“As shown by the present study, amnesia maintenance can be quite problematic. Of 18 high hypnotizable subjects for whom amnesia was suggested, only 10 remained fully amnesic for the suggestion after 3 days. In addition, those 8 subjects for whom amnesia ‘broke down’ showed minimal shifts on BAS, or in reports of phenomenological changes. Such frequent amnesia failure has been reported by other researchers, although the effectiveness of the suggestion is not always so compromised” (p. 26).
1987
Barabasz, Marianne (1987). Trichotillomania: A new treatment. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 35 (3), 146-154.
The details of easily replicable interventions using hypnosis and restricted environmental stimulation therapy in the treatment of 4 cases of trichotillomania are presented. Hypnosis or hypnosis combined with brief restricted environmental stimulation appeared to be effective in 3 of the 4 cases. Factors affecting treatment outcomes are discussed.
NOTES 1:
Patients were given practice with hypnosis and also restricted environmental stimulation sessions to maximize response to hypnotic suggestions, as previous research indicated that only highly hypnotizable people responded to hypnotherapy for trichotillomania. The treatment itself consisted of simple posthypnotic suggestions, as “You will be acutely aware whenever you put your hand to your head, then it is entirely up to you, you have the power, the control, no one else, no habit controls you. You can pull your hair if you want to or you can choose to control the habit” (p. 149).
1984
Gross, Meir (1984). Hypnosis in the therapy of anorexia nervosa. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 26, 175-181.
Hypnosis was used successfully in treating 50 patients suffering from anorexia nervosa. Hypnotherapeutic intervention is most effective in treating such symptoms of this disorder as hyperactivity, distorted body image, failure of interoceptive awareness, feelings of inadequacy, perfectionist tendencies, and resistance to therapy.
Pekala, Ronald J.; Kumar, V. K. (1984). Predicting hypnotic susceptibility by a self-report phenomenological state instrument. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 114-121.
In an attempt to predict hypnotic susceptibility (as measured by the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, HGSHS) the phenomenological experiences of an hypnotic induction (HI) procedure and a baseline comparison condition (eyes closed, EC, sitting quietly) were assessed. After each experience the subjects (n=217) completed the Phenomenology of Consciousness Inventory (PCI), a self-report phenomenological state instrument, dealing with that condition. Step-wise multiple regression and discriminant analyses were then performed on data using the subject’s HGSHS score as the dependent variable and the PCI (sub)dimensions as the independent variables. Regression analyses that held up under cross-validation during HI suggest that the PCI may be an appropriate instrument for predicting susceptibility. The possible clinical usefulness of this approach is discussed.
1965
Halpern, Seymore (1965). Body-image symbols of repression. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 13 (2), 83-91.
Hypnointrospection, a method of hypnoanalysis which emphasizes self-perception during voluntary immobilization, is of demonstrable value in the elucidation of the problem of body-image. Hypnointrospective fragments of a case history showing the reorganization of the body-image during therapy are presented. The sequence of body-image phenomena is interpreted as an expression of attitudinal compromises among conflicting wishes implemented through neuromuscular channels. The continuous reorganization of the physical self as perceived by the patient during hypnointrospective analysis appears to be of significance for a general theory of body-image. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2002 APA, all rights reserved)
1963
Fisher, S. (1963). Body image and hypnotic response. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 11, 152-162.
This study had 2 principal objectives: (a) To test the hypothesis that hypnotizability is negatively related to the definiteness of the individual”s body image boundary, as measured by barrier and penetration scores derived from the Rorschach. (b) To ascertain what body image experiences are characteristic of the hypnotic state. Hypnotizability was evaluated with the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale. In the male group only, hypnotizability was negatively correlated with boundary definiteness. Depersonalization proved to be the most characteristic body image change. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2002 APA, all rights reserved)
1953
Guze, Henry (1953). Posture, postural redintegration and hypnotherapy. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 1, 76-82. (Abstracted in Psychological Abstracts 53: 6559)
SUMMARY. The use of postural analysis, and directives regarding posture and their importance in hypnotherapy are discussed. Theoretically, it is indicated that a chronic postural condition may act to elicit an emotional state with which it was originally associated. Such an emotional condition may have caused the posture in the first place, and then established a feed-back relationship with it. The breaking of feed-back mechanisms of this kind depends largely upon postural change when a chronic situation is established in the absence of realistic cause for the emotion. Posture may also act redintegratively, when directly suggested, in rearousing traumatic memories. Several clinical cases are reported.
Brain
1995
Barabasz, Arreed F.; Barabasz, Marianne; Jensen, Stacia (1995, November). Effects of hypnosis on cortical event-related potentials during visual and olfactory hypnotic hallucinations. [Paper] Presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, San Antonio, TX.
NOTES: Slotnick and London showed that different wording of suggestions led to very different results, which explains why our study on negative hallucinations and Spiegel’s study had opposite results.
This study is still ongoing. Screened for highs who passed visual and olfactory hallucinations and lows who passed only motoric items on hypnotizability tests. Trained Ss with eyes open induction, and lows had instructions to simulate hypnosis. (Used the eyeroll induction, eyes open.)
Did waking administration of alternating checkerboard pattern on computer screen. Then did eyes open hypnotic induction plus a depth check to make sure they were deep (assign number; then instructed raise a finger when you double it; then again, raise a finger when you double it). Then used checkerboard design again.
Obstructive visual hallucination – “imagine traveling through space, a dark nebula” (better than imagining you are blind. Lows had no difference in waking, obstructive hallucination, and negative hallucination. The highs did–looks like they had to see it before they couldn’t see it. “The dark nebula envelopes you completely, and now you can see nothing.”
De Pascalis, Vilfredo (1995, November). Psychophysiological correlates of hypnosis and hypnotic susceptibility. [Paper] Presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, San Antonio, TX.
NOTES
STUDY 1 and STUDY 2.
