In 1907 Morton Prince, Editor of Journal of Abnormal Psychology, introduced a symposium by listing 6 meanings of subconscious: 1. that portion of our field of consciousness which is outside the focus of attention 2. (Janet’s idea) – split off ideas which may be isolated sensations like the lost tactile sensation of anesthesia, or maybe aggregated into groups or systems. The author quotes Janet as stating that “they form a consciousness coexisting with the primary consciousness and thereby a doubling of consciousness results” (p. 87). The primary consciousness is usually dominant, but sometimes is reduced under exceptional conditions (e.g. automatic writing). 3. the subconscious _self_ or hidden self — a part of every human, not just seen in psychopathology; this is a personalized entity; every mind has a double, with the unconscious self having powerful effects on feelings, thoughts, and reactions of the conscious self 4. extends #3 to include not only ideas that remain active below surface but also those which are inactive — forgotten or out of mind 5. Frederic Myers’ concept of the ‘subliminal self’ which had 3 functions:

a) inferior – seen in processes of dissociation
b) superior – seen in works of genius, arising from ‘subliminal rush’ of information, feelings, and thoughts which lie below consciousness
c) mythopoeic – the unconscious tendency to create fantasies 6. physiological meaning, e.g. William Carpenter’s ‘unconscious cerebration’ in which unconscious phenomena are interpreted in terms of pure neural processes unaccompanied by mental activity.

Prince suggested some redefinitions to clarify unconscious and subconscious. He would replace Janet’s subconscious with co-conscious and reserve unconscious for physiological processes that lack the attributes of consciousness. Prince noted that co- conscious ideas have been called unconscious (e.g. by Freud) but said that is confusing and to be avoided.

“Coconscious ideas include states we are not aware of because they are not the focus of our attention, and also pathologically split-off and independently active ideas or systems of ideas, such as occur in hysteria and reach their most striking form in co- conscious personalities and automatic writing.
“Prince prefers the term coconscious to Janet’s subconscious for two reasons. First, because it expresses the simultaneous coactivity of a second consciousness. And second, because the coactive ideas or idea systems may not be outside the awareness of the personal consciousness at all. They may be recognized by the personal consciousness as a distinct consciousness existing alongside it.
“Thus, through his redefinition of terms, Prince makes simultaneous activity of two or more systems of consciousness in one individual the key element in dissociation. He thereby moves the issue of amnesia or lack of awareness by one system of another into the background, making it a secondary, nonessential element. Prince was one of the few to provide a theoretical framework for dissociation in which any combination of interawareness among the coconscious systems was possible” (p. 91).
Two researchers at the turn of the century came to opposite conclusions about the nature of the Subconscious Self that every human has. Morris Sidis saw it as “a brutelike consciousness with a tendency toward personalization. Frederic Myers held that it included those functions and much more, being the source of all that is human, including the highest intuitive powers” p. 96.
Bernard Hart, in 1910, did an analysis of Janet and Freud. Janet’s work is essentially descriptive: “he is always talking about a consciousness which manifests itself in a way we can _perceive_, whether by listening to it talk, reading its written communications, or watching its movements” (p. 97). However Janet’s spatial model of dissociation cannot explain the presence of the same material (e.g. memories) in two or more dissociated systems. According to Hart, Freud offered the conceptualization that Janet lacked, in his idea of the Unconscious .
Freud’s Unconscious is not in competition with Janet’s subconscious. “Janet’s subconscious is the arena of dissociated phenomena which manifest in observable form as elements coactive with the personal self. Freud’s unconscious is a conceptual, nonobservable construction put forward to explain certain facts of human experience. In this way Hart equates the unconscious with the atomic theory in physics or the theory of heredity in biology” p. 99. But Hart also thought Freud’s theory did not do justice to dissociative phenomena. Not only do psychoanalysts show little interest in double personality or multiple personality, they also neglected dissociation on the phenomenal level.
In 1915 Freud denied the existence of a second consciousness and wrote, “there is no choice for us but to assert that mental processes are in themselves unconscious, and to liken the perception of them by means of consciousness to the perception of the external world by means of the sense organs” (p. 101). Janet claimed that Freud had simply taken over his own system and given it a new terminology, and in 1924 Freud wrote an angry rebuttal. For him, “dissociated systems are simply separate groups of mental but unconscious elements. As our consciousness turns now to one group, now to another, as a searchlight shines now on one object and now on another, the dissociated groups manifest in conscious life. … There exists no doubling of consciousness” p. 102.
Jung’s ideas were closer to those of Janet, and like Janet he made dissociation a key concept in his theory. The _complex_ is unconscious, has an archetypal core clothed in personal experience, is like a self-contained psyche within the big psyche, sometimes called a fragmentary personality dwelling inside us. Dissociation for him meant being cut off from the Ego, which is the center of an individual’s field of consciousness. “Dissociated or autonomous complexes are those which have no direct association with the ego” (p. 103). If complexes are charged with enough energy they will become manifest–as a neurotic symptom, as projected into idea of a god or demon, or perhaps as an alternate personality. Therefore Jungian treatment aims at assimilating dissociated complexes into the ego.

