From the book review by Stanley Abrams, AJCH: [The book] “is more philosophical and mystical than scientific. … [and describes] the four states of consciousness: sleep, waking, awakeness, and objective consciousness. … For man to attain completeness and normalcy he must achieve the state of awakeness. According to the author, however, only a relatively few have approached this stage of consciousness and his description of it is quite vague. When one has reached awakeness he is able to understand and actually perceive the world in a novel and unique manner. … The final stage of awareness, objective consciousness, is characterized as the experiencing of cosmic phenomena in the same fashion as external reality is understood in the awakened state. The author indicated that this stage has not as yet been attained by man, but it does lie within his potential. … The only treatment of hypnosis is the author’s statement that the waking state is the same as the hypnotic state because suggestibility exists in both” (p. 96).
CONTEXT
1998
Page, Roger A. (1998). Mental imagery, hypnotizability, differential item difficulty, and context effects. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 41 (2), 162-167
This study attempted to determine the relationship of mental imagery to general hypnotizability and differential difficulty of susceptibility scale items, as well as the effect of context on these relationships. Undergraduates completed a mental imagery questionnaire in or out of a hypnotic context prior to being administered a group susceptibility scale. Most predicted correlations between sensory modalities on the imagery questionnaire scale item performance were small and nonsignificant. The relationship of imagery to hypnotizability was significant for an out-of-context condition, but not for an in-context condition. Reasons for the largely negative results are discussed.
1997
Council, James R. (1997). Context and consistency: The Canadian connection. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 45 (3), 204-211.
Issues related to context effects in hypnosis research are briefly reviewed. The contributions of Canadian hypnosis researchers to current theory and research on context effects are acknowledged. Bowers and colleagues at the University of Waterloo emphasized the scope and subtlety of contextual influences on correlates of hypnotic suggestibility, and they promoted the development of a consistency motivation theory of context effects. Spanos and colleagues at Carleton University generalized context effects within the domain of hypnosis, prompting extension of this work to general personality measurement. Implications of findings on consistency motivation for hypnosis research are discussed in terms of person-by-situation interactions. — Journal Abstract
Ready, David J.; Bothwell, Robert K.; Brigham, John C. (1997). The effects of hypnosis, context reinstatement, and anxiety on eyewitness memory. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 45 (1), 55-68.
The effects of hypnosis, context reinstatement, and motivational instructions on accuracy of recall for factual information and facial recognition accuracy following a stressful event were assessed. None of the three techniques had a significant effect on factual memory or susceptibility to suggestion as assessed by true-false and multiple-choice tests. However, participants high in hypnotic susceptibility showed somewhat better memory on the true-false test, and hypnosis affected performance on the two photograph line-ups. In addition, hypnosis appeared to enhance facial recognition accuracy for participants who were low in anxiety, but not for those high in anxiety. Finally, there was evidence of a curvilinear relationship between self-reported anxiety at time of retrieval and facial recognition accuracy. — Journal Abstract
Aronoff, J.; Green, J. P.; Malinoski, P.; Zelikovsky, N.; Lynn, S. J. (1994, October). Hypnosis and autobiographical memories: The impact of contextual factors. [Paper] Presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, San Francisco.
NOTES
We examined the individual differences in recall for early memories, in a college population, using the Autobiographical Memory Scale (AMS) along with other scales and with a hypnotizability scale (measured in same and different contexts). 75 male and 171 females subjects participated.
Presented as two separate experiments, so Ss would not make an explicit link between autobiographical memories and things measured in the second study.
Exper 1. Administered AMS which indicates we are interested in their memories of events, and not what they were later told about the events. First 5 birthdays, first day of school, etc. Rate the detail, vividness, and accuracy.
Exper 2. Administered Fantasy Proneness (Wilson & Barber), Cognition, Imagery Control Scale, Derogotis, SAC (Brier’s symptoms of child abuse), and Dissociative Experiences Scale.
Final sample of 247 Ss.
Earliest memory was 3.8 years.
Ss ratings of details, vividness, and accuracy were highly correlated. These were negatively correlated with age of first memory.
1994
Spanos, Nicholas P. (1994). Multiple identity enactments and multiple personality disorder: A sociocognitive perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 143-165.
People who enact multiple identities behave as if they possess 2 or more selves, each with its own characteristic moods, memories, and behavioral repertoire. Under different names, this phenomenon occurs in many cultures; in North American culture, it is frequently labeled multiple personality disorder (MPD). This article reviews experimental, cross-cultural, historical, and clinical findings concerning multiplicity and examines the implications of these findings for an understanding of MPD. Multiplicity is viewed from a sociocognitive perspective, and it is concluded that MPD, like other forms of multiplicity, is socially constructed. It is context bounded, goal-directed, social behavior geared to the expectations of significant others, and its characteristics have changed over time to meet changing
1993
Council, James R.; Grant, Debora L. (1993, October). Context effects: They’re not just for hypnosis anymore. [Paper] Presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, Arlington Heights, IL.
NOTES
Context effects in Absorption research are found in correlations, not in mean differences. Original paper has been replicated and yet results are not always significant. Now we are trying to generalize the effect to other areas: an individually administered measure will influence other measures made in the same session.