They recorded 40-Hz EEG temporal density (35-45 Hz band) from the left and right temporo-parietal-occipital scalp regions in four emotional conditions (gladness, happiness, fear, and anger). When measures were made in the waking state, for Highs, during positive emotions they found increase in left and right hemisphere activity compared with resting condition. During fear and anger there was reduction in the left hemisphere and an increase in the right, but for some subjects no left hemisphere change.
Low hypnotizables did not show large or reliable differences across emotions. With the hypnotic state, they found the trend was even greater for Highs.
Jasiukaitis, Paul; Spiegel, David (1995, November). Relateralizing hypnosis, or have we been barking up the wrong hemisphere?. [Paper] Presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, San Antonio, TX.
NOTES
The association between the right hemisphere and hypnotizability dates to the Gurs and Bakan; and to Hilgard and Morgan who developed a measure based on EEG power spectrum. Results from the body of research using alpha are conflicting. De Pascalis, 1988, also couldn’t show a large alpha difference between hemispheres.
Research on hypnotic hallucination with Pribram found Highs in a visual obstruction condition reduced P200 and P300; there was a slightly greater response at O2 than O1 EEG leads, leading us to think it was maybe a Right hemisphere task. But it was a foveal stimulus.
We tested with hemifield stimuli, blocking perception of 1/2 of the visual monitor; had them do the obstruction hallucination. P200 had the greatest reduction, with stimuli presented on the left. With obstruction of left visual field, we got little response. So ERP results were greater in right visual field (left hemisphere). This suggests the earlier observation was predominantly due to left, not right, hemisphere influence.
Martha Farah’s work on imagery is instructive. Also Steve Kosslyn. The Right hemisphere answers “Where” do you see something. The Left answers “What is it you see?” The left hemisphere generates image patterns that match what you see. When you ask people to generate an image, the activity is in O1 area. Also, patients with left hemisphere damage can’t generate images; callosectomy patient also gave evidence. Many inductions use generation of images (left occipital and temporal regions). So when asking subjects to generate a hallucinated image blocking the screen, they are using that area.
The cortex can serve as an amplifier or a suppressor of response. In earlier study of somatosensory potential we observed bigger response when asking person to be more aware of pain. The cortex has an arousal system. There are two relevant systems in the brain (see Posner)–posterior and anterior. Hypnotizability is correlated with a metabolite of dopamine, which is associated with the anterior system which is dopaminergic.
Tucker & Williamson, in article in Psychological Review, 1984, write that activation is “the determination of information control by previous, stored internal representations” as opposed to arousal which is the “determination by novel [missed words….]”
Kinsbourne, in Consciousness and Contemporary Science, 1988. wrote that if at any time a hemisphere works like an automaton, it is the left hemisphere. With R. Davidson, he has shown the left hemisphere elevates affect, the right depresses it. Many people report that hypnosis is a pleasurable thing to do, maybe because it elevates mood.
One obstacle to this formulation is the idea that the left hemisphere governs logical thought.
We may disturb the relationship between words and images in hypnosis; you start to manipulate images and passively receive words, so that language is now a passive, receptive experience and images are active (instead of the usual pattern of actively using words and passively using images).
1994
Crawford, Helen J. (1994). Brain dynamics and hypnosis: Attentional and disattentional processes. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 42 (3), 204-232.
This article reviews recent research findings, expanding an evolving neuropsychophysiological model of hypnosis (Crawford, 1989; Crawford & Gruzelier, 1992), that support the view that highly hypnotizable persons (highs) possess stronger attentional filtering abilities than do low hypnotizable persons, and that these differences are reflected in underlying brain dynamics. Behavioral, cognitive, and neurophysiological evidence is reviewed that suggests that highs can both better focus and sustain their attention as well as better ignore irrelevant stimuli in the environment. It is proposed that hypnosis is a state of enhanced attention that activates an interplay between cortical and subcortical brain dynamics during hypnotic phenomena, such as hypnotic analgesia. A body of research is reviewed that suggests that both attentional and disattentional processes, among others, are important in the experiencing of hypnosis and hypnotic phenomena. Findings from studies of electrocortical activity, event-related potentials, and regional cerebral blood flow during waking and hypnosis are presented to suggest that these attentional differences are reflected in underlying neurophysiological differences in the far fronto-limbic attentional system.
Crawford, Helen J. (1994). Brain systems involved in attention and disattention (hypnotic analgesia) to pain. In Pribram, Karl H. (Ed.), Origins: Brain and self organization (pp. 661-679). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Data are reviewed from regional cerebral blood flow, EEG, and somatosensory event-related potential (SERP; both scalp and intracranial) studies of attention to and disattention (hypnotic analgesia) of painful stimuli to provide further evidence for two neurophysiological systems of pain involving the cortex: (1) the epicritic, sensory system of pain associated with the parietal, posterior region, and (2) the protocritic, distress, comfort-discomfort system of pain associated with the far fronto- limbic region. Studies of neurophysiological changes accompanying suggested hypnotic analgesia support the hypothesis that the executive controller of the far frontal cortex, via the far fronto-limbic attentional system, acts as a gate against the ascent of painful stimuli into conscious awareness by ‘directing’ downward the inhibition of incoming somatosensory information coming from the thalamic region. In hypnotically responsive individuals who could eliminate the perception of pain, reviewed studies demonstrated increased regional cerebral blood in the frontal and somatosensory regions, shifts in hemispheric dominance of EEG theta power, differential surface SERP topographical patterns in the anterior and posterior regions of the brain, and reduction of the intracranial SERP P160 waveform in the gyrus cingulus.