center of an individual’s field of consciousness. “Dissociated or autonomous complexes are those which have no direct association with the ego” (p. 103). If complexes are charged with enough energy they will become manifest–as a neurotic symptom, as projected into idea of a god or demon, or perhaps as an alternate personality. Therefore Jungian treatment aims at assimilating dissociated complexes into the ego.

Crouse, Eric; Kurtz, Richard (1984). Enhancing hypnotic susceptibility: The efficacy of four training procedures. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 27, 122-136.

In this study, we have compared the effects on hypnotic susceptibility of several components of training procedures based on a social learning model, which have been reported to be successful in enhancing hypnotic susceptibility. These included: 1) attitude-conception of hypnosis information, 2) involvement instructions, 3) goal-directed fantasy instructions, and 4) practice vs. no practice in responding to hypnotic suggestions. A 3 x 2 x 2 repeated measures factorial design was used for the experiment with 60 female volunteers serving as subjects in the study. Contrary to expectations, no differential treatment effects were obtained on either objective or subjective measures of hypnotizability. Furthermore, it was questionable whether or not any of the three information-based components even produced gains in hypnotic susceptibility. None produced _clinically_ significant gains. They also were not found to alter either the subjects’ attitudes or their use of hypnosis-related skills. Similarly, practice was found to be ineffective in enhancing responsiveness to suggestions. Taken as a whole, the results of this study suggest that the gains in hypnotic susceptibility reported for social learning-type training procedures may be due to causes other than those posited by social learning theory.

Diamond (1977) posited 3 core components to modification procedures: attitudinal and set factors, cognitive strategy factors, and optimal learning factors (specific ways subjects are taught the internal responses).
“The present study was undertaken to more fully clarify the extent to which each of the critical components hypothesized by Diamond contributes to increasing susceptibility. It was predicted that subjects receiving attitude-conception of hypnosis information and subjects receiving involvement instructions would show a significantly greater gain in hypnotizability than Ss receiving goal-directed fantasy instructions. Secondly, it was predicted that a significantly greater gain in subjects’ hypnotizability would result from an opportunity to practice responding to hypnotic suggestions when coupled with involvement instructions than when accompanied by goal-directed fantasy instructions or attitude-conception of hypnosis information” (p. 125).

A revised SHSS:C was used; it deleted words that explicitly suggested goal directed fantasies (GDF’s) on several items: hand lowering, moving hands apart, taste hallucinations, arm rigidity, arm immobilization. Experimenters used audiotaped presentation. Subjects in 3 of 6 experimental groups were also given opportunity to practice 30 minutes on 3 occasions spaced no more than one week apart. They were given 2 practice trials on each of 5 hypnotic suggestions taken from several different scales.

