and imagination-control. Comparisons were made across independent groups, each tested under one treatment, and also within the same Ss tested twice under various combinations of the treatments. Although Ss were suggestible under the imagination-control treatment, both the motivational instructions alone and the hypnotic procedure given together with the motivational instructions raised suggestibility above the control level. The hypnotic-motivational treatment tended to produce an increment in suggestibility which went slightly beyond that attributable to the motivational instructions. The latter increment is interpreted as due to the slightly greater effectiveness of the hypnotic procedure in defining the situation as one in which unusual manifestations, such as hallucination and amnesia, are within Ss' capabilities and definitely expected by E.     

Pseudo-orientation in time as an hypnotherapeutic procedure

This investigation was carried out to obtain comparable figures on the prevalence of spontaneous and suggested posthypnotic amnesia. 91 introductory psychology students were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 groups, and were required to serve as Ss for two consecutive days. The standard induction of the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form A was used on the first day, and that of Form B on the second. Suggestibility items were then presented and served to appraise susceptibility and to test for amnesia. For 1 group, spontaneous amnesia was tested on the first day, and suggested amnesia on the second day. This order was reversed for the second group. Using as evidence of amnesia that 4 or fewer of the 10 possible items were recalled, 6 (7%) showed spontaneous amnesia on one of the two days, while a significantly larger number, 32 (35%), showed suggested amnesia. When the groups were subdivided on the basis of susceptibility scores, it was found that there is a marked advantage for suggested amnesia over spontaneous amnesia for highly susceptible hypnotic Ss, while this difference essentially disappears for low Ss. It was further found that (a) suggested amnesia is significantly greater than spontaneous amnesia whether or not one follows the other, (b) there is a small effect of the suggested posthypnotic amnesia for all levels of susceptibility, but this becomes pronounced with susceptibility scores of 6 and above, (c) the highly susceptible hypnotic Ss show no more spontaneous posthypnotic amnesia than do other Ss. While there may be a small amount of spontaneous amnesia, this amount, if any, is small compared with suggested amnesia. It may be that those Es who find a large amount of spontaneous amnesia are giving unintentional suggestions that it is to be found.     

Reactivation of memory by hypnosis and suggestion

The effects of hypnotic susceptibility (high vs. low), hypnotic condition (hypnotized vs. waking), and the order of testing (hypnosis first vs. waking first) on S's ability to recall meaningful material (specific facts about a rare chemical) 2 weeks after it was originally learned were studied using a 3-way, repeated-measures, factorial design. 52 college students (both male and female) acted as Ss for the study. No significant main effects were found, and the only significant interaction effect indicated that the memory was enhanced when tested the second time, regardless of whether it was in the waking or the hypnotized condition. The results were compared with the findings of other studies in this area using a less complex design.     

Salient findings: Summaries of key findings in the research literature

An experiment was performed to investigate the relationship of hypnosis and posthypnotic amnesia to retroactive inhibition. 4 groups of 10 Ss each learned lists of adjectives in a retroactive inhibition paradigm. 2 of the groups learned the intervening list while they were hypnotized. Ss of one of these were given instructions for posthypnotic amnesia, while Ss of the other were told to recall what they had learned under hypnosis. The savings and recall scores of both these groups for items of the original list were not different from a third group that learned all 3 lists in the waking state. All 3 groups showed substantial retroactive inhibition when compared to a control group that learned no intervening list.     

Task structure as a limiting condition of the occurrence of the treatment effects of simulation instruction in application of the real-simulating model of hypnosis

The hypothesis tested was that lack of task structure facilitates the occurrence of the treatment effects of simulation instruction in application of the real-simulating model of hypnosis. Following appropriate instruction 10 susceptible and 10 insusceptible Ss were tested in 2 sessions by an E who wm blind to the hypnotic susceptibility of Ss. In Session I, Ss were tested on an unstructured (Rorschach) and a structured (Unusual Uses Test) task. In Session II, Ss were administered the same tests again but after hypnosis had been induced and terminated. It was predicted that after receiving instructions to simulate, insusceptible Ss, initially constricted in their response, would change their behavior in Session II in the direction of increased productivity of response, while hypnotic Ss would not, and that the change would be most apparent on the unstructured task. Data supported the hypothesis. In Session II, simulating Ss, but not hypnotic Ss, significantly increased responses on the Rorschach and not on the Uses test. Results suggested that task definition is a limiting condition of the occurrence of the treatment effects of faking instruction.     

Attitude differences of volunteers and nonvolunteers and of susceptible and nonsusceptible hypnotic subjects

A form of the Semantic Differential, containing 9 concepts related to hypnosis and research, was administered to 96 hypnotically inexperienced male Ss. The Ss were later asked to volunteer for a hypnotic experiment, and the hypnotic susceptibility of all volunteers (N = 51) was then determined. Semantic Differential responses of volunteers and nonvolunteers and of highly susceptible and unhyp-notizable Ss were compared. Differences between groups, in both comparisons, were generally not statistically significant, a finding which suggests that there is no simple relationship between paper-and-pencil measures of attitudes and volunteering for hypnotic experiments or hypnotizability.     