NOTES
Paradoxically, there may be physiological reactivity to pain stimuli while the hypnotized Subject reports they are not consciously aware of pain. Posner’s proposal of two different attentional systems may account for why there is physiological reactivity concurrent with lack of awareness of pain. Posner suggested that the posterior brain is involved with engaging and disengaging attention while the anterior brain is involved in attention for action or effortful attention. “Thus, the posterior region is involved in space and time, the epicritic processes, whereas the anterior region is involved in comfort- discomfort, the protocritic processes (Pribram, 1991)” (p. 665).
In parallel, there appear to be two systems of pain involving the cortex, as revealed in positron emission tomography research. Also relevant is clinical data showing that “removal of the frontal or cingulate cortex in patients with intractable pain leads to the amelioration of distress while not eliminating sensory pain (Bouckoms, 1989)” (p. 665).
The author proposes a neuropsychophysiology of hypnotic analgesia based on Hilgard’s (1986) neodissociation theory of hypnosis, together with Pribram and McGuinness’ (1975, 1992) attention model. In this view, “Hilgard’s executive control system is the far frontal cortex ‘directing’ the inhibition of incoming painful stimuli” (p. 666) after determining that the somatosensory signal is ‘irrelevant.’
“Highly hypnotizable individuals (‘highs’) have greater attentional and disattentional abilities than low hypnotizable individuals (‘lows’). … Recent neuroimaging techniques (PET, SPECT, CBF) that assess regional brain metabolism have found no differences in waking conditions between low and highly hypnotizable individuals, but have consistently reported that only highs show increased cerebral blood flow during hypnosis, suggestive of enhanced cognitive effort (Crawford, Gur et al., 1993; Halama, 1989; Meyer, Diehl, Ulrich, & Meinig, 1989; Walter, 1992)” (p. 666).
The hippocampus appears to be involved as a gating mechanism in selective attention (Crowne, Konow, Drake & Pribram, 1972; Isaacson, 1982, Isaacson & Pribram, 1986; R. Miller, 1991; Pribram, 1991; Arnolds et al., 1980) This gating function may be promoted “through a cortico-hippocampal relay [that] transmits information by theta wave modulation and Hebbian synaptic modification so that there is selective disattention” (p. 667). The author suggests that hypnotic pain control may involve directing attention away from pain sensory signals.
Highly hypnotizable people generate more EEG theta than low hypnotizables whether they are hypnotized or not, and Crawford (1990) observed marked hemispheric shifts in theta when highs (but not lows) were attempting to control pain with hypnosis.
This paper reports on preliminary results of SERP studies of people given hypnotic analgesia suggestions to reduce electric shock stimulus evoked pain. The results were analyzed individual by individual, because group data obscured pronounced shifts in SERP patterns (e.g. habituation rates differed among Subjects). For highs, the SERP tended to be reduced, and the lower amplitudes were observed as early as the N100-P200 components. This did not occur for low hypnotizables.
Different kinds of mechanisms may be operative for high hypnotizables, however. “In over half of the high hypnotizable subjects the far frontal region (Fp1, Fp2) showed strong arousal during attention to pain, but during hypnotic analgesia there was a flattening out of the SERPs to the point they are hard to measure. By contrast, the more posterior SERPs (including F3 and F4), while reduced in amplitude, were still evident. The other half of highs showed little SERP activity in the far frontal region in either attend or disattend conditions, but substantial reductions of SERPs at all locations during hypnotic analgesia” (p. 670). Additionally, some of the highs evidenced a contingent negative variation (CNV) or a late 400-500 msec negativity in the far frontal region, which author is inclined to interpret as “a preparation for a response or for an inhibition of a response” (p. 670).
Case studies of two patients with intracranial electrodes and scalp electrodes recording SERPs are presented in support of the experimental data. The two female patients were diagnosed with obsessive compulsive disorder; one was highly hypnotizable and one was not. They received 30 moderately painful stimuli to the left middle finger under sequential conditions: waking attention, hypnosis with analgesia suggestions, and hypnosis with attention instructions. The highly hypnotizable patient reported significantly less pain during suggested analgesia, and that reduction in pain was associated temporally with reduction of SERP at P160 in the gyrus cingulus (and at no other recording sites). The ‘unhypnotizable’ patient showed no SERP changes. As an aside, the author notes that “Subsequent to the hypnotic analgesia, when the pain was attended to again during waking this patient showed a significant enhancement of the same positivity wave at Fz, as if there was a rebound effect (something we have also observed in some of our SERP subjects at the BRAINS Center)” (p. 674).
Freeman, R.; Barabasz, A.; Barabasz, M. (1994, October). EEG topographic differences between dissociation and distraction during cold pressor pain in high and low hypnotizables. [Paper] Presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, San Francisco.
NOTES
Hilgard once said we should study what is going on inside the skull when we study hypnotic behavior. Theta EEG was studied, in 3.5 and 5.5-7.5 band widths, based on Crawford’s research (no differences between high and low hypnotizables in low range but significant differences in waking state, eyes closed condition).
Also employed new type of distraction procedure. Previously used as comparison conditions things like imagine a pleasant scene, do whatever you can do to reduce pain, or imagine an instructor giving a lecture. Barabasz theorized that highs, given the opportunity, may spontaneously get involved in imagery; so distraction used in some experiments may actually become hypnosis. Here, distraction involved using a storage box, with plexiglass covering front, and 3 lights–subjects were to recall sequence of light changes that occurred during 60 sec when arm was in the cold water.
Cold pressor pain. 3 immersions with simultaneous pain reporting and EEG monitoring. –Waking State –Light array distraction –Hypnotic induction and suggested analgesia (Distraction and hypnosis with analgesia were presented in a balanced design)
Pain Ratings ranged from 0 = no pain, 10 = level would very much like to remove arm from water (rating could exceed 10 however). After removing arm, subjects were to report the maximum amount of pain that they had felt. Pain Scores were obtained at 30 seconds and 60 seconds after immersion in the cold water.
Also got qualitative data. During recovery period after each arm immersion, Subjects were asked what if anything they had done to reduce the pain felt.