Other tests that correlate with hypnosis are studied with 2 x 2 design, enabling order effects and same vs separate contexts to be studied. Or two tests are administered at two points in time, with “bridges” between the two sessions (e.g. same experimenter, same consent forms, etc.) As one adds more and more bridging cues, the correlation of Absorption with other Tellegen MPQ subscales increases.
Same context assessment increases correlation between hypnotizability and 6-8 other scales; with childhood trauma scale when trauma scale is administered first; with beliefs in paranormal phenomena when the measure is related to an adjustment scale. The same inflation of correlations was found in Beck Depression scale research.
These results are of concern because we may have to re-do a lot of personality research that suggested correlation between personality test variables, as the correlations may be inflated by the effects of testing in the same context.
Frischholz, Edward J. (1993, October). The many roles of context in clinical and experimental hypnosis. [Paper] Presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, Arlington Heights, IL.
NOTES
There are two potential sources of dissociation: 1. Person Effect – genetic factors, personality types 2. Situation Effect – situations like environmental causes, contextually dependent
Person Effects and Hypnotizability. Morgan (1973 Journal of Abnormal Psychology) Intraclass correlation determines heritability index: 62% of score is accounted for by genetic factors (though the twins were not reared apart, so family influences also were present). Piccione’s research demonstrated long-term stability for hypnotizability scores; 25 years’ test-retest r = .71, N = 50
Situational Effects and Hypnotizability. Norman Katz (1979) varied context before giving the Stanford Form C for a second time (sleep/trance induction, social learning induction, social learning relaxation induction). The latter two inductions showed significant gains of 3.33 and 2.87 on the scale, compared to .80.
Context effects must always be placed in perspective. When reanalyzing Katz with ANOVA, according to the recommendation of Cronbach for change score analysis, situation accounts for 17% of effect while person effect accounts for 49% (See Spiegel & Frischholz, 1992.)
Sivec, Harry; Lynn, Steven Jay (1993, October). Negative posthypnotic effects: The influence of prehypnotic experiences. [Paper] Presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, Arlington Heights, IL.
NOTES 1:
NOTES: Ss and Experimenters may mis-attribute negative experiential effects to hypnosis because of temporal contiguity. This study required Ss to complete the experiences scale before and after hypnosis and before and after a non-hypnotic control procedure. The PES is a 65 item scale and has a stable factor structure assessing pleasant, perceptual/kinesthetic, anger, and anxiety experiences.
49 Ss completed the test before and after the Harvard Group Scale, minus the word “hypnosis” in the induction, though it was presented as a study of hypnosis; 33 had the study presented as study of body awareness, and were to focus on body parts corresponding to the parts mentioned on the Harvard.
RESULTS. Ss in both groups reported more perceptual/kinesthetic effects after than before the experience. Research failed to find hypnosis was associated with unique effects that were negative. The single increase might be due to focusing on the body. The only difference between groups was that hypnosis Ss reported fewer anger experiences than those in the other group.
This data disconfirms the belief that hypnosis is associated with negative effects.
Spinhoven, Philip; Vanderlinden, Johan; ter-Kuile, Moniek M.; Linseen, A. Corry G. (1993). Assessment of hypnotic processes and responsiveness in a clinical context. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 41 (3), 210-224.
The present study was designed to investigate in a clinical situation whether differences in measured hypnotizability validly reflect differences in hypnotic processes and to what extent factors deemed extraneous to hypnosis — such as resistance — influence hypnotic responding. To answer this question, Dutch versions of relevant scales had to first be developed. The factorial validity and reliability of a Dutch translation of the Resistance Toward Hypnosis Scale (DRHS) and a shortened Dutch version of the Phenomenology of Consciousness Inventory (DPCI) were investigated in a sample of 205 psychiatric patients. The DRHS proved to be factorially valid and reliable, and two subscales, Trance and Reality Orientation, derived empirically from the DPCI showed good to satisfactory reliability. In a second study with a subsample of 99 psychiatric patients, hypnotizability as measured by the Stanford Hypnotic Clinical Scale for Adults was strongly and positively related to DPCI Trance scores and moderately and negatively related to DPCI Reality Orientation and DRHS Resistance scores. It is concluded that hypnotizability as measured in a clinical context under standard conditions is strongly related to hypnotic experiences over and above the moderate effects of resistance toward hypnosis and hypnotic suggestions. Standard hypnotizability assessments appear to be similar in their meaning in an experimental and clinical context.
Zivney, Olivia; Lynn, Steven Jay; Zelikovsky, Nataliya; Sivec, Harry; Marsden, Kim; Stewart, Kay; Valdez, Gail (1993, October). Hypnotizability modification training: Gains are not mediated by context. [Paper] Presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, Arlington Heights, IL.
NOTES
Spanos’ program to enhance hypnotizability was examined by Bates et al to determine whether improvement was due to context. They had a problem because they required Ss to sign up for five sessions, and their attempt to do a retest independently of the training sessions was therefore challenged. Also, Bates admitted that the rapport characteristic of Spanos’ lab was not present.
