A scale is presented that assesses subjective experiences associated with the test suggestions contained in the Waterloo-Stanford Group C scale (WSGC), a group adaptation of the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale: Form [C] (SHSS:C). This scale, along with the standard behavioral scoring system of the WSGC, was given to 926 students at the University of Connecticut. Normative data from this sample indicate that the experiential scoring scale is both reliable and valid as a measure of suggestibility. It is suggested that it may be useful to supplement behavioral scoring with experiential scoring when the WSGC is used.
1993
Bowers, Kenneth S. (1993). The Waterloo-Stanford Group C (WSGC) Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility: Normative and comparative data. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 41 (1), 35-46.
The Waterloo-Stanford Group C (WSGC) hypnotic susceptibility scale was developed as a substitute for the individually administered Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C (SHSS:C). A first investigation with WSGC reports normative data on 259 subjects, and the results indicate that it is comparable in most important respects to the norms of SHSS:C. A second investigation directly compared WSGC and SHSS:C in a counterbalanced design on 65 subjects, and the two scales correlated .85. It is argued that, when used as a follow-up to the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A, WSGC provides a valid criterion of hypnotic ability.
1990
Kirsch, Irving; Council, James R.; Wickless, Cynthia (1990). Subjective scoring for the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 38 (2), 112-124.
A scale is presented which assesses subjective experiences associated with the test suggestions contained in the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A (HGSHS:A) of Shor and E. Orne (1962). This scale, along with the standard HGSHS:A self-scoring test booklet, was administered to 479 students at the University of Connecticut and 618 students at North Dakota State University, and normative data from these samples are reported. Correlational analyses indicated that the scale was both reliable and valid as a measure of hypnotic responsiveness. It is suggested that it may be useful to supplement behavioral scoring of hypnotizability with subjective scoring.
1989
Palan, B.M.; Chandwani, S. (1989). Coping with examination stress through hypnosis: An experimental study. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 31, 173-180.
Fifty-six volunteer medical students participated in three groups balanced for number of subjects, performance at last examination, and hypnotizability. The hypnosis and waking groups attended eight group sessions once a week with general ego- strengthening and specific suggestions for study habits, with a ninth session of age progression and mental rehearsal. Subjects in these two groups practiced self-suggestions (in self-hypnosis or waking respectively) daily for the study period of 9 weeks. The control group experienced sessions of passive relaxation induced by light reading for the same period of time. The hypnosis group improved significantly in coping with examination stress, but there was no significant change in performance on examinations by any of the groups.
Spiegel, David; Bloom, J. R.; Kraemer, H. C.; Gottheil, E. (1989, October 14). The beneficial effect of psychosocial treatment on survival of metastatic breast cancer patients: A randomized prospective outcome study. Lancet, 888-891.
The effect of psychosocial intervention on time of survival of 86 metastatic breast cancer patients was studied using randomized prospective design. The one-year treatment consisted of weekly supportive group therapy with training in self-hypnosis for pain management, and resulted in significant reductions in mood disturbance and pain. Both the treatment and control groups had routine oncologic care. At ten-year follow-up, only three of the original 86 patients were still alive, and death records were obtained for the other 83. Survival from the time of randomization and onset of intervention was 36.6 (sd = 37.6) months for the treatment group, compared with 18.9 (sd = 10.8) months for the control group, and this difference was highly significant (Z = 3.94, p <.0001) using the Cox life table regression model. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis indicated that the divergence in survival began at 20 months after entry into the study, or 8 months after the treatment intervention ended. These unexpected findings suggest that intensive psychosocial support affects the course of the illness, although the mechanism by which it does so is not clear. 1988 Azuma, Nagato; Stevenson, Ian (1988). 'Psychic surgery' in the Philippines as a form of group hypnosis. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 31, 61-67. Psychic surgeons and their patients were observed in the Philippines during a variety of procedures of 'minor surgery.' In six cases, subcutaneous tissues (cysts and benign tumors) were removed. Histological examination confirmed the gross diagnoses and left no doubt that the skin had been penetrated. Although the psychic surgeons used no analgesics or anesthetics, the patients appeared to experience little or no pain and only slight bleeding. The authors believe that a supportive group 'atmosphere' enables the patients to enter a quasi-hypnotic state that reduces pain and facilitates healing. Bowers, Patricia G.; Laurence, Jean-Roch; Hart, David (1988). The experience of hypnotic suggestions. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 36, 336-349. The experience of nonvolition in response to hypnotic suggestions was investigated for 126 Ss. 2 different scales, a new scale providing discrete options for response and a previously used volition rating scale, gave Ss an opportunity to describe some of their subjective experiences after completion of a 12-item adaptation for group administration of the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C (Weitzenhoffer & Hilgard, 1962). Ratings of depth of hypnosis were also obtained. Ss had been previously administered the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A (Shor & E. Orne, 1962). Distribution of descriptions of experience for passed and failed items were obtained. Total scores on subjective indices were found to be highly correlated with the behavioral score on the Waterloo-Stanford Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility: Group C. Items differed, however, in the degree to which responses seem to occur effortlessly. Some suggestions have a substantial number of passed responses lacking the "classic suggestion effect," but only 7% of Ss have more than 2 such responses. NOTES 1: NOTES: Earlier research on the subjective perception of voluntary enactment of suggestions found from 20% (K. Bowers, 1981; P. Bowers, 1982) to 55% (Spanos, Radtke, Hodgins, Stam, & Bertrand, 1983) of hypnotic responses were described as voluntary in nature. Methodological differences could account for the range in probability levels, and rating scales used did not provide for absence of behavioral response to a particular suggestion. This research investigated three issues: "1. Using a choice format to describe experiences during hypnosis, what is the distribution of the different descriptions used to index the construct of nonvolition? When S gives a mid-point rating on a volition rating scale, to what experiences does he/she refer? 2. How do two aspects of subjective experience: nonvolitional experience descriptions and hypnotic depth reports, covary with behavioral passing and failing of items and with levels of hypnotizability? 3. How frequently does S pass an item behaviorally but indicate either that he/she did not experience the response or that he/she purposefully enacted it? On what items is this a more or less frequent occurrence? Are there just a few people who pass items in this fashion or is it a common observation?" (p. 339). The Ss were seen in small groups. Immediately after hypnosis they scored their own hypnotizability scales. Then they were asked to rate their subjective response to each suggestion: - how much they had experienced the suggestion (1-5) - how involuntary their response had been (1-5) (These two items comprised the Voluntary Rating Scale (VRS) used by K. Bowers, 1981, and P. Bowers, 1982.) - how deeply hypnotized they had felt (1-10, Perry & Laurence format, 1980) - Choice Scale (example from the hand magnetism item below) "Choice Scale of Nonvolitional Experience: Listed below are various ways people experience the hands together item. Please check the description(s) that most closely describe your experiences: (1) My hands did not move together at all. (2) I purposefully directed the movement of my hands most of the time. (3) I found I directed the movement of my hands and then later they continued to move together with no effort on my part. (4) I found my hands moving together without my helping them. (5) During this experience, the feelings of purposefully moving my hands were completely mixed with feelings that they were moving on their own. None of the above" (p. 340). Considering both the passed and failed items, and after excluding the 'None of the above' category, "37% of items [on the W-SGSHS:C] were not experienced, 12% were enacted purposefully, 14% were experienced as intertwined volition and nonvolition, 17% were experienced as beginning purposefully but becoming nonvolitional, and 20% 'happen by themselves'" (p. 341). See Table 2, taken from the article. Table 2 Average Percent of Ss per Item Choosing Each of the Options Begins No Purposeful Completely Purposefully; Happened Itself Exper. Enactment Mixed Continues On NoTryng Own Passed 7.5 12.2 21.8 26.2 32.2 Failed 60.4 13.9 10.4 9.3 5.9 Passed Items 3.0 10.7 30.0 47.2 9.1 Rated 3 on Volition Rating Scale Thus of those failing an item, 60% reported that they did not experience the suggestion, while almost 26% reported some level of subjectively experienced nonvolition. This research demonstrated that the Choice Scale is an improvement over the Voluntary Rating Scale, which has an ambiguous midpoint of '3' between voluntary and nonvoluntary extremes (on a 5-point scale). Almost half of the ambiguous '3' responses on the VRS were associated with a more meaningful response on the Choice Scale, indicating that the response started off voluntarily but then continued 'on its own.' Another third of the Ss indicated that there was an intertwining of volition and nonvolition. The Choice Scale (transformed into an ordinal scale) was correlated with the VRS and hypnotizability and depth estimate scales. The correlations were "consistently high, suggesting that typically one reports feeling more deeply hypnotized when many suggestions are performed and passed, and more deeply hypnotized Ss report feeling that suggestions occur more 'by themselves' than do less hypnotizable Ss" (p. 342). The authors note the complex relationship between behavioral and subjective experience. High hypnotizables report experience of nonvolition even with some failed items, and rate themselves as deeply hypnotized even when failing items. This is not true for low hypnotizables, whose self-rated depth varies directly with passing or failing items. Mismatches were defined as passing an item behaviorally but reporting either that it was not experienced (Choice 1) or purposefully enacted (Choice 2). 93% of Ss had less than 3 mismatches; of the 8 Ss exhibiting 3 or more mismatches, 3 were medium-low hypnotizables, 4 were medium-highs, and 1 was highly hypnotizable. When one corrects their total hypnotizability score for the mismatch, people remain close to their original score however. Some items had many more mismatches than others (See Table 6). The 'classic suggestion effect' reflected in a low percentage of mismatches (3-9%) was found for five items; three items had a moderate level of mismatches (16-22%); but four suggestions had mismatches on 34-41% of the passed responses. Item difficulty could not account for whether the classic suggestion effect occurred: two very difficult items were at opposite ends of the spectrum--positive music hallucination had the fewest and negative visual hallucination the most frequent mismatches. "One might speculate that the nature of one's ordinary imaging during the day makes some hallucinations well practiced and