30 second pain scores: Waking 7.60 vs 7.50 Distraction 8.60 vs 6.80 Hypnotic analgesia 7.80 vs 4.10 (Significantly different).
60 second pain scores: Showed same trend
There was no difference whatsoever for the lows.
Results for the 2 EEG sites: P3 left hemisphere parietal in waking and hypnotic analgesia, high theta, had significantly different activity O1 left hemisphere in waking and hypnotic analgesia, was significantly different between highs and lows (same as above).
Results for two theta ranges: Low theta range, T4 temporal right hemisphere, for lows in waking and [missed words] condition–hard to interpret this finding.
RESULTS
Highs demonstrated pain reduction in hypnotic analgesia compared to waking and distraction conditions and compared to lows. Lows had no differences in any condition.
Enhanced EEG theta in left parietal area differentiated highs and lows. This suggests that highs generate enhanced disattention that may be controlled by these areas.
P3 area regulates the integration and association of somatic perceptions. The O1 area controls processing of visual imagery. Perhaps high hypnotizables have more ability to alter afferent sensory information through focused attentional processes. Also, the ability to alter the suffering portion of pain experience may involve visual imagery activity.
State and trait differences are apparent.
The low theta range may be more closely related to slower delta range 0-3.5 that is associated with sleep and drowsiness. High theta = low arousal and attention capacity. That’s why theta seems associated with wide range of behaviors that appear contradictory
The qualitative data shows highs reported they spontaneously preferred strategies that were more than distraction (associating colors with warmth, thinking of warm water) and the most frequent responses of lows were “nothing” or “told myself it would be over soon.”
Highs in analgesia condition used no specific strategy: 8/10 reported the arm simply felt more numb.
Lynn, Steven Jay (1994, October). Toward an integrative theory of hypnosis. [Paper] Presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, San Francisco.
NOTES: This is a re-evaluation of neodissociation and cognitive models of hypnosis, and an attempt to be integrative. This paper focuses more on ideomotor behaviors but we will extend the model to other hypnotic behaviors in the future.
Automaticity of behavior in hypnosis can be accounted for without using a concept of divided consciousness or weakened consciousness. Parapraxes (doing one behavior while intending another) are not instances of decreased control of behavior, but relate to where attention is drawn. This requires a different use of the hierarchy concept from Hilgard’s model (which in turn comes from Hull’s concept of habit hierarchy).
Here hierarchy is a concept drawn from Miller, Galanter, & Pribram: acts are comprised of molecular units, that are comprised of even more molecular units. Behavior only needs to be processed at an executive level when unusual events occur. But one or more hierarchies may be set into motion at the same time. Dissociation is not an infrequent event. Behavior is controlled by subroutines rather than by an executive control structure; subroutines operate in parallel rather than in a hierarchy. Parapraxes are due to an overlap between two subfunctions.
Parapraxes are different from ideomotor responses, where we pay close attention and involuntariness is reported not just post facto but as part of the experience.
1993
Attias, J.; Shemesh, Z.; Sohmer, H.; Gold, S.; Shoham, C.; Faraggi, D. (1993). Comparison between self-hypnosis, masking and attentiveness for alleviation of chronic tinnitus. Audiology, 32, 205-212.
A total of 45 male patients close in age with chronic tinnitus related to acoustic trauma were assigned to three matched subgroups: self-hypnosis (SH), masking (MA), and attentiveness to the patients’ complaints (AT). The therapeutic stimuli in the SH and MA sessions, recorded on audio cassettes, were given to the patients for use when needed. SH significantly reduced the severity of tinnitus, AT partially relieved the tinnitus, and MA had no significant effect.
Crawford, Helen J.; Gur, Ruben C.; Skolnick, Brett; Gur, Raquel E.; Benson, Deborah M. (1993). Effects of hypnosis on regional cerebral blood flow during ischemic pain with and without suggested hypnotic analgesia. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 15, 181-195.
Using 133Xe regional cerebral blood flow (CBF) imaging, two male groups having high and low hypnotic susceptibility were compared in waking and after hypnotic induction, while at rest and while experiencing ischemic pain to both arms under two conditions: attend to pain and suggested analgesia. Differences between low and highly-hypnotizable persons were observed during all hypnosis conditions: only highly-hypnotizable persons showed a significant increase in overall CBF, suggesting that hypnosis requires cognitive effort. As anticipated, ischemic pain produced CBF increases in the somatosensory region. Of major theoretical interest is a highly-significant bilateral CBF activation of the orbito-frontal cortex in the highly-hypnotizable group only during hypnotic analgesia. During hypnotic analgesia, highly-hypnotizable persons showed CBF increase over the somatosensory cortex, while low-hypnotizable persons showed decreases. Research is supportive of a neuropsychophysiological model of hypnosis (Crawford, 1991; Crawford and Gruzelier, 1992) and suggests that hypnotic analgesia involves the supervisory, attentional control system of the far-frontal cortex in a topographically specific inhibitory feedback circuit that cooperates in the regulation of thalamocortical activities.
De Pascalis, Vilfredo (1993). EEG spectral analysis during hypnotic induction, hypnotic dream and age regression. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 15, 153-166.