This research replicated Bates, with improvement in the research design. The sessions were separated by having the hypnosis done in the medical school. None of the low demand group realized that they were being trained for improving hypnosis. 50% of the low demand group and same of the replication group scored as Highs on retest.
This failed to support Bates’ contention that demands for compliance mediate training gains. Magnitude of gains was the same as reported earlier in the Carlton (Spanos lab) research. Trained Ss could not be distinguished from natural highs. Training related gains are not only robust but are generalizable to novel tasks. Trained Ss have a more internal locus of attribution, consistent with the educational approach.
Clinicians need to investigate this in a variety of clinical situations.
1992
Kirsch, Irving (1992, August). Cognitive-behavioral hypnotherapy. [Paper] Presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.
The use of hypnosis to augment cognitive behavior therapy was described. Hypnotic inductions establish a context in which the effects of therapeutic interventions can be potentiated for clients with positive attitudes and expectancies toward it. Hypnosis can also provide a disinhibiting context for both clients and therapists, allowing them to behave in ways that are therapeutic, but that might seem awkward in other contexts. A meta-analysis of outcome studies in which the effects of a cognitive-behavioral treatment were compared to the effects of the same treatments supplemented by hypnosis resulted in a mean effect size of 0.87 standard deviations, indicating the average client receiving cognitive-behavioral hypnotherapy is better off at the end of it than more than 80 percent of clients who receive the same treatment in a nonhypnotic context. (ABSTRACT from the Bulletin of Division 30, Psychological Hypnosis, Fall, 1992, Vol. 1, No. 3.)
Kvaal, Steven; Lynn, Steven Jay; Myers, Brian (1992, October). The Gulf war: Effects on hypnotizability. [Paper] Presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, Arlington, VA.
NOTES
We did a study that follows the line that volunteers may differ from nonvolunteers for hypnosis experiments (Authors cite 3 studies, including one with Hilgard as later author; Brodsky; Zamansky). Also, Ss who volunteer early in the quarter at the university are motivated for hypnosis; later volunteers want course credit. The former want to experience hypnosis.
Previously we did a study on authoritative vs permissive suggestions with Ss who volunteered early or late in the quarter; Ss were tested twice. For Ss who volunteered in first 2 weeks of the quarter, scores decreased across testing; for Ss volunteering late, scores remained stable across testing. This implies that if an experiment were conducted late in a quarter we would conclude that repeated testing has no effect; if done earlier, we would have concluded repeated testing decreases scores.
This result has been replicated. It is therefore important to run Ss across an entire quarter or year.
The present study differs from the foregoing study. It addresses the question: Do life events affect scores on the Harvard Scale? Do tension, uncertainty, etc. affect scores? Would they depress scores? Are scores reactive to environmental events?
On January 14 the U.S. issued an ultimative to Iraq; that very day we administered a tape recorded version of the Harvard Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, preceded by the Tellegen Absorption Scale. The hypnotizability tests were self-scored for involvement and involuntariness. Tension throughout the day escalated, culminating with bombing 2 hours before the hypnosis screening. The graduate student announced war had started and told Ss they could leave if they wanted. All 52 Ss stayed!
Control group was 58 Ss tested at same time of the quarter, one year before (10 days into the quarter).
Analysis was by a 3 x 2 ANOVA. There was no main effect for time of testing, sex, or interaction for any measures on hypnotizability, or subjective involvement.
The Tellegen Absorption scale showed a significant timing x sex interaction: males on outbreak of war scored lower than all other groups (15 vs 21 or more for all other groups). Tensions had no effect on subjective or objective scores of hypnotizability. Thus the males were affected on the Absorption Scale by outbreak of war.
The fact the Tellegen Scale was more reactive suggests hypnotizability may be more stable than Absorption. Absorption might have been depressed because males were more upset by images of military services.
Little research has been conducted to examine the possible positive effects on hypnotizability of positive events in real life.
Lyons, Larry C. (1992, October). Absorption and hypnotizability: Meta-analysis of studies to determine if contextual effects are important. [Paper] Presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, Arlington, VA
NOTES
Correlations between hypnotizability and Absorption range from .20 to .40; Council et al. suggest the correlation between these variables is a context effect (expectancy). In our review there was no statistically significant difference between correlations that were found in and out of context (.26 and .23, weighted means) in more than 40 studies with more than one correlation per study.
When Absorption was measured before hypnosis experience the r = .25; after the hypnosis experience, r = .32 (significantly different), which also was different from what context hypothesis would predict. Any context difference may be a function of length of time between the Absorption and hypnosis sessions.
Data does not support the context hypothesis. Measuring Absorption after hypnosis resulted in higher mean correlations with susceptibility. However, the magnitude of this relationship was small. Variation due to test reliability and small sample size are likely explanations of the differences in the magnitude of the correlations across studies. We also must consider scale reliability and sample error (samples less than 1000 have departures from the population correlation that are fairly large).
CONCLUSION
We should construct confidence intervals around observed correlations and look at the overlap; don’t look only at the significance of the difference between correlations.
Author is in the process of conducting a mail survey to obtain unpublished results on context effect.