easier to produce, while others are rarely practiced and seem to require cognitive effort to reconstruct. ... Thus, instead of a mismatch representing 'faked' responses, it may at times represent S's report of a hallucination's seeming real while simultaneously requiring effort. Ideomotor suggestions have few mismatches. If they feel 'real,' it is by virtue of their seeming to occur without effort or volition" (pp. 346-347). Table 6 Item % Mismatch Hand Lowering 2.9 Hands Together 4.8 Arm Rigidity 5.6 Music Hallucination 7.7 Dream 8.7 Arm Immobilization 15.5 Amnesia 21.6 Age Regression 21.8 Taste Hallucination 33.8 Negative Hallucination 34.6 Mosquito 38.1 Post-hypnotic Suggestion 40.8 Since highly hypnotizable people experience nonvoluntariness even when they fail items, tested hypnotizability must reflect more than simply passing test items on suggestion. "Research focusing exclusively on the nonvolitional aspect of hypnotic experience may be somewhat 'off the mark,' at least for some types of suggestions. Reports of nonvolition may be tracking the experience of effortless responding which may be just one aspect of a complex hypnotic response to cognitive suggestions. ... It may be that studies using free reports from Ss responsive to hallucination suggestions would be necessary prior to devising an appropriate 'choice' scale for these items. The work of Sheehan and McConkey (1982) provides a solid basis for such a task. The Choice Scale in the present study was derived from an understanding of the 'classic suggestion effect,' the concept of which is closely tied to ideomotor suggestions. This concept may or may not prove to be of central relevance to hypnotic hallucinations or more generally to cognitively demanding suggestions" (p. 347). 1988 Neufeld, V.; Lynn, Steven Jay (1988). A single-session group self-hypnosis smoking cessation treatment: A brief communication. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 36 (2), 75-79. This study was designed to assess the efficacy of a manual-based, single-session group of self-hypnosis intervention. At 3 months follow-up, 25.92% of the total number of participants (14 male, 13 females) reported continuous abstinence, and at 6 months, 18.52% of the participants reported continuous abstinence. Reported social support and motivation to quit were both associated with successful outcome. Comparison of the current data with other findings reported by the American Lung Association (Davis, Faust, & Ordentlich, 1984) suggests that treatment effects may not be solely attributable to the use of a maintenance manual, education, and attention. Limitations of the research associated with issues of experimental control, generalizability of the findings, and outcome measures are discussed. Spinhoven, Philip; Baak, Diana; Van Dyck, Richard; Vermeulen, Peter (1988). The effectiveness of an authoritative versus permissive style of hypnotic communication. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 36, 182-191. The differential effectiveness of an authoritative versus permissive style of hypnotic communication was investigated, with locus of control as a moderator variable. 44 Ss received in counterbalanced order both the more authoritatively worded Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A and the Wexler-Alman Indirect Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale (WAIHS), which is a more permissive scale with the same item content as HGSHS:A. Permissively worded suggestions did not enhance the level of hypnotic responsiveness. Locus of control did not predict the response level on one of the scales. Unexpectedly, significantly more female Ss preferred the WAIHS, and more male Ss preferred HGSHS:A. It is concluded that Ss' characteristics (i.e., hypnotizability) are more important for hypnotic responsiveness than variations in style of hypnotic communication or scale preference." 1986 Radtke, H. Lorraine; Spanos, Nicholas P.; Malva, C. Lori Della; Stam, Henderikus J. (1986). Temporal organization and hypnotic amnesia using a modification of the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 34, 41-54. The Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A (Shor & E. Orne, 1962) was modified to permit better assessment of amnesia and changes in temporal organization during amnesia. First, a baseline measure of recall was obtained before administration of the amnesia suggestion. Second, on the recall trial following cancellation of the suggestion, Ss recalled everything they could remember. Amnesia was assessed by comparing recall during the suggestion with recall before it and after it was canceled. Temporal organization was assessed by correlating the order of item administration with Ss' recall orders. Hypnotic susceptibility and amnesia were independently related to temporal organization. Overall, high hypnotizable Ss organized less than medium or low hypnotizables, and amnesics showed less temporal organization than nonamnesics, but neither of these variables interacted with recall trial. The results are discussed in terms of recent theories of hypnotic amnesia. NOTES 1: NOTES Subjects in general tended to use less temporal organization during the suggestion compared to the baseline and postsuggestion trials. Although they did not obtain a disorganization effect comparable to that found in the clustering studies (e.g., Spanos & Bodorik, 1977), the results "replicated past studies that found differences in the recall organization of high and low hypnotizables during an amnesia suggestion" (p. 50), while suggesting that "the previous findings were not due to hypnotic amnesia" (p. 50). "The baseline differences replicated Schwartz (1980) who found similar differences between high and low hypnotizable Ss following a hypnotic induction procedure but in the absence of an amnesia suggestion. Since we also found differences posthypnotically, it is questionable whether the hypnotic induction procedure was a causal factor in the Schwartz study. Furthermore, the presence of such differences on the postsuggestion trial represents a failure to replicate Evans's (1980) finding of no differences between high and low hypnotizable Ss under comparable nonhypnotic conditions. The present results are also contrary to those of two other studies that found no differences between high and low hypnotizables on rho scores on the amnesia trial (Radtke & Spanos, 1981; St. Jean & Coe, 1981) and a recent study using word stimuli which found a significant correlation between hypnotizability and temporal organization only during the amnesia suggestion (Kihlstrom & Wilson, 1984). Taken together these studies suggest that temporal organization (at least when hypnotic experiences are recalled) varies as a function of hypnotizability and therefore may be attributed to an individual difference factor" (p. 50). The authors go on to say they have replicated other studies (p. 50), noting that the Harvard may not be the best method for investigating this issue, and individual testing of memory may be better (p. 51). 