EEG was recorded monopolarly at frontal (F3, F4), central (C3, C4) and posterior (in the middle of O1-P3-T5 and O2-P4-T6 triangles) derivations during the hypnotic induction of the Stanford Hypnotic Clinical Scale (SHCS) and during performance following suggestions of hypnotic dream and age-regression as expressed in the before-mentioned scale. 10 low-hypnotizable and 9 highly-hypnotizable and right- handed female students participated in one experimental session. Evaluations were Fast- Fourier spectral analyses during the following conditions: waking-rest in eyes-open and eyes-closed condition; early, middle, and late phases of hypnotic induction; rest-hypnosis in eyes closed condition; hypnotic dream and age regression. After spectral analysis of 0 to 44 Hz, the mean spectral amplitude estimates across seven Hz bands (theta 1, 4-6 Hz, theta 2, 6-8 Hz; alpha 1, 8-10 Hz; alpha 2, 10-13 Hz; beta 1, 13-16 Hz; beta 2, 16-20 Hz; beta 3, 20-36 Hz) and the 40-Hz EEG band (36-44 Hz) for each experimental condition were extracted. In eyes-open and -closed conditions in waking and hypnosis highly-hypnotizable subjects produced a greater 40-Hz EEG amplitude than did low hypnotizable subjects at all frontal, central and posterior locations. In the early and middle hypnotic induction highly-hypnotizables displayed a greater amount of beta 3 than did low hypnotizables and this difference was even more pronounced in the left hemisphere. With posterior scalp recordings, during hypnotic dream and age regression, high hypnotizables displayed, as compared with the rest-hypnosis condition, a decrease in alpha 1 and alpha 2 amplitudes. This effect was absent for low hypnotizables. Beta 1, beta 2 and beta 3 amplitudes increased in the left hemisphere during age regression for high hypnotizable; low hypnotizables, in contrast, displayed hemispheric balance across imaginative tasks. High hypnotizables during the hypnotic dream also displayed in the right hemisphere a greater 40-Hz EEG amplitude as compared with the left hemisphere. This difference was even more evident for posterior recording sites. This hemispheric trend was not evidenced for low hypnotizable subjects. Theta power was never a predictor of hypnotic susceptibility, 40-Hz EEG amplitude displayed a very high main effect (p<0.004) for hypnotizability in hypnotic conditions by displaying a greater 40-Hz EEG amplitude in high hypnotizables with respect to lows. NOTES: In the Discussion section, the authors indicate that they have no idea why they didn't replicate results of other theta studies, including their own, except maybe due to complex interaction among personality, subject selection, situation-specific factors, and hypnotizability. They observe that the alpha results conform with previous findings (p. 163). Beta bands were sensitive. Highs showed left-hemisphere prevalence in all beta bands during age regression; they also showed hemispheric balance in the hypnotic dream condition. Beta 3 amplitude was also greater among highs than lows. "among high hypnotizables, beta 3 amplitude in the early hypnotic condition was greater in the left hemisphere as compared to the right and as the hypnotic induction proceeded hemisphere balancing, with reduced beta 3 amplitude, was displayed. This result appears in agreement with the predictions of the neurophysiological model proposed by Gruzelier et al. (1984) and Gruzelier (1988) as well as with other studies in which beta rhythm was found to discriminate performances between high and low hypnotizables (e.g., Meszaros et al., 1986, 1989; Sabourin et al., 1990)" (p. 163-164). 40 Hz amplitude was higher in highs and increased in right hemisphere during the hypnotic dream, especially in posterior areas. "This pattern of hemispheric activation may be interpreted as an expression of the greater right-hemisphere activation and of the release of posterior cortical functions during the hypnotic dream and is compatible with the predictions of the Gruzelier model of hypnosis, however, the results obtained in this study for 40-Hz EEG amplitude failed to reveal an inhibition of the left-hemisphere activity with the progress of the hypnotic induction" (p. 164). (They note that De Pascalis & Penna, 1990, agreed with the Gruzelier 1988 model: highs in early induction had increase of 40-Hz in both hemispheres, but as induction proceeded they had inhibition of left and increase in right hemisphere activity. In this current experiment, only beta 3 showed the hemispheric trend of Gruzelier's model. They cite other details of current study, p. 164, not consonant with Gruzelier.) "The 40-Hz EEG rhythm, which according to Sheer (1976) is the physiological representation of focused arousal, appeared to discriminate between differential patterns of high and low hypnotizables. Both during hypnotic induction and during hypnotic dream and age regression highly hypnotizables exhibit greater 40-Hz EEG amplitude with respect to the lows. These findings support the validity of the assumption that hypnosis is characterized by a state of focused attention (Hilgard, 1965) and that 40-Hz EEG activity reflects differential attentional patterns among subjects high and low in hypnotizability. On the basis of these findings it would appear that 40-Hz EEG and beta 3 spectral amplitudes may prove to be useful measures of individual hypnotizability" (p. 164). Gruzelier, John; Warren, Kristen (1993). Neuropsychological evidence of reductions on left frontal tests with hypnosis. Psychological Medicine, 23, 93-101. Individuals with high and low susceptibility to hypnosis were compared in a baseline condition and after instructions of hypnosis on tests of anterior left and right hemispheric functions of word fluency to letter categories, word fluency to semantic categories, design fluency and bilateral finger tapping dexterity. With hypnosis high susceptibles showed a reduction in word generation to letter categories, no significant change in word generation to semantic categories, an improvement in design fluency, and bilateral reductions in finger tapping dexterity. Low susceptibles showed the opposite changes except for the improvement in design fluency. These results, together with correlational results, were interpreted as evidence of central inhibitory processes, particularly of the left hemisphere, in response to instructions of hypnosis in high susceptibles. NOTES: The authors discussion of their study includes the following statements. "The main result of the study was the differential influence of instructions of hypnosis on high and low susceptibles for word fluency to letter designated categories, as distinct from semantic categories, and design fluency" (p. 98). "The absence of effects of hypnosis on word generation to semantic categories (left fronto-temporoparietal) versus letter categories (left frontal) has a bearing on evoked potential evidence (Gruzelier et al. 1987). Bilateral comparisons at temporal lobe and central locations showed that high susceptibles were characterized by asymmetric changes in evoked potential amplitude (N116 component) with hypnosis. Activity