Nadon, Robert; Dywan, Jane; Adams, Barbara (1992, October). The social psychology of depth reports: Skirting the important data. [Paper] Presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, Arlington, VA.
NOTES
Radke & Spanos used a new 7-point scale that permitted Ss to say they passed an item but were not hypnotized, and only 25% (instead of 88% on usual 4-point scale) said that they were hypnotized.
Do we delude ourselves in thinking reports of hypnotic depth just reflect scale wording, or is something genuine being measured? Radke & Spanos found that breaking down Ss into low, medium, and high hypnotizable groups, the mediums are the ones who are affected by scale manipulations.
Lyons, Larry C. (1992, October). Absorption and hypnotizability: Meta-analysis of studies to determine if contextual effects are important. [Paper] Presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, Arlington, VA.
NOTES
Correlations between hypnotizability and Absorption range from .20 to .40; Council et al. suggest the correlation between these variables is a context effect (expectancy). In our review there was no statistically significant difference between correlations that were found in and out of context (.26 and .23, weighted means) in more than 40 studies with more than one correlation per study.
When Absorption was measured before hypnosis experience the r = .25; after the hypnosis experience, r = .32 (significantly different), which also was different from what context hypothesis would predict. Any context difference may be a function of length of time between the Absorption and hypnosis sessions.
Data does not support the context hypothesis. Measuring Absorption after hypnosis resulted in higher mean correlations with susceptibility. However, the magnitude of this relationship was small. Variation due to test reliability and small sample size are likely explanations of the differences in the magnitude of the correlations across studies. We also must consider scale reliability and sample error (samples less than 1000 have departures from the population correlation that are fairly large).
CONCLUSION
We should construct confidence intervals around observed correlations and look at the overlap; don’t look only at the significance of the difference between correlations.
Author is in the process of conducting a mail survey to obtain unpublished results on context effect.
Nadon, Robert; Dywan, Jane; Adams, Barbara (1992, October). The social psychology of depth reports: Skirting the important data. [Paper] Presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, Arlington, VA.
NOTES
Radke & Spanos used a new 7-point scale that permitted Ss to say they passed an item but were not hypnotized, and only 25% (instead of 88% on usual 4-point scale) said that they were hypnotized.
Do we delude ourselves in thinking reports of hypnotic depth just reflect scale wording, or is something genuine being measured? Radke & Spanos found that breaking down Ss into low, medium, and high hypnotizable groups, the mediums are the ones who are affected by scale manipulations.
Spanos, Nicholas P.; Simulates, Ann; de Faye, Barbara; Mondoux, Thomas J.; Gabora, Natalie J. (1992-93). A comparison of hypnotic and nonhypnotic treatments for smoking. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 12, 23-43.
Three experiments administered variants of Spiegel’s (1970) smoking cessation procedure to smokers in hypnotic and nonhypnotic treatments. Follow-up periods were from twelve to twenty-four weeks depending on the experiment. Complete abstinence was an infrequent outcome in all three experiments. Greater-than-control reductions in smoking for treated subjects were obtained in two of the experiments but, in both cases treatment and control subjects failed to differ significantly before the end of the follow-up period. Hypnotic and nonhypnotic treatments produced equivalent smoking reductions in all studies, and neither hypnotizability nor questionnaire assessments of motivation to quit correlated significantly with treatment outcome. Implications are discussed.
NOTES
When the experimenters compared number of treatments they simply compared two sessions of Spiegel’s one-session treatment with four sessions of it. The authors make the point that perhaps they should vary the four sessions.
“In all three of the present experiments the abstinence rates associated with the Spiegel treatment were very low. Our abstinence rates were similar to those reported in one earlier study [4 – Perry et al.], but substantially lower than those reported in three other studies [2, 22, 25]. The reasons for these discrepancies between studies remains unclear, but experiment 3 suggests that these discrepancies cannot be accounted for simply in terms of whether the subjects were drawn from a university or nonuniversity population, and experiment 2 suggests that the discrepancies are unrelated to the number of treatment sessions administered to subjects.
“The finding that hypnotic and nonhypnotic subjects in all three experiments attained equivalent reductions in smoking is consistent with other comparison studies in this area which indicate that hypnotic treatments are no more effective than various nonhypnotic procedures at inducing reductions in smoking [22, 25, 30]. More generally, these findings are consistent with comparison studies on a wide variety of clinical disorders (headache pain, warts, phobias, obesity) which indicate that hypnotic treatments are no more effective than nonhypnotic ones at producing therapeutic change (see [3] for a review).
“The failure to find significant correlations between smoking reduction and hypnotizability among treated subjects is also consistent with the findings of most studies in this area [3], but the reasons why significant correlations between these variables are found in some studies and not others remains unclear. Spanos [3] suggested that significant correlations between these variables are particularly likely when hypnotizability testing is integrated into the treatment protocol. Under these circumstances subjects are likely to form strong expectations about treatment success on the basis of their self- observed responses to the hypnotizability scale. Such expectations may, in turn, influence subjects’ motivations to comply with the treatment regimen, the self-statements they make concerning their likelihood of quitting, etc. In all of the present experiments hypnotizability was assessed at the end of the follow-up period and, therefore, could not influence subjects’ expectations of treatment success” (pp. 40-41).