“While differential treatment effects were not found, there was a general facilitation of hypnotic responsiveness for all Ss across treatment conditions on both objective and subjective hypnotizability measures. The mean change in the objective hypnotizability score for all subjects was +.68, …p<.001; was +.68, ...p<.001; the corresponding mean change in the subjective hypnotizability scores was +3.11 ... p<.001. Although statistically significant, neither of the shifts appear to indicate _clinically_ significant shifts in hypnotic responsiveness" (p. 129). The changes in the positive direction in hypnotizability were not correlated with hypnotizability. Subjects appear to change in their conceptualization of hypnosis, in the direction of it being more a self-induced phenomenon (p <.001). In their Discussion, the authors write, "Taken as a whole, results of this study challenge assumptions which have been made about how training procedures based on a social learning model affect gains in hypnotic susceptibility" (p. 131). Each experimental manipulation was intended to influence a mediating variable, and that apparently did not happen. Teaching subjects to use GDFs on a few items did not generalize so that subjects would generate GDFs on novel items. The results suggest "caution against assuming that social learning base training procedures are effective in altering subjects' attitudes and/or their use of skills thought to mediate hypnotic responsiveness" (p. 133). Nevertheless, the correlational data support previous studies that relate hypnotizability to the mediating factors under investigation. Continuing their Discussion, the authors write, "Clearly, more attention should be paid in future studies to assessing changes in mediating variables produced by such training procedures. This is particularly important in terms of subjects' use of GDF's and their use of cognitive strategies to increase the extent of their involvement in the hypnotic experience. It is significant that in this study neither involvement instructions nor GDF instructions were found to alter subjects' use of cognitive strategies. Changes in these skill-related factors need to be demonstrated if social learning based training procedures are to be proven effective in altering subjects' hypnotic abilities rather than simply in raising subjects to their optimal level of responsiveness. "One explanation which has been offered for the reported success of such training procedures is that they work by changing subjects' attitudes, motivation and/or expectations of hypnosis while leaving any aptitudinal component to hypnosis unaltered (Perry, 1977). From this point of view the gains in susceptibility reported for such procedures result from subjects moving closer to their optimal or 'plateau' level of responsiveness rather than from real changes in subjects' hypnotic abilities" (p. 134). Alternatively, it is possible that the increases observed following training programs have something to do with the hypnotist-subject relationship. For example, increases in hypnotizability are more modest when the training is given in written instructions than when it is given in person by a hypnotist. Kelly, Paul James (1984, December). The relationship between hypnotic ability and hypnotic experience. Newsletter of Division 30, Psychological Hypnosis, of the American Psychological Association, 5. This study investigated the relationship between four types of hypnotic experience and hypnotic ability. The types of experience were: dissociation, the experience of involuntariness; altered state effects, such as perceptual alterations and diminished reality sense; rapport, transference-like involvement with the hypnotist; and relaxation. A sample of 230 students was given the HGSHS:A, a group version of the SHSS:C, and the Hypnotic Experience Questionnaire (Kelly, 1984), a 47-item multidimensional scale of hypnotic experience. Items were taken from these tests to form 11 hypnotic ability variables (Positive Hallucinations, Dreams and Regressions, Post- Hypnotic Compulsions, Amnesia (HGSHS:A), Amnesia (SHSS:C), Arm Rigidity, Arm Immobilization, Other Motor Inhibitions, Head Falling, Moving Hands Together, and Hand Lowering). Fourteen hypnotic experience variables were also formed (Generalized Dissociative Effects, Dissociative Immobilization, Other Motor Inhibitions, Head Falling, Moving Hands Together, and Hand Lowering). Fourteen hypnotic experience variables were also formed (Generalized Dissociative Effects, Dissociative Inhibition, Trance, Unawareness, Transference-like Involvement, Trust, Friendliness, Physical Relaxation, Mental Relaxation, Imagery Presence, Imagery Vividness, Imagery Detail, Self Consciousness, and Analytic Thoughts). The 25 variables were intercorrelated and factored with principal axis factoring. Five factors with eigenvalues greater than 1 were extracted and rotated to varimax criteria. These factors, which accounted for 54.4 percent of the variance, were called: Imaginative Involvement, Ideomotor Response, Rapport, Cognitive Inhibition, and Relaxation. Hypnotic ability variables loaded significantly on three of the factors (Imaginative Involvement, Ideomotor Response, and Cognitive Inhibition) and these three factors also tapped some aspect of altered state experience and/or dissociative experience. It was concluded therefore that dissociative experience and altered state experience are related to hypnotic ability. The remaining two factors, Rapport and Relaxation, showed significant loadings only for rapport variables and relaxation variables, respectively. Neither of these two factors were related to any of the traditional measures of hypnotic ability or to the experience of dissociative effects or altered state effects. The results of this study suggest that rapport and relaxation may happen in the hypnotic situation but neither experience is related to the condition of being hypnotized in any essential way. The hypnotic condition is characterized by dissociative experience, altered state experience, and by successful performance on hypnotic ability tasks. The results also raise questions about Edmonston's (1981) theory that relaxation is the essence of hypnotic responsiveness. The finding that the experience of relaxation is unrelated to hypnotic ability is more congruent with Hilgard's (1977) view that relaxation is a nonhypnotic process. Lynn, Steven Jay; Nash, Michael R.; Rhue, Judith W., Frauman, David C.; Sweeney, Carol A. (1984). Nonvolition, expectancies, and hypnotic rapport. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 93 (3), 295-303. Prior to hypnosis, subjects were informed either that hypnotizable subjects can resist motoric suggestions or that such control does not characterize good hypnotic subjects. During hypnosis, susceptible and simulating subjects received countering suggestions involving inhibiting suggestion-related movements. Susceptible subjects' responses were found to be sensitive to prehypnotic normative information. There was a corresponding tendency for reports of involuntariness to be sensitive to the expectancy manipulation. Furthermore, subjects were able to feel deeply hypnotized and to rate themselves as good subjects yet concomitantly experience themselves as in control over their actions when normative information supported this attribution. Reports of suggestion-related sensations but not imaginative involvement were associated with movements in response to countersuggestion. Simulators were unable to fake susceptibles' reports of sensations and involuntariness. However, for all subjects, movements paralleled expectancies about appropriate response, supporting the hypothesis that involuntary experiences are sensitive to the broad expectational context and are mediated by active cognitive processes. Also, rapport with the hypnotist was found to be a factor. Susceptible subjects with highly positive rapport resolved hypnotic conflict, in part, by achieving a compromise between meeting normative expectations and complying with the hypnotist's counterdemand. Pekala, Ronald J.; Kumar, V. K. (1984). Predicting hypnotic susceptibility by a self-report phenomenological state instrument. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 114-121. In an attempt to predict hypnotic susceptibility (as measured by the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, HGSHS) the phenomenological experiences of an hypnotic induction (HI) procedure and a baseline comparison condition (eyes closed, EC, sitting quietly) were assessed. After each experience the subjects (n=217) completed the Phenomenology of Consciousness Inventory (PCI), a self-report phenomenological state instrument, dealing with that condition. Step-wise multiple regression and discriminant analyses were then performed on data using the subject's HGSHS score as the dependent variable and the PCI (sub)dimensions as the independent variables. Regression analyses that held up under cross-validation during HI suggest that the PCI may be an appropriate instrument for predicting susceptibility. The possible clinical usefulness of this approach is discussed. Spanos, Nicholas P.; Tkachyk, M.; Bertrand, L. D.; Weekes, J. R. (1984). The dissipation hypothesis of amnesia: More disconfirming evidence. Psychological Reports, 55, 191-196. Hypnotic subjects were administered a suggestion to forget a previously overlearned word list. Before cancellation of the suggestion they were challenged twice to try and recall the words. Subjects in one group received a second challenge immediately after response to the first. Those in the second group were given a 15-min. delay before their second challenge. Subjects in both groups showed less amnesia after the second challenge than after the first, but the length of delay between challenges had no effect on amnesia scores. These findings are inconsistent with the hypothesis that hypnotic amnesia involves an involuntary blockage of memory that decays spontaneously with time. Zamansky, Harold S.; Bartis, Scott P. (1984). Hypnosis as dissociation: Methodological considerations and preliminary findings. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 26, 246-251. Three criteria are proposed to be met by any experience labeled as "dissociation." A preliminary experiment is described that illustrates one way in which two of these criteria may be operationalized, and that assesses the relationship between successful performance on the two criteria and hypnotic susceptibility. The results are viewed as consistent with Hilgard's (1977) hypothesis that hypnotic susceptibility and the ability to dissociate are positively related. The authors propose that for dissociation to be present: "1) The individual must be engaged in two or more cognitive processes concurrently. 2) These processes must occur simultaneously, i.e., without recourse to alternation between them. 3) One of these processes must be perceived (by the subject) to occur below the level of conscious awareness, i.e., must seem to be autonomous or nonvolitional" (p. 247). In this study they focus on the first two criteria, as well as the relationship between ability to perform two cognitive tasks simultaneously and Subjects' hypnotizability. The authors used a dichotic listening task, with Ss instructed to listen to both auditory inputs at once. One input was a short story that was to be followed with 12 multiple choice questions. The other ear received 3 tones every 2 seconds (the higher tone 60% of the time, lower tone 40% of the time) and S was to press a button in response to the low tones. Speed of presentation of tones was intended to reduce the opportunity for alternating back and forth between tasks. of tones was intended to reduce the opportunity for alternating back and forth between tasks. Of 28 volunteer students, 22 passed criteria for accuracy on both tasks when performed singly: 10 high hypnotizables (Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility; HGSHS > 8); 10 medium hypnotizables (HGSHS 5-8); and 2 low hypnotizables who were dropped from the data analysis. They were considered ‘dissociators’ if they met the criterion of passing 9 or more items of the story and simultaneously having fewer than 15% errors on the tones, on two separate trials with two different stories.
“Of the 20 subjects, four scored above criterion on both test trials and were classed as dissociators; these four also scored as highly hypnotizable on the HGSHS. Accordingly, 40% of the highly hypnotizable subjects met our criteria, while not one of the moderately hypnotizable subjects reached this level of performance” (p. 249).
In their Discussion, the authors wrote, “The results demonstrated that highly hypnotizability Ss are significantly better able to attend to two inputs simultaneously than are moderately hypnotizability Ss. These results provide preliminary empirical evidence that dissociative ability, assessed independently of hypnosis, may be an important factor underlying hypnotic behavior” (p. 249).
The authors speculated about why only 40% of the highly hypnotizable people performed successfully, suggesting that it may be because they had misclassified Ss with the HGSHS which may be less demanding than other scales, or that “while dissociation represents an important cognitive factor in hypnosis, the Harvard measures mostly ideomotor performance” (p. 250). They suggest using a hypnotizability scale that uses more cognitive items to select highly hypnotizable Subjects who would demonstrate a high degree of dissociative ability. The other possibility that they mention is that dissociation may be only one of several alternate paths to hypnosis, citing Hilgard (1965).
The Experimenters added two control groups, one given the stories without the competing tones, the other given identical questions but without actually hearing the stories. The first group answered a mean of 9.7 and 8.6 questions correctly; the second control group answered a mean of 2.9 and 3.8 questions correctly