at the central electrodes was compatible with a left-to-right hemispheric shift of function, but this was not the case at the temporal electrodes. Instead of an inhibition of left temporal activity with hypnosis activation was maintained. Maintenance of activity in the left temporal lobe follows consideration of the fact that hypnosis requires sustained attention to the voice of the hypnotist, which is predominantly a left temporal function" (p. 99). "The absence of differences in the pre-hypnotic condition between high and low susceptibles indicates that hemisphericity _per se_ may not be a factor that characterizes susceptibility. The fact that lateral differences were found in some experiments (e.g. Gruzelier et al. 1984; Gruzelier & Brow, 1985) but not others (e.g. Cikurel & Gruzelier, 1990; McCormack & Gruzelier, 1993) may indicate that such effects, when apparent, were secondary to another factor such as cognitive flexibility as conceptualized by Crawford (1989)" (p. 99). Jutai, Jeffrey; Gruzelier, John; Golds, John; Thomas, Martin (1993). Bilateral auditory-evoked potentials in conditions of hypnosis and focused attention. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 15, 167-176. Brain event-related potentials (ERPs) evoked by auditory stimulation were used to study cerebral hemispheric activity during hypnosis. ERPs were recorded from bilateral central (C3 and C4) and temporal (T3 and T4) scalp locations in response to tone pips in 6 medium-high and 6 low-susceptible subjects in three conditions: baseline (tones only), hypnosis (tones plus hypnotic induction), and a focused attention control (tones plus a newspaper story read by the hypnotist). Task asymmetries were individually adjusted for baseline asymmetries. Responses from central locations did not differentiate hypnosis from focused attention for either group. The same was true of temporal locations for the low-susceptible group. The predominant temporal lobe pattern for both conditions and groups was larger left than right responses. The exception was the hypnosis condition for the medium-high susceptible group where there was an increase in responses in the right temporal lobe. Lindsay, Suzanne; Kurtz, Richard M.; Stern, John A. (1993). Hypnotic susceptibility and the endogenous eyeblink: A brief communication. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 41, 92-96. This study investigated the relationship between hypnotic susceptibility, hypnotic state, and the endogenous eyeblink with 36 undergraduates, who were assigned to four independent groups (waking-low, hypnotized-low, waking-high, and hypnotized- high susceptibles) on the basis of combined cutoff scores on both the Creative Imagination Scale and the Stanford Hypnotic Clinical Scale for Adults. The auditory vigilance task required subjects to discriminate between 200 ms and 300 ms tones over a 35-minute period. Hypnotic depth was controlled across trials using the Long Stanford Scale of Hypnotic Depth. As predicted, high-susceptible subjects had a significantly lower blink rate than low-susceptible subjects. The predicted interaction between susceptibility and hypnotic state was also confirmed. High-susceptible subjects showed a significant decrease in blinking for the hypnotized condition, whereas low-susceptible subjects did not. The need for replication with more adequate measures of susceptibility is discussed. NOTES: "In a preliminary study, Weitzenhoffer (1979) found significant differences between high- and low-susceptible subjects following a hypnotic induction. The highs showed a 66% decrease in blink rate from a baseline reading. More recently, Tada, Yamada, and Hariu (1990) reported a series of studies suggesting that blink rate was dramatically reduced during the hypnotic state, as well as finding a relationship between high susceptibility and decreased blink rate. Although these studies tend to support Weitzenhoffer's (1979) research, they are poorly controlled and report no quantitative data" (p. 93). In the present study, "to assure that subjects kept their eyes open, they were required to maintain their gaze on a dimly lighted box (12" x 12") placed one meter in front of them. Subjects in both conditions were asked to rate their hypnotic depth by using the Long Stanford Scale of Hypnotic Depth (Tart, 1970) before being given a practice trial of 20 tones. Following the practice trial, participants were again asked to rate their hypnotic depth, and the trial period began. Subjects gave subsequent depth ratings every 10 minutes for the remainder of the 35-minute trial. The hypnotic state was maintained across time periods by using deepening instructions when necessary" (p. 94). In their Discussion, the authors noted that "High-susceptible subjects in the hypnotized state have a significantly lower blink rate and presumably greater attentional focus than lows. Although the interaction was significant and in the predicted direction, it accounted for only a small portion of the overall variance, suggesting that trait differences are more robust than those for state" (p. 95). Lyskov, E.; Juutilainen, J.; Jousmaki, V.; Hanninen, O.; Medvedev, S.; Partanen, J. (1993). Influence of short-term exposure of magnetic field on the bioelectrical processes of the brain and performance. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 14, 227-231. The influence of an extremely-low-frequency (ELF) magnetic field on the bioelectrical processes of brain and performance was studied by EEG spectral analysis, auditory-evoked potentials (AEP), reaction time (Roletaking) and target-deletion test (TDT). Fourteen volunteers were exposed for 15 min to an intermittent (1 s on/off) 45- Hz magnetic field at 1000 A/m (1.26 mT). Each person received one real and one sham exposure. Statistically significant increases in spectral power through alpha- and beta- bands, as well as in mean frequency of the EEG spectrum were observed after magnetic field exposure. Field-dependent changes of N1OO were also revealed. No changes in the amplitudes or latencies of the earlier peaks were observed. No direct effects on Roletaking, nor on TDT performance were seen. However, practice effects on Roletaking (decrease of Roletaking in the course of the test-sessions) seemed to be interrupted by exposure to the magnetic field. 