Spinhoven, Philip; van Wijk, Jorrit (1992). Hypnotic age regression in an experimental and clinical context. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 35, 40-46.
Investigated role of a clinical context in the experience of hypnotic age regression. 25 patients experienced hypnotic age regression in an experimental and clinical context in counterbalanced order. Patients obtained significantly lower scores for experimental age regression than for clinical age regression, in particular when the experimental assessment preceded the clinical assessment of age regression. Moreover, scores for clinical and experimental age regression were only significantly and positively correlated when the clinical assessment of age regression preceded the experience assessment. These findings give a tentative indication that more patients are able to experience clinical age regression than can be predicted from their responses to an experimental suggestion for hypnotic age regression where almost no opportunities for patient contact or maximizing of hypnotic responsiveness are provided.
1991
Campbell, Laura; St. Jean, Richard (1991, August). Attentional processing and hypnotic time estimation. [Paper] Presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, San Francisco.
The tendency of subjects to substantially underestimate the duration of the hypnotic period is, by now, well-documented (St. Jean, 1989). Recent attempts to account for this phenomenon have focused on the attentional processing requirements of the hypnotic role and hypnotic task. St. Jean, McInnis, and Swainson (1990) presented a “busy-beaver” hypothesis which views the hypnotic subject as so occupied with the demands of task and role that little attention may be spared for the processing of unrelated stimuli. Consequently, when stimuli such as contextual changes, or other cues denoting the passage of time, are unattended the result is a reduction in subjective duration. St. Jean et al. (1990) reported a study in which the attentional demands of a listening task, presented in a hypnotic context, were varied by placing additional processing demands, in the form of a complex problem-solving task, on some subjects, but not on others. Subjects in the attentionally-demanding condition underestimated the duration of the listening period to a far greater degree than their passive listening counterparts. Estimates were not related to hypnotic susceptibility. St. Jean et al. (1990) did not employ a waking comparison condition. Such a comparison is important in determining whether the hypnotic role, or context, apart from the processing demands they usually impose, contribute to the underestimation effect. The present study provides such a comparison by presenting the same attentional manipulation in both a waking and a hypnotic context. The findings of the previous study were strongly corroborated; subjects in the attentional condition gave significantly shorter duration estimates than those who passively listened. The nature of the context, hypnotic or waking, did not, however, influence the magnitude of time estimates. These results, together with similar findings in the time-perception literature, appear to lend considerable support to the “busy- beaver” hypothesis. (ABSTRACT from Bulletin of Division 30, Psychological Hypnosis, Provided by former Editor, James Council.)
Nadon, R.; Hoyt, I. P.; Register, P. A.; Kihlstrom, J. F. (1991). Absorption and hypnotizability: Contextual effects re-examined. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 144-153.
Two independent studies failed to find evidence consistent with Council, Kirsch, and Hafner (1986), who argued that the repeatedly observed correlations between Tellegen’s (1981) Absorption Scale (TAS) and hypnosis measures were artifacts of testing context, and de Groot, Gwynn, and Spanos (1988), who claimed evidence for a Gender x Context moderator effect. In the present studies, subjects completed the TAS and other personality questionnaires during an independent survey and later immediately prior to an assessment of hypnotizability. In Experiment 1 (N – 475), the effect of context on the relation between questionnaire scores and hypnotizability was weak and variable; in Experience 2 (N – 434), these weak effects were reversed. The results reaffirmed the construct validity of absorption as both a major dimension of personality and as a predictor of hypnotic responsiveness.
Sheehan, Peter W. (1991). Hypnosis, context, and commitment. In Lynn, S. J.; Rhue, J. W. (Ed.), Theories of hypnosis: Current models and perspectives (pp. 520-541). New York: Guilford Press.
NOTES
There are several different ways to classify the model that is expounded in this chapter. One may view it … as an individual-differences model of hypnosis, because it emphasizes the significance of intragroup differences in the pattern of hypnotic performance. Alternatively, one may view it as a phenomenologically based model…. Invariably, however, single categories fail to do justice to the nature of theories, and hence it is perhaps wisest to view this theory as a means of exploring particular hypotheses about hypnotic phenomena that focus primarily on the meaning of suggestion as perceived by susceptible subjects. This model focuses, in a way that most other theories do not, on the motivational implications of the cognitive involvement of the susceptible subject in the events of the hypnotic setting. It offers a variant of contextual theories of psychological functioning, but is experiential in its emphasis rather than simply behavioral” (p. 537).
Sheehan, Peter W.; Statham, Dixie; Jamieson, Graham A. (1991). Pseudomemory effects over time in the hypnotic setting. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 100 (1), 39-44.
Highly (n=36), moderately (n=26), and low (n=48) susceptible Ss were administered either hypnosis or waking instruction to examine the hypothesis that pseudomemory will occur for hypnotic Ss as long as 2 weeks after suggestions are given for accepting false events. Accuracy and confidence of memory were measured for all ss, and memory was examined for free recall, structured recall, and recognition. Results indicated persistence of pseudomemory for the 2-wk period for both highly and moderately susceptible ss. Data highlighted the multifaceted operation of skill, contextual, and state instruction factors, and a hypothesis that ambiguity of communication when suggestion is delivered plays a part in the maintenance of pseudomemory over time is offered for further testing.