1985 Bongartz, Walter (1985). German norms for the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 33 (2), 131-139. German norms for the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A (HGSHS:A) of Shor and E. Orne (1962) are presented. 3 samples (N = 108, N = 103, and N = 163) were pooled resulting in an aggregate sample of 374 Ss which was in general congruent with earlier normative studies (Laurence & Perry, 1982; Sheehan & McConkey, 1979; Shor & E. Orne, 1963) with regard to score distribution and item difficulty level. Reliability of the German adaptation of HGSHS:A was somewhat lower than the reliabilities reported by the 3 cited studies, but in terms of standard error of measurement (estimated for each study by using the corresponding reliability coefficient), the German and the other studies were quite comparable. Results show that HGSHS:A is a useful instrument for initial screening of hypnotizability in a German context. Jeffrey, Timothy B.; Jeffrey, Louise K.; Greuling, Jacquelin W.; Gentry, William R. (1985). Evaluation of a brief group treatment package including hypnotic induction for maintenance of smoking cessation: A brief communication. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 33 (2), 95-98. Hypnotic, cognitive, and behavioral interventions were used in a 5-session treatment program to assist 35 Ss with maintenance of smoking cessation. 63% of the treated Ss discontinued smoking, and 31% maintained abstinence for 3 months (p <.005). These results include 13 dropouts, all of whom were smoking at 3 months follow-up. No S in the waiting-list-control group quit smoking. The results demonstrate that a brief, group treatment program, including hypnotic techniques, can be effective for smoking cessation. Jupp, J. J.; Collins, J. K.; McCabe, M. P. (1985). Estimates of hypnotizability: Standard group scale versus subjective impression in clinical populations. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 33 (2), 140-149. The relationship between hypnotic responsiveness as measured by the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A (HGSHS:A) of Shor and E. Orne (1962) and global depth estimates derived from an 11-point scale were explored in 2 clinical samples. In one case, depth estimates were made just before, and in the other, immediately following the patients' focus on aspects of hypnotic responsiveness. The responsiveness-depth relationship was moderate and consistent across both samples, a finding which in itself is consonant with previous findings employing experimental Ss. When HGSHS:A performance and depth estimates were less proximate, the relationship between them remained significant but was substantially reduced in magnitude. Data suggest that low hypnotizabile Ss increase their estimates of depth, and that higher hypnotizable Ss retain relatively stable estimates with increased exposure to hypnosis in a clinical context. 1983 Saavedra, Ramon Luis; Miller, R.J. (1983). The influence of experimentally induced expectations on responses to the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 31, 37-46. A sample of 75 female and 63 male undergraduates were told that their hypnotizability was predictable through the application of a battery of questionnaires and physiological measures. Three levels of hypnotizability expectations were created, with 3 groups of Ss informed that they were highly hypnotizable, moderately hypnotizable, or low in hypnotizability, respectively. A control group received no such expectations. All Ss were then administered the Harvard. Results indicated a significant main effect due to the assigned hypnotizability expectations. Only Ss in the low expectation group, however, scored significant differently from the other groups on the Harvard. Four other variables were examined as covariates: locus of control, attitude toward hypnosis, absorption, and self-predictions of hypnotizability. All but locus of control correlated significantly with the Harvard. It also was shown that the degree to which assigned expectations influenced Harvard scores was a function of the confidence Ss had in those expectations. NOTES The authors state that research has shown that it is easier to lower hypnotizability scores by providing negative expectancies than to increase hypnotizability scores through provision of positive expectancies. In this study, very little of the variance of hypnotizability scores was accounted for by the expectancy manipulation Farthing, G. William; et al. (1982, October). Voluntariness-involuntariness on the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility. [Paper] Presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, Indianapolis, IN. NOTES Challenge items were equal to ideomotor items in percentage of Ss who felt the (passed) response was at least 75% nonvoluntary. 1982 Laurence, Jean-Roch; Perry, Campbell (1982). Montreal norms for the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 30 (2), 167-176. Norms are presented for the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A (HGSH:A) of Shor and E. Orne (1962). Comparisons are made on HGSHS:A between 3 Montreal samples (N = 220, N = 178, & N = 137) and the aggregate sample (N = 535). These are compared additionally with a normative group of Harvard students (Shor & E. Orne, 1963), a normative group of University of California at Berkeley students (Coe, 1964), a normative sample of Australian students (Sheehan & McConkey, 1979), and the original Stanford University normative sample which was tested individually on the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form A (Weitzenhoffer & Hilgard, 1959). Although the Montreal groups were heterogeneous in ethnic origin and first language, the present normative data are generally congruent with earlier studies. 