Effects of hypnotic induction,motivational suggestions,and level of suggestibility on cognitive performance

The effects on cognitive performance of duration of the hypnotic induction procedure (none, minimal, or extended), presence or absence of motivational suggestions, and Ss' high or low level of suggestibility were assessed in a 3 × 2 × 2 factorial experiment with 120 Ss. Pre- and post-treatment measures were obtained on alternate forms of 4 cognitive tasks measuring visual-motor coordination, number facility, abstract reasoning, and associative memory. The experimental treatments generally failed to exert significant main or interactive effects on the 4 tasks. The discussion specifies 5 possible reasons why cognitive performance was not clearly affected by such experimental treatments as hypnotic induction, motivational suggestions, or a combination of hypnotic induction and motivational suggestions.     

The Conceptual Space of Good and Poor Hypnotic Subjects: A Preliminary Exploration

A form of the Semantic Differential, containing eight concepts related to hypnosis and research, was administered to 12 deeply hypnotizable and 14 nonsusceptible Ss. The good hypnotic Ss evaluated all the concepts more favorably than did the poor hypnotic Ss, with the greatest differential between the two groups occurring on the concept hypnosis. Moreover, the susceptible Ss perceived hypnosis as closer in connotative meaning to such concepts as experiment and professor, then did the nonsusceptible Ss. All differences between the two groups of Ss were of small absolute magnitude, however. Therefore, while the results suggest a relationship between hypnotic susceptibility and attitude toward hypnosis, they appear to preclude the use of the Semantic Differential as a practical predictor of hypnotic susceptibility.     

Motor Imagery in Hypnosis: Accuracy and Duration of Motor Imagery in Waking and Hypnotic States

This study assessed response times and accuracy of motor imagery in waking and hypnotic states and to related responses to hypnotic experiences. The Vividness of Motor Imagery Questionnaire (VMIQ) was administered to 47 participants. A mental walking task was then performed in the waking state. In hypnosis, the same task was included within an imaginary journey after a hypnotic induction. An interaction effect showed for condition (waking vs. hypnotic) and distances. The further the participants had to walk in imagination, the longer they took. For all combinations, participants took significantly longer in hypnosis (p < .001) and were significantly less accurate in hypnosis in reproducing the difference between the different distances (p < .001). Results appear to show a relationship between motor imagery and hypnotic responding and support a state-trait conception of imagery.     

The fantasy of hypnotic time obliteration with related literary allusions

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the effectiveness of a new training procedure on the modification of hypnotic susceptibility. 10 Ss were scored on their objective and subjective performances on the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Forms A and C, both before and after training. Training consisted primarily of (1) providing the circumstances necessary for a clear conception of the appropriate sensory experiences, (2) allowing S to proceed by self-paced successive approximations, (3) structuring the procedure in order to place S in a double-bind situation, and (4) providing verbal reinforcement and opportunities for S's self-reinforcement. The results indicate that both the objective and subjective post-training changes in hypnotic susceptibility are statistically significant. Ss maintained a significant increase when tested by a new hypnotist, although the scores were slightly but significantly reduced. The increased performance on items not included in the training sessions revealed significant generalization. This investigation provides evidence that hypnotic susceptibility can be modified.     

A further attempt to modify hypnotic susceptibility through repeated individualized experience

The study seeks to determine whether hypnotic susceptibility as measured on objective scales can be changed with practice and training. 3 low-, 2 medium-, and 1 high-scoring Ss were seen in individualized training sessions. Combining these Ss with the results of an earlier study (total N = 16) a comparison of gains among high and low Ss showed the higher Ss gaining significantly more (p < .05).     

Hypnotic Depth and Basal Skin Resistance

This study investigated the relationship between a self-report scale for measuring the depth of the hypnotic state and basal skin resistance (BSR). 10 Ss participated in 2 training and 2 experimental sessions each, and BSR was recorded during the latter two sessions. The self-report depth scale accurately predicted the occurrence of hypnotic dreaming and amnesia, traditional criteria for medium and deep hypnotic states. BSR showed a high, positive correlation with the self-report depth scale. Although the study was exploratory in nature, the data suggest that both the self-report depth scale and BSR may be useful measures for detecting changes in the depth of the hypnotic state, and encourage further research.     

Analysis of the cue characteristics of task motivational instructions

This study investigated the assumption of Barber's model of hypnosis that its set of task motivational instructions is thoroughly “nonhypnotic” in character. If this assumption is correct, then the cues associated naturally with task motivational instructions should be more compatible with a suggestibility test situation explicitly defined as nonhypnotic than with one defined as hypnotic, and this affinity should be reflected in both Ss' objective and subjective suggestibility test scores. Barber's (1965) Suggestibility Scale data collected from 90 Ss did not confirm the main prediction under test, but results failed to provide unequivocal support for the model; subjective evidence, in particular, supported least well the assumptions of the paradigm.     