Drake, Stephen D.; Nash, Michael R.; Cawood, Glenn N. (1990-91). Imaginative involvement and hypnotic susceptibility: A re-examination of the relationship. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 10, 141-155.
Several researchers have reported that significant correlations between hypnotic susceptibility and absorption result from the reactive effects of administering scales immediately before measurement of hypnotizability. The present study was conducted to determine whether interview measures of imaginative involvement are similarly reactive. Three groups of 48, 43, and 43 Ss each were first administered 3 scales of absorption/imaginativeness. This was followed by administration of a hypnotizability scale. Ss in Group 1 who were administered the 3 scales immediately prior to hypnosis evidenced the usual significant positive correlation between each of the 3 scales and hypnotizability. Ss in Groups 2 and 3 were administered the 3 scales 24 to 36 hours prior to hypnosis. Group 2 Ss were informed that administration of these scales was part of a hypnosis experiment. Group 3 Ss were not aware that the scales were part of a hypnosis experiment. No significant correlation between hypnotizability and the 3 measures of imagination/absorption was evidenced for either Group 2 or Group 3. Our findings suggest that any relationship between these two constructs may be quite dependent on how and when the measures are administered.
1989
Malott, James M.; Bourg, Audrey L.; Crawford, Helen J. (1989). The effects of hypnosis upon cognitive responses to persuasive communication. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 37, 31-40.
Several writers have suggested that hypnotic responsiveness is directly related to the content of S’s covert self-statements. To test this notion, low and high hypnotizable subjects in either hypnosis or waking conditions were exposed to a recorded message advocating that college seniors be required to pass a comprehensive exam in order to graduate. Following message presentation, subjects listed all of the thoughts which occurred to them while listening to the message; these thoughts were later coded as counterarguments, favorable thoughts, or neutral thoughts. Hypnotized subjects generated significantly fewer counterarguments and agreed more with the message than waking subjects. In addition, high hypnotizable subjects (in both waking and hypnosis conditions) produced significantly more favorable thoughts and agreed more with the message than low hypnotizability subjects. Results, therefore, provided a demonstration of the differential impact of context (induction) and trait (hypnotizability level) upon different cognitive phenomena. Implications for the occurrence of hypersuggestible behavior are discussed.
NOTES:
N = 48 (24 highs, 24 lows, blocked on sex and hypnotizability level, then randomly assigned to one of two conditions).
Hypnosis subjects generated significantly fewer counterarguments than waking subjects (12% vs 45%). Main effect for hypnotizability level was nonsignificant, as was the condition x hypnotizability interaction.
High hypnotizable subjects generated significantly more favorable thoughts than low hypnotizable subjects (28% vs 12%). The main effect for condition was nonsignificant, as was the condition x hypnotizability interaction.
Unexpectedly, hypnosis subjects produced a significantly greater number of neutral thoughts. The main effect for hypnotizability level did not reach significance, nor did the condition x hypnotizability interaction.
“Thus, as suggested by McConkey (1984), it may be the hypnotic _context_, rather than a hypnotic “state” which is responsible for reduced levels of counterarguing. … the data indicate that an induction decreases counterarguing among high and low hypnotizable subjects alike; on the other hand, the incidence of favorable thoughts is related only to hypnotizability level and not to the hypnosis context. … the present findings suggest that _both_ context and trait play a role in the occurrence of hypnotic behavior, although each may do so by impacting upon _different_ cognitive responses.
There appears to be a relationship between counterarguing and acceptance of the persuasive communication in the present study. First, there was a significant negative correlation between those two measures (collapsing across conditions), indicating that higher levels of counterarguing were associated with _lower_ levels of communication acceptance. Second, subjects in the hypnosis condition who counterargued less than waking subjects, also indicated significantly higher levels of communication acceptance than waking subjects.
In a similar fashion, there appears to be a relationship between favorable thought production and communication acceptance. There was a significant positive correlation between the two measures, and high hypnotizable subjects who generated significantly more favorable thoughts than low hypnotizables, also produced higher scores on the attitude measure.
They attribute the greater number of neutral thoughts for hypnosis subjects to minor differences in the instructions (p. 38).
1989
Nash, Michael R.; Spinler, Dwayne (1989). Hypnosis and transference: A measure of archaic involvement. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 37, 129-144.
20 Likert-type items were derived directly from Shor’s theoretical propositions concerning the occurrence of transference-like experiences among hypnotic Ss. In 3 separate experiments, this 20-item Archaic Involvement Measure (AIM) was administered to 452 Ss following termination of both group and individually administered hypnosis procedures. Results suggest that: (a) AIM is internally consistent, and is significantly correlated with hypnotizability; (b) among high hypnotizable Ss, AIM scores assess an important aspect of hypnotic experience which is relatively unrelated to behavioral response to hypnotic suggestions; (c) there is no change in AIM scores associated with the sex of the hypnotist or S; and (d) there are 3 clusters of AIM items; perceived power of the hypnotist, positive emotional bond to the hypnotist, and fear of negative appraisal. Possible validational and clinical research applications of AIM are presented, along with a plea for further empirical examination of the relational dimensions of hypnosis.