Levitt, Eugene E.; Baker, Elgan L. (1983). The hypnotic relationship–another look at coercion, compliance and resistance: A brief communication. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 31, 125-131.

The purpose of the present investigation was to assess the ability of hypnotic Ss to voluntarily resist neutral suggestions on a monetary reward incentive. The results were ambiguous; Ss resisted with a mean of 1.2 of 2 suggestions each. Postexperimental interviews disclosed that all Ss felt that the instructions to resist were asking them to be disloyal to the hypnotist or to betray him. Ability to resist was positively correlated with Ss’ impressions of the “resistance instructor” and tended to be negatively correlated with the impression of the hypnotist. These findings are interpreted to suggest support for an interactional conception of the hypnotic state.

Lynn, Steven Jay; Nash, Michael R.; Rhue, Judith W.; Frauman, David; Stanley, Scott (1983). Hypnosis and the experience of nonvolition. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 31 (4), 293-308.

Consistent with theoretical perspectives on hypnosis and the experience of nonvolition (e.g., Arnold, 1946; Hilgard, 1977, 1979; Spanos, 1981, 1982), hypnotic Ss, when faced with a conflict between experiencing motoric suggestions and inhibiting movements, resolved the conflict by following the hypnotist’s suggestions. Imagining and simulating Ss, by and large, showed no movements. Hypnotic Ss’ reports of their experience reflected more conflict, sensations, imaginative involvement, and involuntariness than simulating Ss. Arnold’s (1946) theory was not supported in that imagining Ss reported feeling as absorbed and involved in imaginings as hypnotic Ss but resisted responding to suggestions. The findings were more compatible with theoretical accounts which emphasize dissociation (Hilgard, 1977, 1979) and the importance of the experimental context in determining the experience of nonvolition (Spanos, 1981).

McConkey, Kevin M. (1983). Behaviour, experience, and effort in hypnosis. Australian Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 11, 73-81

Subjects were administered the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A, and were afterwards asked to rate the degree to which they experienced the items; subjects also scored their behavioural performance on the items. Data were analyzed to explore the relationships among behaviour, experience, and effort. Findings indicated a significant positive relationship between behaviour and experience on all of the HGSHS:A items, a significant negative relationship between behaviour and effort on the ideomotor items, and a significant positive relationship between behaviour and effort on the cognitive items. A similar pattern was observed between experience and effort. Also, subjects of varying HGSHS:A responsivity differed in terms of overall experience of the scale but not in terms of the overall amount of effort that they expended. Implications of the data are discussed in terms of the factors influencing subjects’ experiential response and behavioural performance as well as the attributions that they make concerning effort during hypnosis.

Bowers, Patricia G. (1982). The classic suggestion effect: Relationships with scales of hypnotizability, effortless experiencing, and imagery vividness. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 30 (3), 270-279.

How well the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scales assess what Weitzenhoffer (1978) terms the “classic suggestion effect” is addressed by developing an index of nonvolitional behavior (N-VB) for a group form of the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C of Weitzenhoffer and Hilgard (1962) given to 43 Ss. The N- VB index, reflecting the classic suggestion effect’s dual criteria of both behavioral responsiveness to suggestion and nonvolition ratings, was correlated highly with the traditional scoring of the group SHSS:C and moderately with the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A. Effortless experiencing of imagination and imagery vividness relate similarly to traditional and N-VB scores of hypnotizability. In addition, the relationship between involuntary ratings and passing and failing an item of the group SHSS:C was examined for each of the 10 items. There was a significant relationship for 7 of the items.