1980 McConkey, Kevin M.; Sheehan, Peter W.; Law, H. G. (1980). Structural analysis of the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 28 (2), 164-175. Multiple samples of Ss were tested on the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A (HGSHS:A) of Shor and E. Orne, (1962) to examine the nature of the dimensions underlying the scale. Data were analyzed by the principal components method, the alpha factoring technique, and the Rasch model of analysis. The Rasch model was used to specifically test the hypothesis that HGSHS:A measures just one dimension with items varying along a difficulty continuum. Results indicated that either a 2- or 3-factor solution is appropriate to HGSHS:A and that performance on the test cannot be explained in terms of a single dimension even when item difficulty is taken into account. Greatest instability of structure across both samples and methods of analyses was evident for the cognitive-delusory items on the scale. Implications for hypnotic theory and test construction are discussed. 1979 Araoz, Daniel L. (1979). Hypnosis in group-therapy. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 27 (1), 1-13. Therapeutic groups are defined to include both therapy groups and enrichment or extensional groups, either goal-specific or goal-individualized. After reviewing the literature, 3 modalities for the use of 6 hypnotherapeutic techniques are presented. These modalities are: (a) simultaneous group hypnosis, (b) working with one member and then fostering group interaction, and (c) cooperative group self-hypnosis. The 6 group hypnotherapy techniques are: (a) relaxation, (b) positive revivification, (c) dream production, (d) age regressiona and recovery of early recollections, (e) age progression and mental rehearsal, and (f) ego strengthening. The need for research in group hypnotherapy is stressed, especially in the areas of transference, countertransference, and 'co-transference.' McConkey, Kevin M.; Sheehan, Peter W.; White, K. D. (1979). Comparison of the Creative Imagination Scale and the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 27 (3), 265-277. 237 Ss were administered both the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A (HGSHS:A) of Shor and E. Orne (1962), and the Creative Imagination Scale (CIS) of Barber and Wilson (1977) and Wilson and Barber (1978) in separate testing sessions. Results were analyzed to assess the extent of relationships between the 2 scales and particular attention was paid to the question of whether, or not, CIS can be said to be an index of hypnotizability as traditionally measured by HGSHS:A. Data indicated that performance on CIS relates positively (r = .28) to success on HGSHS:A, but the 2 tests are independent in their underlying dimensions. The CIS appears to tap primarily the processes of imagery and imagination which are only partly related to performance on the more complex scales which measure hypnosis as generally conceptualized. Sheehan, Peter W.; McConkey, Kevin M. (1979). Australian norms for the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 27, 294-304. Australian norms for the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A (Shor & E. Orne, 1962) are presented and results relating to score distributions, item difficulty level, reliability, and validity are considered for 3 distinct samples of Australian students. Data are compared with both the original norms (Shor & E. Orne, 1963) and additional American (Coe, 1964) normative data. Results indicated that, in the Australian context, HGSHS:A functions as a reliable, effective predictor of hypnotic susceptibility. The psychometric properties of the scale were uniform across all of the different samples and reference groups that were considered. The accuracy of the scale appears to be most obviously limited when it is employed as a sole predictor of Ss' special aptitude for hypnosis. 1976 Ihalainen, O.; Rosberg, G. (1976). Relaxing and encouraging suggestions given to hospitalized chronic schizophrenics. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 228-237. 3 groups of hospitalized chronic schizophrenic patients received "the taped hypnotic treatment" twice a week for 4 weeks. The treatment differed for each of the 3 groups of 18 patients, but neither the patients nor the nursing staff were informed of this difference. The first group was exposed to music only, the second group was given music with superimposed hypnotic suggestions, and the third group heard music with superimposed hypnotic suggestions for improving self-confidence. The staff filled in an evaluation form about the patient's health beforehand, immediately afterward, and then 1 month after the treatment program. No difference between the groups was found if the comparison was based only upon the directions of the changes. However, twice as many positive changes as negative ones were observable in every group after the control period. If the changes noted are restricted only to those attaining the statistically significant (p < .05) level, the majority of positive ones was more evident. From this point of view, the reactions of the groups to the treatments were also different. Improvement appeared directly after the treatment of the Music and Self-confidence groups, but was not evident during the observation time 1 month later. In the Relaxing group, there was, on the contrary, only slight improvement directly after the treatment, but 1 month later during the follow-up observation time, the improvement was considerable. Thus, while encouraging hypnotic suggestions proved on the follow-up to be ineffective, hypnosis appeared to have a real influence when only relaxing suggestions were used. NOTES 1: NOTES This is a controlled clinical outcome study of psychotherapy involving the use of hypnosis Illovsky, J.; Fredman, N. (1976). Group suggestion in learning disabilities of primary grade children. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 24, 87-97. This study reports the effects of tape-recorded hypnotic suggestions given to 48 hyperactive children between the ages of 6 and 8 from 3 public schools. The children had short attention spans, low frustration and tolerance [sic], and poor learning motivation. They were taught by the same method in class and received remedial instruction as in the previous year. In order to participate in this study, the children were brought from their regular classrooms every morning to listen in groups of 9, 10, or 19 -- according to the available accommodation in the school -- to suggestions of relaxation, to ideas of coping with emotional problems, and to suggestions of modifying attitudes towards learning. The corrective reading teachers conducted these 15-minute sessions. After the session was over, the children were returned to their respective classes. At the beginning and at the end of the school year, the classroom teachers evaluated the children's behavior in class and their attitudes toward learning. The addition of the modified hypnotic technique enabled 45 of 48 children to function better in school. The improvement ranged from decreased hyperactivity to better than average performance in class. Significant correlations were found between percent of relaxation with increased attention span (r = .40) and number of sessions attended with increased self-confidence (r = .46). NOTES The paper is reprinted from Med. J. Aust., 1971, 2, 675-676 with permission of Editor. The author discusses theoretical concepts, techniques and patient selection for this method. "I avoid all logical communication, as this would only keep the patient alert, and so prevent the atavistic regression which is the essential factor in hypnosis" (p. 139). He moves from patient to patient, saying little except "Good--easy--natural" etc. and he uses touch to reinforce their development of hypnotic state. To ratify the trance and make sure they are hypnotized, not just relaxed, he places a clip on forearm skin for a few moments. "This potentially painful stimulus has the effect of further deepening hypnosis" (p. 139). After about 35-40 minutes he alerts the group. Patients are taught self hypnosis to extend the results into daily life. 1970 Kline, Milton V. (1970). The use of extended group hypno-therapy sessions in controlling cigarette habituation. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 18, 270-282. Results of the present experimental approach to the treatment of smoking habituation tend to be consistent with the view of smoking habituation as a dependence reaction, parallel to drug addiction, and with the concept that habituation must be examined as a psychosomatic entity. Therapeutic approaches must take into account the psychophysiological characteristics of deprivation behavior. Hypnosis, and particularly extended periods of hypnotherapy involving the reduction and control of deprivation behavior, seems to offer a promising approach to the therapeutic treatment of smoking habituation. (German & Spanish summaries) (17 ref.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2003 APA, all rights reserved) Swiercinsky, Dennis; Coe, William C. (1970). Hypnosis, hypnotic responsiveness, and learning meaningful material. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 18 (3), 217-222. Compared 3 antecedent conditions for their ability to enhance recall of meaningful material. Ss were 35 male and 10 female upperclass undergraduates. The conditions were: (a) group hypnotic instruction followed by posthypnotic suggestions of enhanced concentration and recall ability, (b) task motivation instructions to Ss to imagine and try their best, and (c) no special instructions (control). No differences in recall ability were found. Also, high and low susceptible Ss performed essentially the same. (Spanish & German summaries) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2003 APA, all rights reserved) 1968 Vingoe, Frank J. (1968). The development of a group alert-trance scale. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 16, 120-132. PRESENTS A VERBATIM ALERT-TRANCE INDUCTION PROCEDURE IN WHICH SUGGESTIONS FOR MIND ALERTNESS ARE MADE CONCURRENTLY WITH SUGGESTIONS FOR BODY RELAXATION. DIRECT AND INDIRECT SUGGESTIONS OF SLEEP ARE AVOIDED. A DISCUSSION OF MIND AND BODY IS THUS SUGGESTED WITH THE STIPULATION THAT IN DOING THIS S''''''''''''''''S BODY WILL MAINTAIN ITSELF WITHIN THE LIMITS OF NORMAL PHYSIOLOGICAL FUNCTIONING AND, IN AN EMERGENCY, WILL REACT SO AS TO ENSURE SELF-PRESERVATION. EMPHASIS IS PLACED ON S''''''''''''''''S MIND BEING ALERT SO AS TO ENGAGE IN ANY MENTAL WORK EITHER DURING OR AFTER THE HYPNOTIC TRANCE. DATA OBTAINED FROM 150 SS WHO RESPONDED TO A SHORT SELF-REPORT SCALE ARE PRESENTED. (SPANISH + GERMAN SUMMARIES) (21 REF.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2002 APA, all rights reserved) 1966 Evans, Frederick J.; Schmeidler, D. (1966). Relationship between the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility and the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale: Form C. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 14, 333-343. 3 SUBGROUPS OF 20 SS WITH HIGH, MEDIUM, OR LOW SCORES ON A SLIGHTLY MODIFIED, TAPE-RECORDED VERSION OF THE HARVARD GROUP SCALE OF HYPNOTIC SUSCEPTIBILITY, FORM A (HGSHS:A) WERE LATER ADMINISTERED THE STANFORD HYPNOTIC SUSCEPTIBILITY SCALE, FORM C (SHSS:C). THE 2 SCALES CORRELATED .59, WHICH IS LOWER THAN WOULD BE PREDICTED BY SCALE RELIABILITIES. THIS, TOGETHER WITH OTHER DATA BASED ON ITEM CHARACTERISTICS, INDICATES THAT THE 2 SCALES ARE NOT EQUIVALENT, BUT IN PART MEASURE DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF HYPNOTIC PERFORMANCE. SCORES ON HGSHS:A FOR LOW SS ARE PREDICTIVE OF SHSS:C SCORES, BUT THE STABILITY OF PERFORMANCE BETWEEN HGSHS:A AND SHSS:C IS NOT AS MARKED FOR MEDIUM AND HIGH SS ON HGSHS:A. THIS IS PARTLY A RESULT OF THE FAILURE OF PASSIVE MOTOR (PRIMARY) SUGGESTIBILITY TO DISCRIMINATE BETWEEN LEVELS OF SUSCEPTIBILITY, ALTHOUGH CHALLENGE ITEMS DO. THE 2 CLUSTERS OF ITEMS CORRELATE .23 AND .43 IN HGSHS:A AND SHSS:C, RESPECTIVELY. THE PASSIVE SUGGESTIBILITY ITEMS DETRACT FROM THE VALIDITY OF THE 2 SCALES. (SPANISH + FRENCH SUMMARIES) (20 REF.