NOTES
Relates these findings to ‘countering’ (Sheehan, P., Countering preconceptions about hypnosis: An objective index of involvement with the hypnotist. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1971, 78, 299-322). “Countering is the tendency of some highly hypnotizable Subjects to comply with the intent of the hypnotist, even when there are strong nonhypnotic influences (e.g., social influences, expectations derived from previous lectures, perceptual constraints) to perform otherwise. … Sheehan and Dolby (1979) found that hypnotic Subjects’ dreams about the hypnotist were different than nonhypnotic Subjects’ dreams, by being more positive and more often containing themes of protection, care, and authority. Interestingly, these themes were especially evident in the dreams of hypnotic Subjects who countered” (p. 130).
The several experiments in this study investigate reliability, concurrent validity, and factor structure of the AIM. In their discussion, Nash and Spinler make the following points. As is the case with hypnotizability, AIM scores may have a bi-modal distribution, at least when administered in the same context as a hypnosis measure. It is possible that these two modes define qualitatively different kinds of involvement with the hypnotist. “For high hypnotizable Ss, behavioral response to hypnotic suggestions appeared unrelated to the extent of archaic involvement with the hypnotist across both Experiments 2 and 3. Considering only the overall correlation between AIM and hypnotic responsiveness, one might argue that both scales measure general behavioral compliance and conformity, and that this explains their degree of association. It may indeed be correct to associate AIM scores with an overall conformity to respond, but only among low hypnotizable Subjects. For high hypnotizable Subjects, behavioral compliance (task performance) was not associated with AIM scores. Just as Sheehan’s (1971, 1980) ‘countering’ studies suggest, among high hypnotizable Ss there appears to be no clear-cut relationship between the ability to perform hypnotic tasks and the special, motivated commitment to the hypnotist evidenced in some Ss. The theory of Shor (1979) and the empirical work of Sheehan and Dolby (1979) strongly suggest that an intense involvement with the hypnotist (archaic involvement) is a distinctive feature of the hypnotizable S’s experience. The present work corroborates Sheehan and Dolby’s (1979) finding that, among high hypnotizable Ss, this involvement is not equivalent to overt response to the demands of standard test suggestions.
“Three findings further suggest that AIM scores assess an important aspect of the hypnotic S’s experience which is relatively unrelated to behavioral task performance. First, AIM scores correlated significantly with a measure of subjective depth during hypnosis (Hypnotic Depth Inventory, Field, 1966). Second, the correlation between hypnotic depth and AIM scores was substantial for both low and high hypnotizable Ss. Thus, for high hypnotizable Ss, AIM scores were significantly correlated with hypnotic depth, even though they were unrelated to behavioral task performance. Finally, regression analysis suggested that AIM scores accounted for variance in hypnotic depth which was not explained by task performance scores. These findings, then, conform to Shor’s proposition and Sheehan’s (1971, 1980) later observations that archaic involvement with the hypnotist is a fundamental dimension of hypnotic experience which may not be directly related to the extent of behavioral response to hypnotic suggestions (see Shor, 1979, p. 119).|
“It is of some interest that the mean AIM score for low hypnotizable Ss was roughly equivalent to that of control Ss who had listened to a lecture prior to AIM administration. Only Ss who were exposed to hypnosis and who were behaviorally responsive to hypnotic suggestions evidenced elevated AIM scores” (pp. 140).
Ronnestad, Michael Helge (1989). Hypnosis and autonomy: A moderator analysis. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 37, 154-168.
The study focused on autonomy as a moderator variable in the prediction of subjectively reported hypnotic depth. Ss in the experimental part of the study were 56 undergraduate psychology and education majors classified as either high or low in autonomy. Ss who were equated on capacity for absorption were individually administered 1 of 3 hypnotic inductions: an authoritarian induction, a permissive hetero- induction, or a self-hypnosis induction. The study had a double-blind design. The data suggest that situational manipulation has greater impact on low than on high autonomy Ss. Individual-difference variables such as absorption, have greater impact on hypnotic depth for high than for low autonomy Ss. The data indicate that the hypnotic behavior of high autonomy Ss is more likely to be self-congruent and less likely to be demand-congruent. A factor-analytic inquiry of absorption confirmed the importance of affective/regressive capacity for hypnotic functioning for high autonomy Ss. The study supported the alternate-path perspective of hypnosis.
NOTES
There is very little research on autonomy and hypnosis. The authors cite studies showing only a modest relationship between hypnotizability and locus of control.
In this study, 176 students were assigned to the high autonomy group if they were in the upper 1/3 of two of 3 autonomy scales (Rotter’s Locus of Control Scale, the Inner- Directedness Subscale of the Shostrom Personal Orientation Inventory, and the Autonomy subscale of Jackson’s Personality Research Form) and not in the lower 1/3 of the third scale. Ss were designated as low autonomy if the obverse obtained. This procedure yielded 27 high and 29 low autonomy Ss.