1992 Atkinson, Richard P.; Crawford, Helen J. (1992). Individual differences in afterimage persistence: Relationships to hypnotic susceptibility and visuospatial skills. American Journal of Psychology, 105 (4), 527-539. To investigate the moderating role of individual differences in hypnotic susceptibility and visuospatial skills on afterimage persistence, we presented a codable (cross) flash of light to 40 men and 46 women who had been dark adapted for 20 minutes. In an unrelated classroom setting, subjects had previously been given two standardized scales of hypnotic susceptibility (Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Shor & Orne, 1962; Group Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C, Crawford & Allen, 1982) and the Mental Rotations Test (Vandenberg & Kuse, 1978). The first afterimage interval and the afterimage duration correlated significantly with hypnotic responsiveness, supporting Wallace (1979), but did not show the anticipated relationships with mental rotation visuospatial skills. Individuals in the high hypnotizable group had (a) significantly longer afterimage intervals between its first appearance and first disappearance than did those in low groups, but those in medium groups did not differ significantly from the other groups. Discriminant analysis using the afterimage persistence measures classified correctly 65.2% of high hypnotizables, 37.5% of medium hypnotizables, and 54.8% of low hypnotizables. Hypothesized cognitive skills that assist in the maintenance of afterimages and underlie hypnotic susceptibility include abilities to maintain focused attention and resist distractions over time and to maintain vivid visual images. NOTES "Because there is no apparent evidence for physiological differences of the visual system between low and high hypnotizables (e.g., Wallace, 1979), cognitive factors are suggested as possible moderators of afterimage persistence. "Hypnotic susceptibility per se is not the moderator of afterimage duration. Rather, we argue that hypnotic susceptibility represents a constellation of underlying cognitive skills (e.g., for reviews, see Crawford, 1989; Kihlstrom, 1985) that assist an individual to respond to hypnotic suggestions as well as assist in the persistence of afterimages by interacting with more primary casual mechanisms that are physiological in origin. These cognitive skills are thought to include the abilities to focus attention selectively upon both external stimuli and internally generated images, to maintain vivid visual images, to sustain attention over time and remain absorbed in the experience at hand, and to resist distractions. The relationships between these cognitive skills and hypnotic susceptibility are reported in a large body of literature (e.g., Crawford, 1982, 1989; Crawford et al., 1991; Crawford & Grumbles, 1988; Finke & Macdonald, 1978; Grumbles & Crawford, 1981; Mitchell, 1970; Tellegen & Atkinson, 1974).... "Sustained and selective attention without interference from extraneous stimuli plays an important role in hypnosis. Individuals who are responsive to hypnosis demonstrate greater skills in extremely focused and sustained attention (e.g., Crawford et al., 1991; Tellegen & Atkinson, 1974). Electrophysiological research had found that high hypnotizables often generate substantially more theta electroencephalogram (EEG) power than do low hypnotizables (e.g., Crawford 1990, 1991; Crawford & Gruzelier, 1992; Sabourin, Cutcomb, Crawford, & Pribam, 1990). Such a relationship may be interpreted as further evidence of greater attentional skills in highs, because certain theta waves have been correlated with enhanced problem solving and attentional task performance (e.g., Crawford & Gruzelier, 1992; Schacter, 1977).... "Hypnosis is seen often as a condition of amplified attention, where attention can be either more focused or diffuse dependent upon set (e.g., Krippner & Binder, 1974). Increases in vigilant performance during hypnosis have been reported, albeit inconsistently (e.g., Barabasz, 1980; Fehr & Stern, 1967; Kissen, Reifler, & Thaler, 1964; Smyth & Lowy, 1983). Fehr and Stern's results suggest that hypnotized subjects devote more attention to a primary task with less available attentional resources for a secondary task. Hypnosis has been found to have an enhancing effect on the imaginal processing of information-to-be-remembered that consists of literal or untransformed representations of pictorial or nonverbal information for high but not low hypnotizables (Crawford & Allen, 1983; Crawford, Nomura, & Slater, 1983; Crawford, Wallace, Nomura, & Slater, 1986). This may possibly be the result of increased attention and/or shifts in cognitive strategies. Supportive of the hypothesis that sustained attention can be enhanced during hypnosis, Atkinson (1991) recently found that high but not low hypnotizables report significantly more persistent afterimages in hypnosis than in waking. "Although we have argued for a cognitive explanation for individual differences in afterimage persistence and their possible relationship to hypnotic susceptibility and sustained attentional abilities, as has Wallace (1979, 1990), we must point out the possibility that high hypnotizables may be more suggestible to imagery instructions or more willing to discuss or experience imagery than low hypnotizables, particularly in the context of hypnosis and hypnotic susceptibility testing (e.g., Zamansky, Scharf, & Brightbill, 1964). A contextual account of the longstanding relationship between hypnotic susceptibility and absorption was raised by Council, Kirsch, and Hafner (1986), but was not supported by two independent, and more methodologically sound, studies reported by Nadon, Hoyt, Register, and Kihlstrom (1991). The context of hypnosis was not an issue in the present study, because none of the subjects was aware of the investigated relationship between afterimage persistence and hypnotic susceptibility at the time of recruitment or participation" (pp. 533-535). Barinaga, Marcia (1992). Giving personal magnetism a whole new meaning. Science, 256, 967. NOTES: Cited in Noetic Sciences Review, Autumn, 1992. This geobiologist has discovered that the human brain contains billions of tiny magnets--some 7 billion of them, each so small that their total weight is only one/millionth of an ounce. In magnetite- containing bacteria, the crystals are used as a compass needle which orients the bacteria with respect to the Earth's magnetic field. In birds, bees, and fish, where concentration of the mineral is a few orders of magnitude higher than he found in the human brain, it is used as a navigational aid. He plays down the possible connection to weak electromagnetic fields that supposedly cause cancer (unless fields could induce very weak electrical fields inside the cells, disrupting cellular function). Other possible interpretations: a means for cells to store excess iron, or part of a magnetic sensing system, or a vestigial system left over in evolution from when we were more directly connected with the earth's magnetic field and may have relied on it for navigation or migratory movement. Greenwald, Anthony G. (1992). New Look 3: Unconscious cognition reclaimed. American Psychologist, 47, 766-779. ABSTRACT: Recent research has established several empirical results that are widely agreed to merit description in terms of unconscious cognition. These findings come from experiments that use indirect tests for immediate or long- term residues of barely perceptible, perceptible-but-unattended, or attended-but-forgotten events. Importantly, these well-established phenomena--insofar as they occur without initially involving focal attention--are limited to relatively minor cognitive feats. Unconscious cognition is now solidly established in empirical research, but it appears to be intellectually much simpler than the sophisticated agency portrayed