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2002 APA, all rights reserved) Kramer, E. (1966). Group induction of hypnosis with institutionalized patients. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis. 25 hospitalized mental patients, mainly with schizophrenic diagnoses, were tested in group sessions for hypnotic susceptibility. The hypnotic induction and the susceptibility tests were part of the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, a scale which has been standardized on a nonpsychiatric population. Os scored the patients'' behavior; the patients filled out self-report forms. Contrary to some reports in the literature, the average hypnotic susceptibility of these patients was similar to that of normals. Self-reports of their behavior during the hypnosis session were significantly correlated with O ratings, but less highly than has been reported for normals. (Spanish & German summaries) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2002 APA, all rights reserved) Scott, E. M. (1966). Group therapy for schizophrenic alcoholics in a state-operated outpatient clinic: With hypnosis as an integrated adjunct. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 3, 232-242. Because Alcoholics Anonymous has been so unsuccessful with the schizophrenic alcoholic, no therapeutic modalities structured to fit this population have reached the literature. For 3 yr. specific therapeutic techniques, among them hypnosis, have been employed, and the results appear to be rather encouraging. (Spanish & German summaries) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2002 APA, all rights reserved) Vasiliev, L. (1965). Mysterious phenomena of the human psyche. New York NY: University Books. (Reviewed by Leo Wollman in American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 1965, 8 (2), 146-147) NOTES AJCH Abstract by Leo Wollman: Many interesting theories about hypnosis are aired in this book. The opinions Pavlov propounded many years ago, about cortical inhibition are assiduously asserted, yet some statements made bear investigation. The mere sight of the experimenter in B.N. Birman's experiments with dogs put the dog into a hypnotic state. The appearance in the room of other people, who had not participated in the experiments, had no sleep-inducing effect. For the experimental animal, therefore, the experimenter himself had been transformed into a conditioned hypnogenous stimulus. Similarly, in group hypnotherapy, the entrance of the physician-hypnotist into the room often effects a hypnotic state in some of the subjects. The doctor has become the stimulus for the conditioned response, that of hypnotic trance state induction. An interesting and perhaps little known fact elicited from Chapter III (Hypnotism and Suggestion) is the high percentage (12%) of those replies to questionnaires during the First International Congress on Experimental Psychology held in Paris in 1899, which indicated that 3,000 respondents had hallucinations while in a normal state of health. The majority were visual; auditory and tactile hallucinations were less frequent. Dr. P. P. Podyapolsky, in 1905, wrote 'I tried unsuccessfully to induce in a peasant a reddening of the skin from a mock mustard plaster not only was there no reddening, there wasn't even any appropriate sensation of burning or smarting. I surmised that this simple man had probably never experienced a mustard plaster; therefore, his mind lacked the corresponding images and the ability to reproduce them with all their consequences... And so it turned out--he had never experienced a mustard plaster. It happened that he later had occasion to put a mustard plaster on his chest, and when I hypnotized him thereafter, suggestion quickly created not only the appropriate burning sensation but also reddening of the skin where the mock mustard plaster was applied.' This phenomenon is explained by the fact that the connection between the skin and cerebral cortex by means of neural conductors may, under certain circumstances, alter the activity of different organs. The alteration operates, apparently, in the category of conditioned-reflex formation. This book is interesting reading and from a historic point of view is worth having in one's library. 1964 Coe, William C. (1964). Further norms on the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 12 (3), 184-190. The Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A was administered to 168 upper level college students. Findings are congruent with the original normative data reported by Shor and E. C. Orne. Differences between the 2 samples'' mean scores and distributions are discussed in terms of sample composition. Further support for the group scale as an accurate predictor of hypnotic susceptibility was indicated by a significant relationship between the group scale and the individually-administered Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2002 APA, all rights reserved) Ludwig, Arnold M.; Lyle, William H., Jr.; Miller, Jerome S. (1964). Group hypnotherapy techniques with drug addicts. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 12 (2), 53-66. This study was designed to investigate the appropriateness of a number of group hypnotherapeutic techniques which might be used in the treatment of addict patients. It is the belief of the investigators that the more "magical," "authoritative," and practical-oriented techniques seem more appropriate and useful than techniques designed to elicit deep, insightful understanding of the emotional problems underlying drug addiction. Many of the specific hypnotherapeutic techniques used are described, and some of the difficulties and advantages of group hypnosis as a treatment method are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2002 APA, all rights reserved) 1963 Bentler, P. M.; Hilgard, Ernest R. (1963). A comparison of group and individual induction of hypnosis with self-scoring and observer-scoring. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 11, 49-54. (Abstracted in Index Medicus, 63, June, S-1599) 45 volunteer Ss were hypnotized in small groups and were subsequently hypnotized in individual sessions. In both sessions observer- and self-scores were recorded for all suggestions of the Harvard Group Scale adaptation of the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale. The correlation between observer- and self-scores indicated that hypnotic susceptibility in the 2 sessions was very similar. Group self-scores were also found to predict quite accurately objective hypnotist scores of the subsequent individual session. A 2nd sample of 34 nonvolunteer male Ss were hypnotized individually following Form A of the Stanford scale. Self-scoring was found to be remarkably similar to observer ratings, and the results of group administration very comparable to those of individual administration of hypnotic susceptibility tests. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2002 APA, all rights reserved) Shor, Ronald E.; Orne, Emily C. (1963). Norms on the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 11, 39-48. Norms are presented on an adaptation for group administration with self-report scoring of Weitzenhoffer and Hilgard''s Stanford Hynotic Susceptibility Scale, Form A. Comparisons are made between a sample of 132 undergraduates given the new group-administered version and 4 reference samples including the original Stanford University normative group. Findings indicate that the group-administered version yields norms congruent with the individaully-administered original. Diagnostic evaluations of hypnotic depth after one or more additional hypnotic training sessions tentatively indicate that the adapted scale is an effective predictor of subsequent hypnotic depth. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2002 APA, all rights reserved) GUIDED IMAGERY 2001 Fredericks, Lillian E. (2001). The use of hypnosis in surgery and anesthesiology. Springfield IL USA: Charles C Thomas. Gibbons, Don E. (2001). Experience as an art form: Hypnosis, hyperempiria, and the Best Me technique. San Jose CA: Authors Choice Press. (([available online:] http//www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/marketplace)) NOTES The Best Me Technique is a procedure for constructing suggestions which incorporates many different dimensions of experience -- beliefs, emotions, sensations, thoughts, motives, and expectations -- for maximum involvement and effectiveness. Best Me suggestions may be used with either hyperempiria, an alert induction based on suggestions of mind expansion and increased alertness and sensitivity, or with more traditional forms of hypnotic induction. 1998 Eimer, Bruce; Freeman, Arthur (1998). Pain management psychotherapy: A practical guide. New York NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.. NOTES "Pain Management Psychotherapy" (PMP) provides a clear and methodical look at pain management psychotherapy beginning with the initial consultation and work-up of the patient and continuing through termination of treatment. It is a thoughtful and thorough presentation that covers methods for psychologically assessing the chronic pain patient (structured interviews, pain assessment tests and rating scales, instruments for evaluating beliefs, attitudes, pain behavior, disability, depression, anxiety, anger and alienation), treatment planning, cognitive-behavioral therapy techniques, and a range of hypnotic approaches to pain management. The book covers both traditional (cognitive and behavior therapy, biofeedback, assessing hypnotizability, choice of inductions, designing an individualized self-hypnosis exercise) as well as newer innovative techniques (e.g., EMDR, pain-relief imagery, hypno-projective methods, hypno-analytic reprocessing of pain-related negative experiences). An extensive appendix reproduces in their entirety numerous forms, rating scale, inventories, assessment instruments, and scripts. The senior author, Bruce Eimer, states in his online comments on Amazon.com that "most therapists hold the belief that 'real' chronic pain patients are quite impossible to help. This book attempts to dispel these misguided beliefs by providing a body of knowledge, theory, and techniques that have proven value in understanding and relieving chronic physical pain." He also states that "the challenge for the therapist is to persuade the would-ne patient/client that he or she has something to offer that can help take way pain and bring back more pleasure. This challenge is negotiated through the therapeutic relationship. However, the therapist just can't be 'warm, accepting, non-judgmental and empathic'. The therapist must also have knowledge and skills relevant to relieving pain. Only then can the therapist impart such knowledge, and in teaching these skills to the pain patient, help the patient become something of a 'self-therapist'. . . I dedicate this book to everyone who wants to find ways to make living with pain more comfortable, and to the ongoing search for better ways to relieve pain." The effectiveness of different pain-distraction tasks was compared as a function of level of hypnotizability, using the cold-pressor pain-testing procedure. Selected high, medium, or low hypnotizable participants first underwent a 1-minute baseline immersion of a hand in ice water, with periodic pain ratings. Independent groups were then given 4-minute test immersions under one of five conditions. Analgesia suggestion and guided imagery were conceived to be internal distractors, whereas word memory and pursuit-rotor tasks were external distractors. Placebo-control groups were given permission to let their minds wander. All four experimental treatments reduced pain significantly for highly hypnotizable participants, compared to the control group, whereas none of the experimental treatments were effective for low hypnotizables. The different treatment instructions did not produce different preimmersion anxiety state ratings, so the treatment effects on pain ratings could not be explained in terms of their effects on anxiety. It appears that high hypnotizables are more effective than low hypnotizables at diverting attention to control pain, regardless of whether internal or external distractor tasks are used. Treatment effects on pain ratings did not change between 1 and 4 minutes of test immersion.