Ss were hypnotized with one of three inductions: authoritarian with many motor items (Barber Suggestibility Scale), permissive with mostly imagery (Barber & Wilson’s Creative Imagination Scale), or guided self-hypnosis with mostly imagery (taken from Fromm et al, 1981). After hypnosis, Ss rated their own hypnotic depth on a 1-10 scale, and their perception of E or the procedure as authoritarian and directive. Ss’ attitude, expectations, motivation, and experienced effortlessness were measured. E rated Ss for pre-hypnosis rapport and post-hypnosis rapport.
The results indicated that there was no difference in hypnotizability level between high and low autonomy Ss. The correlation between effortlessness of experience and hypnotic depth was high for low autonomy Ss (.51) but not significant for high autonomy Ss (.12). In general the two groups were very similar in terms of mean scores on most variables. The differences appeared in the correlations between self-reported hypnotic depth and the other variables. For low autonomy Ss correlations were not significant between depth and pre-hypnotic variables (rapport-pre, absorption, expectation) but for highs the same correlations were significant (rapport-pre .47, absorption .54, expectation .48).
But for post-hypnosis variables, low autonomy Ss had significant correlations between depth and the two variables measured from post-hypnosis interviews (perceived authoritarian/directiveness .40, effortlessness .51) and the highs did not have significant correlations. The multiple correlation between these variables and depth was R = .28 for low autonomy Ss (with no contribution from rapport-pre) and R = .72 for high autonomy Ss, with absorption contributing most. The more they perceived the induction as authoritarian or directive, the greater depth reported by low autonomy Ss. Although low and high absorption Ss did not differ on the Absorption Scale, absorption predicted hypnotic depth better for the highs.
The author divided the Absorption Scale into four rational factors: Affective/Regressive, Perceptual/Cognitive, Dissociative, and Mystical. Low and high autonomy Ss scored at approximately the same level on these categories, but correlations between these categories and depth for low and high autonomy Ss were somewhat different. (See Table.)
Correlations between Categories of Absorption and Hypnotic Depth for Low and High Autonomy Ss
Absorption Low Autonomy High Autonomy All Ss Category r r r
Affective/Regressive .14 .56** .33** Perceptual/Cognitive .25 .33* .29* Dissociative .32* .57** .47** “Mystical” .07 .16 .11
In their discussion, the authors note that one might assume that high autonomy Ss would be less affected by variations in hypnosis procedures than low autonomy Ss. The differences found in depth scores for these two groups were supportive of this expectation. “Fluctuations in subjectively reported depth scores for low autonomy Ss only, clearly suggest autonomy to be a moderator variable” (p. 163).
Moreover, the results indicate “that high autonomy Ss in comparison to low autonomy Ss are more likely to express their inner dispositions, such as absorption and expectation, in the hypnotic setting. High autonomy Ss may be more reflective of and attuned to individual predisposing characteristics and less influenced by situational demands. … the hypnotic behavior of high autonomy Ss is more likely to be self- congruent and less likely to be demand-congruent. Low autonomy Ss, however, are more likely to be demand congruent and less likely to be self-congruent. The latter finding was suggested both by the significant F ratio for low autonomy Ss across treatments, and also by the stronger relationship found for this group between depth and how authoritarian/directive they perceived the procedure to be” (p. 163).
[Paradoxically, among low autonomy Ss an authoritarian approach yields less depth but greater suggestibility (higher hypnotizability scores).] “The tendency for low autonomy Ss to have a higher behavioral score on the authoritarian procedure is consistent with Tellegen’s (1979) assumption that there are two pervasive dimensions in current hypnotizability measures–a compliance dimension and a true hypnotic responsiveness dimension. According to Tellegen, motor items may be more saturated with compliance, while cognitive items may be more saturated with true hypnotic responsiveness. The BSS has a motor emphasis, and the higher behavioral scores for the low autonomy group of Ss may be interpreted as an expression of compliance.
“In addition to the inner-directedness and self-congruence hypothesis of why autonomy may be a moderator variable, another possible explanation is related to accuracy of self-perception. The intercorrelational and multiple regression data showed repeatedly that a stronger relationship existed between prehypnotic variables and hypnotic depth for high autonomy than for low autonomy Ss. The relational capacity, as tapped by the rapport-pre variable, absorption, which may be conceptualized as a personality trait; and expectation, a cognitive variable, were all related to depth for high autonomy Ss. For low autonomy Ss, none of these variables were individually related to depth. Differences in Ss’ accuracy of self-reporting may explain this. According to ego-psychology theory, highly individuated Ss, with clear self-other differentiation and congruence in self-perception, are better able to make accurate statements about themselves. The self-assessments of Ss with low differentiation capability may be less accurate and possibly more affected by demand characteristics and response set. In other words, their self-assessments have more error. The generally lower correlations for the low autonomy Ss may reflect this” (p. 164).
“A report of subjectively reported hypnotic depth following CIS and the self- hypnosis scales may reflect clarity of imagery, while a report of depth following BSS may reflect experiences of kinesthetic/bodily changes” (p. 165).