in psychoanalytic theory. The strengthened position of unconscious cognitive phenomena can be related to their fit with the developing neural network (connectionist) theoretical framework in psychology. Holroyd, Jean (1992). Hypnosis as a methodology in psychological research. In Contemporary hypnosis research (pp. 201-226). New York: Guilford Press. NOTES This chapter deals with how the changes brought about by hypnosis (in cognition, behavior, motivation, etc.) may be used in research in other areas of psychology. "The distinction between experimental effects attributable to a personality trait (i.e. hypnotizability), hypnosis context (i.e. an induction), and interaction between the two is particularly important in using hypnosis as a research strategy. The author discusses suggestibility, imagery enhancement, and changes in the mind-body relationship (immunology, pain, cognitive neuropsychology, attention, learning and memory, and awareness) as they might be employed in social psychology or psychophysiology research. She reviews problems inherent in using hypnosis as part of the research methodology, while noting that hypnosis nevertheless offers new information when introduced into traditional content areas. "For example, in cognitive psychology it has re-introduced the importance of studying experiential aspects of cognition, i.e. I think, I remember, or self reference (Kihlstrom, 1987)" (p. 223). She concludes, "Hypnosis as a research method will continue to benefit from contributions of radically different theoretical views of hypnotic phenomena. Social- cognitive psychologists have contributed significantly toward unifying the fields of hypnosis research and general experimental psychology. At the same time, advances in neurophysiology and psychosomatic medicine employing hypnosis indicate that there is a role for hypnosis as a research strategy, solely because of its altered-state characteristics. If theoretical physics can reconcile both wave and particle theories of light, it is conceivable that psychology can accommodate both behavioral and state theories of hypnosis" (p. 224). Lippincott, Brian (1992). Owls and larks in hypnosis: Individual differences in hypnotic susceptibility relating to biological rhythms. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 34, 185-192. In 1986 Coleman developed the Owl and Lark Questionnaire to differentiate morning people from evening people, with owl individuals being more alert during the evening phase and lark individuals being more alert during the morning phase. Rossi has hypothesized that the bimodal peaks of hypnotizability found by Aldrich and Bernstein in 1987 were caused by alterations in owl and lark circadian rhythms. In the current study I used the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A to test compliance with hypnotic suggestions among 42 graduate students at three times of the day: in the morning, in the evening, and, as a control, in the middle of the night. Owls were more hypnotizable than larks in the morning, and larks were also significantly more hypnotizable in the evening than owls. There was no difference between the two groups in the middle of the night. A possible implication of this study is that one fundamental mechanism of therapeutic hypnosis is the entrainment of psychobiological rhythms. NOTES: The author tested Subjects at 8-10 a.m., 4-6 p.m., and midnight to 2 a.m. because they were the times when owls and larks could be most easily differentiated (morning and late afternoon) or were most equal (night). The goal was "to determine if individuals differentiated by the Owl and Lark Questionnaire have different peaks of hypnotizability associated with the rest phases of their biological rhythms." (P. 187). "To control for practice effects (Cooper, Banford, Schubot, & Tart, 1967), one third of the subjects started rotating at each of the three test times and proceeded in clockwise order (morning-evening-night; evening-night-morning; night-morning-evening). "There were at least 24 hours between tests to assure that boredom from the testing was not a factor" (p. 188). DISCUSSION. "Rossi has extended Erickson's naturalistic approach and has hypothesized the entrainment of the ultradian biological rhythms as a possible factor in therapeutic hypnosis. ... Rossi states: 'The ultradian theory of hypnotherapeutic healing proposes that (1) the source of psychosomatic reactions is in stress-induced distortions of the normal periodicity of ultradian cycles and, (2) the naturalistic approach to hypnotherapy facilitates healing by permitting a normalization of these ultradian processes.' (Rossi, 1982, p. 23)" (pp. 189-190). "If owls and larks were not separated, the results of this study would show no differences in hypnosis. Perhaps this is why Hollander et al. (1988) found no change in hypnotizability using a direct-suggestion measure after a 2-day training in Ericksonian techniques" (p. 190). 1991 Brown, Jason W. (1991). Self and process: Brain states and the conscious present. New York: Springer-Verlag. NOTES Author, from the Department of Neurology at New York University Medical School, presents a theory about the genetic unfolding of mental content (mind) through stages, from mental state into consciousness or into behavior. He relates the genesis of mind to brain development but avoids assuming that there is a straightforward correlation between brain development (e.g. myelination) and cognitive development or perception. To some degree, the theory is based on subjective report data and psychological symptoms. The author discusses issues that bear on the phenomena of nonvoluntary responding and dissociation that are reported or described by hypnotized persons. "The nature of the mental state will determine the relation between self and world, and thus the interpretation given to agency and choice. ... The crossing of the boundary from self to world is a shift from one level in mind to another" (pp. 10-11). "... if we begin with mind as primary and seek to explain objects from inner states and private experience, the discontinuity between inner and outer evaporates: mind is everywhere, a universe. ... Whereas before we thought to perceive objects, now we understand that we think them" (p. 19). "The concept of a stratified cognition is central to the notion of a mental state .... This entails an unfolding from depth to surface, not from one surface to the next, a direction crucial to agency and the causal or decisional properties of consciousness" (p. 52). By unfolding from depth to surface, he means from Core, through Subconscious, then Conscious Private Events, and finally Extra-Personal Space. He goes on to provide a definition of mental states. "A mental state is the minimal state of a mind, an absolute unit from the standpoint of its spatial and temporal structure. ... The state also has to include the prehistory of the organism. ... The concept of a mental state implies a fundamental unit that has gestalt-like properties, in that specific contents-- words, thoughts, percepts--appear in the context of mind as a whole (p. 53).