Schuyler, Bradley A. (1982). Further investigation of volitional and nonvolitional experience during posthypnotic amnesia (Dissertation, California School of Professional Psychology, Fresno). Dissertation Abstracts International, 44 (n6-B), 1977. (Order No. DA 8324472)

“Electrodermal responses were compared between highly responsive hypnotic Ss who were classified as having control over remembering (voluntaries) or not having control over remembering (involuntaries) during posthypnotic amnesia. Three contextual conditions were employed: Two were meant to create pressure to breach posthypnotic amnesia (lie detector instructions alone or with feedback that Ss had been detected as not having told all they could remember); the other provided feedback, in addition to the lie detector instructions, that Ss had told all they could remember. The recall data confirmed earlier findings of Coe and Yashinski and showed that voluntary and involuntary Ss did not differ in response to the contextual conditions. However, lie detector instructions alone did not create pressure to breach as in previous studies. In addition, electrodermal results were insignificant. The results are discussed as they relate to (a) amnesia, (b) the physiological detection of deception and physiological activation, (c) the voluntary/involuntary classification of Ss, and (d) theories of hypnosis” (p. 1977).

Spiegel, David; Tryon, Warren W.; Frischholz, Edward J.; Spiegel, Herbert (1982). Hilgard’s illusion. Archives of General Psychiatry, 39 (8), 972-4.

Examines E. R. Hilgard’s (see PA, Vol 68:11932) critique of the hypothesis that eye roll (ER) is related to hypnotizability, clarifying the nature of the data relevant to the ER hypothesis. The authors contend that there are a number of factual errors in Hilgard’s article: his (1) explanation of the procedure used in determining the Hypnotic Induction Profile (HIP) grades, (2) characterization of the HIP as a single-item test, and (3) his contention that the levitation score is the sole determinant of manifest hypnotic response. (9 ref.)

Bowers, Kenneth (1981). Has the sun set on the Stanford Scales?. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 24, 79-88.

There have been recent expression of concern regarding the adequacy of the Stanford Scales of Hypnotic Susceptibility. Concern about the Scales’ utility involve the fact that they do not explicitly assess the experience of nonvolition that is classically associated with the concept of suggestion. Concern about the Scales’ validity suggest that the individual differences they assess are not clinically relevant. A review of the available literature shows that neither of these concerns stands up to inspection, and that the Stanford Scales have a crucial role to play in both laboratory and clinical contexts

Gross, Meir, M. D. (1981). Hypnosis for dissociation — diagnostic and therapeutic. Journal of the American Society of Psychosomatic Dentistry and Medicine, 28 (2), 49-56.

Dissociative disorders might be at times very difficult to diagnose and treat, especially since they are very similar to epilepsy in general and to temporal lobe epilepsy in particular. Amnesia, fugue, changing personality and depersonalization are part of both disorders. Patients who suffer from dissociative disorders might be diagnosed and treated for epilepsy with anticonvulsive medications without any beneficial results. These patients are labeled as epileptics and have to face the social stigmata associated with being epileptic. The wrong label could even reinforce the sick role and make it become fixed and chronic.

-lsive medications without any beneficial results. These patients are labeled as epileptics and have to face the social stigmata associated with being epileptic. The wrong label could even reinforce the sick role and make it become fixed and chronic.
Hypnosis was used to diagnose the dissociative disorder by using the hand levitation technique for the differential diagnosis. It was found by the author that patients who suffer from dissociative disorders would get into spontaneous hypnotic trance during the hand levitation. Hypnosis was used also for successful therapy of these patients.
Seven cases are presented in which the hand levitation technique was used to diagnose the dissociative disorder. They were also treated by hypnotherapy. Their treatment by hypnosis is discussed. The purpose of this paper is to introduce the hand levitation technique for the differential diagnosis of dissociative disorder and to emphasize the effectiveness of hypnotherapy in the treatment of this disorder. Sorting out the cases of dissociative disorders from the epileptics is very important clinically, since it can save many patients from the anguish of having to take anti-convulsants unnecessarily and having to face the social stigmata of being labeled as epileptic.

Hilgard, Ernest R. (1980, October). Hypnotic modification of sensitivity and control. [Paper] Presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, Chicago.

The author presents a factor analysis of several scales in the hypnosis domain: HGSHS:A, Wilson-Barber CIS, Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale Form C, Questionnaire on Mental Imagery (Sheehan’s modification of Betts) and the Tellegen- Atkinson Absorption Scale. Scales were broken down into components first. He didn’t report all of the factors, but shows how these tests fall on a graph defined by Factor 1 (Amnesia/Cognitive) and Factor 4 (Absorption/Imagery). “Capacity for fantasy and amnesia are so different that hypnosis probably includes both.”
Hilgard concludes that he doesn’t like a state theory for hypnosis or the idea of “trance” because it is unidimensional. He prefers “dissociation” because we think of it as a continuum. Even Highs differ one from another in the nature of their responses. Altered- state-of-consciousness theories don’t readily explain partial dissociation (e.g. persistence of a suggestion such as arm rigidity after hypnosis is terminated; or hysterical paralysis).