The Role of Expectancy in Hypnotic Hypermnesia: A Brief Communication

Previous research has yielded equivocal evidence of hypnotic memory enhancement. The present experiment assessed the effects of expectancy and hypnotizability on recall for videotaped material under waking and hypnotic conditions. Ss (N = 138) were informed of hypnotic induction either before (expectancy condition) or after (no expectancy condition) watching a videotaped enactment of a crime and completing an initial waking recall test (R1). Both groups then underwent hypnotic induction, and completed the test again (R2). Ss raw recall scores were significantly greater under hypnotic than waking conditions, but this hypermnesia was not evident when scores were corrected for mere increase in rate of responding. Ss expecting later hypnosis scored significantly higher than Ss with no such expectations, but again, this difference was not evident in corrected scores. Hypnotizability of Ss was, however, related to corrected recall, with high hypnotizable Ss displaying the greatest increase in rate of responding from R1 to R2. No evidence for the hypothesized “suppression effect” underlying hypnotic hypermnesia was found.     

Self-exploration in the hypnotic state

Forty-five volunteer Ss were hypnotized in small groups of 4, 5, or 6 and were subsequently hypnotized in individual sessions. In both sessions observer- and self-scores were recorded for all suggestions of the Harvard Group Scale adaptation of the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale. The correlation between observer- and self-scores was .83 for the group session and .89 for the individual session. Hypnotic susceptibility in the group session was very similar to susceptibility in the individual session; mean observer-scores were 6.80 and 6.67 on a 12 point scale. Group self-scores were found to predict quite accurately objective hypnotist scores of the subsequent individual session, 93 per cent of the cases being within 3 points of each other. The correlation was .74.

A second sample of 34 non-volunteer male Ss were hypnotized individually following Form A of the Stanford scale. Observer- and self-scores correlated .81. Thus self-scoring was found to be remarkably successful, and the results of group administration very comparable to those of individual administration of hypnotic susceptibility tests.     

Subject posture and hypnotic susceptibility: A comparison of standing,sitting, and lyingdown subjects

Because of the prominence of relaxation instructions and suggestions of sleep within common hypnotic induction procedures, it seemed a reasonable conjecture that, in comparison to the customary sitting posture, a lying-down posture would facilitate hypnosis and a standing posture inhibit it. A preliminary experiment, using a slightly modified, tape-recorded Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C, failed to support either hypothesis. A subsequent experiment under improved conditions with 20 Ss in each group (standing, sitting, and lying down) also showed no significant difference of mean hypnotic susceptibility scores between any 2 of the conditions.

Although Ss expressed dislike for the standing posture, the only objective disadvantage seemed to be some dizziness or nausea generated for some Ss (5 out of 39 tested in the standing condition). No clear evidence exists that this effect is to be attributed to hypnosis rather than to standing with eyes closed for an appreciable time.

The results show that hypnotic behavior may be little affected by the concomitant requirements of maintaining a standing or sitting posture, even with the use of an induction which emphasizes relaxation.     

Ratings of “trust” and hypnotic susceptibilty

The relationship of trust to hypnotic susceptibility has been only peripherally explored. This study tests the hypothesis that hypnotic susceptibility in females is related to traits associated with trust. A 38-adjective Trust Rating Scale for females was constructed and the relationship between ratings on this scale and a modified version of the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A (Shor & E. Orne, 1962) was examined. 4 subgroups of Ss, with a total N of 102, were used. No relationship was found between group ratings of trust and hypnotic susceptibility, but self-ratings of trust correlated .40 with hypnotic susceptibility. Relationships among variables for all subgroups were generally consistent. The split-half reliability of .79 and alpha coefficient of .82 for the Trust Rating Scale indicate an encouraging degree of internal consistency for the trait being measured.     

Analysis of the heterogeneity of “faking” and “simulating” performance in the hypnotic setting

A balanced design was adopted where an attempt was made to replicate Overley and Levitt's (1968) finding of “faking heterogeneity” by applying their essential procedures, while also attempting to show that under demonstrably different conditions heterogeneity no longer exists. Results for 4 independent sets of 10 “faking” Ss given Overley and Levitt's set of role-playing instructions were compared with data from real and “simulating” Ss tested in application of Orne's (1959) real-simulating model of hypnosis. Heterogeneity of role-playing performance in the hypnotic test-setting was replicated for “faking” but not for “simulating” Ss, and both delay-in-instruction and the susceptibility level of the faking S were related to the effect. Evidence indicated that the earlier finding of heterogeneity of faking performance was a real one, but that Overley and Levitt's faking procedures were not proper to the task of simulation that they were questioning.     

Peripheral skin temperature and vasomotor responses during hypnotic induction

The present study is a further investigation of the hypothesis proposed by Reid and Curtsinger (1968) that hypnosis involves changes in peripheral vasomotor responses and skin temperature. 20 male Ss, screened for hypnotic susceptibility, participated in 2 experimental sessions. Each S was hypnotized in 1 session and simply given instructions to relax in the other session. Peripheral skin temperature and pulse volume were continuously monitored through-out each session. The resulting data were analyzed to determine the effects of hypnosis on these physiological measures. Under both conditions, a tendency for increased skin temperature and increased vasodilation was found. It was concluded that neutral hypnosis does not involve changes in these measures which are appreciably different from the changes associated with relaxation.