Weitzenhoffer, Andre M. (1980). Hypnotic susceptibility revisited. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 22, 130-146.

The concept and measurement of hypnotic susceptibility are re-examined in their relation to hypnotizability, hypnotic depth and suggestibility. The Stanford Scales and similar instruments are found to have failed to take into account essential features defining traditional hypnosis and suggestibility and to have created confusion in the scientific inquiry into hypnotism. Other available measures have not been particularly successful, but some bear further attention. Recent claims that hypnotizability can be trained have failed to distinguish between hypnotizability proper and accessory processes, leaving some question about what is actually being trained. Possible future directions of work on susceptibility are considered. Attempts to distinguish between ‘clinical’ and ‘laboratory’ hypnotizability are examined and found to have been premature and loosely based on facts.

‘clinical’ and ‘laboratory’ hypnotizability are examined and found to have been premature and loosely based on facts.

Bowers, Patricia G. (1978). Hypnotizability, creativity and the role of effortless experiencing. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 26, 184-202.

Creative people and highly hypnotizable people describe their experience of finding creative solutions or responding to hypnotic suggestions as “effortless.” It is suggested that receptiveness to subconscious work accounts for the experience of effortlessness in both tasks. An experiment using 32 high and low hypnotizable men and women was designed to explore the hypothesis that the aptitude for such effortless experiencing accounts for the relationship found between creativity and hypnotizability.
Analyses of variance indicate highly significant effects of level of hypnotizability on composite scores reflecting effortless experiencing of several tasks and creativity. Intercorrelations of these indices are about .60. As predicted, effortless experiencing accounts for much of the relationship between high versus low hypnotizability and composite creativity. The role of imagery vividness and of absorption in both hypnotizability and creativity were also explored.

1977 Anderson, J. W. (1977). Defensive maneuvers in two incidents involving the Chevreul pendulum: A clinical note. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 25, 4-6.

“Hypnosis frequently facilitates increased access to the unconscious. In both of these cases, the hypnotized subject gained contact with a thought which otherwise would likely have remained out of awareness. Then the ego quickly resorted to defensive maneuvers in order to deny the thought” (p. 6).

Erickson, Milton H.; Rossi, Ernest L. (1976). Two level communication and microdynamics of trance and suggestion. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 18, 153-171.

The authors provide the transcript and commentaries of an hypnotic induction and an effort to achieve automatic writing. An unusual blend of Erickson’s approaches to two level communication, dissociation, voice dynamics and indirect suggestion are made explicit in the commentaries. The junior author offers a ‘context theory of two level communication’ that conceptualizes Erickson’s clinical approaches in terms consonant with Jenkins’ (1974) recent contextual approach to verbal associations and memory. A summary of the microdynamics of Erickson’s approach to trance induction and suggestion is outlined togetehr with a utilization theory of hypnotic suggestion.
Jenkins, J. J. (1974). Remember that old theory of memory? Well, forget it! American Psychologist, 29, 785-795.

Spanos, Nicholas P.; Spillane, Jeanne; McPeake, John (1976). Cognitive strategies and response to suggestion in hypnotic and task-motivated subjects. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 18, 254-262.

Thirty-two male and 32 female subjects, exposed to an hypnotic induction or task-motivational instruction, were administered either three suggestions which provided a cognitive strategy (i.e., a goal-directed fantasy, GDF) for experiencing suggested effects, or three suggestions that did not provide such a strategy. Subjects provided with GDF strategies were more responsive overtly and subjectively to two out of the three suggestions. Subjects in the No GDF Strategy treatment who spontaneously devised their own goal-directed fantasies were more responsive to suggestions than subjects who failed to devise such a strategy. These results support the contention that goal-directed fantasy helps both hypnotic and non-hypnotic subjects experience suggested effects.

Weitzenhoffer, Andre M. (1974). When is an ‘instruction’ an ‘instruction?’. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 22 (3), 258-269.

In the course of validating with 100 undergraduate Ss the concept of a “classical suggestion-effect” (i.e., the existence of a class of nonvoluntary behaviors elicited by communications intended to serve as traditional “suggestions”), evidence was incidentally obtained showing that many “instructions” given to presumably hypnotized Ss also function like “suggestions.” In these circumstances it is not possible to state a priori that a verbal communication will function as an “instruction” rather than as a “suggestion.” Such a statement can be made with certainty only a posteriori, on the basis of the nature of the resulting behavior. The implications of this finding for research and for the clinical uses of hypnotic suggestion are discussed. (German, French & Spanish summaries) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2002 APA, all rights reserved)

Weitzenhoffer, Andre M. (1972). The postural sway test: A historical note. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 17-24.

Presents historical evidence disputing that the postural or body sway test of hypnotic susceptibility was originated by C. L. Hull. Excerpts from French scientific literature between 1887 and 1914 are cited indicating that the French physician Lucien Moutin should receive credit as the originator. (Spanish & German summaries) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2002 APA, all rights reserved)

Garmize, L. M.; Marcuse, F. L. (1969). Some parameters of body sway. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 17, 189-194.

Investigated the effects of 4 variables on body sway with 160 undergraduates. A 4-dimensional analysis of variance was performed on the body sway scores obtained. None of the main effects were significant. 1 of the interactions was significant, but might have been due to chance. Results are consistent with those of past researchers. (Spanish & German summaries) (16 ref.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2002 APA, all rights reserved)
(PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2002 APA, all rights reserved)

Dittborn, Julio M. (1968). A brief nonthreatening procedure for the evaluation of hypnotizability. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 16, 53-60.


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.


Field, Peter B. (1965). An inventory scale of hypnotic depth. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 13, 238-249. (Abstracted in American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 1966, 1, 86)

An inventory of 300 items describing subjective experiences during hypnosis was administered to 102 students after they had wakened from hypnosis. The 38 items that correlated best with a standard measure of hypnotic susceptibility are proposed as an inventory measure of hypnotic depth. Items dealing with absorption and unawareness, automaticity and compulsion, and discontinuity from normal experience correlated best with the criterion, while items dealing with conscious motivation to enter hypnosis, feelings of surface compliance with suggestions, and unusual bodily sensations showed generally weaker relationships to the hypnotizability criterion. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2002 APA, all rights reserved)

Webb, Robert A.; Nesmith, C. C. (1964). A normative study of suggestibility in a mental patient population. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 12 (3), 181-183.

The postural sway technique was used to make suggestibility measurements on a total of 490 Ss of which 279 were hospitalized psychiatric patients. The remaining Ss were “normal” college students. The “normal” Ss were significantly more suggestible than the psychiatric group. Within the psychiatric group, the psychotics, nonpsychotics, and organics differed significantly, with the nonpsychotics being least suggestible, the psychotics most suggestible, and the organics intermediate. The hospital group was further reduced into diagnostic subcategories and postural sway parameters were shown. The sample distributions were essentially normal although the sample drawn from a psychiatric population showed positive skewness. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2002 APA, all rights reserved)

Hoskovec, J.; Svorad, D.; Lanc, O (1963). The comparative effectiveness of spoken and tape-recorded suggestions of body sway. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 11, 163-166.

The relative effectiveness of tape-recorded vs. spoken suggestions of body sway was measured. Both types of suggestion produced increased body sway. Spoken suggestions following recorded suggestions were the most effective. The expectation by Ss of a greater effectiveness of live presentation may have produced this result. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2002 APA, all rights reserved)

LeCron, Leslie M. (1963). Uncovering early memories by ideomotor responses to questioning. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 11, 137-142.

The author argues for the veridicality of birth and prenatal memories elicited by hypnosis, and in any event states they are therapeutically useful fantasies. He also advocates use of ideomotor signalling as a means of access to unconscious material. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2002 APA, all rights reserved)

Crasilneck, Harold B.; Hall, James A. (1962). The use of hypnosis with unconscious patients. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 10 (3), 141-144.

8 of 10 patients dying of cancer were found to continue a simple motor response to a hypnotic command, even though they revealed no other evidence of interaction with the environment and were considered unconscious by their physicians. Certain theoretical considerations are mentioned. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2002 APA, all rights reserved)

Cheek, David B. (1961). Value of ideomotor sex-determination technique of LeCron for uncovering subconscious fear in obstetric patients. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 9, 249-259.

(Author”s Summary) “Unrecognized subconscious fears can be uncovered while using ideomotor questioning with a Chevreul pendulum or with finger signals. The technique described by LeCron for evaluating knowledge regarding the sex of an unborn child is a most helpful way of approaching subconscious fears. The frightened patient refuses to indicate knowledge of the sex of her unborn child. Uncovered fears can be resolved by appealing to conscious-level understanding with adroit questioning” (p. 258).

Das, J. P. (1961). Body-sway suggestibility and mental deficiency. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 13-15.

50 mental defectives were subjected to the body-sway test of suggestibility. Contrary to expectations the defectives did not differ from each other when taken according to grades of deficiency, nor do they differ, as a group, from normal (college) controls. From Psyc Abstracts 36:02:2JI13D. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2002 APA, all rights reserved)