Induction of a dissociative state followed by suggestion during interrogation caused a suspect to develop pseudo-memories of raping his daughters and of participation in a baby-murdering Satanic cult. The pseudo-memories coupled with influence from authority figures convinced him of his guilt for 6 months. During this time, the suspect, the witnesses, and all the evidence in the case were studied. No evidence supported an inference of guilt and substantial evidence supported the conclusion that no crime had been committed. An experiment demonstrated the suspect’s extreme suggestibility. The conclusion reached was that the cult did not exist and the suspect’s confessions were coerced- internalized confessions. During the investigation, 2 psychologists diagnosed the suspect as suffering from a dissociative disorder similar to multiple personality. Both psychologists were predisposed to find Satanic cult activity. Each concluded that the disorder was due to “programming” by the non-existent Satanic cult.

Richeport, Madeleine M. (1992). The interface between multiple personality, spirit mediumship, and hypnosis. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 34, 168-177.

The author draws parallels between multiple personality disorder (dissociative identity disorder), spirit mediumship, and hypnosis. She uses historical, anthropological, and clinical perspectives. According to the author, Milton Erickson’s view of multiple personality disorder was that it was not necessarily pathological, and he employed hypnosis to gain access to personalities and to transform their behavior from involuntary to voluntary actions. “Natural trance therapies in other cultures offer a new perspective for viewing the normalcy or pathology of “other selves”” (p. 168).

Spanos, Nicholas P. (1992, October). Multiple identity enactments: A social psychological perspective. [Paper] Presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, Arlington, VA.

Frequency of reports of multiple personality disorder has varied over the centuries. The diagnosis is limited now to North America; and some therapists see more than others. Contemporary cases report severe child abuse, but this was much less so at the turn of the century.
is limited now to North America; and some therapists see more than others. Contemporary cases report severe child abuse, but this was much less so at the turn of the century.
There is an older syndrome, called demonic possession, which shares all of these characteristics. Demonic possession was diagnosed for almost 2000 years and the disorder included: secondary (demonic) selves, and the patient being amnesic during the personality take-over by a demon. The diagnosis was more prevalent during some periods (when Christianity was proselytizing but not when it was a state religion; then again in the 16th Century when Christianity was breaking up and both Catholics and Protestants had interest in it–each inspired by the other group). Demonic possession was more often found by some experts than others; and often was diagnosed as something else initially– e.g. psychosomatic problems. Symptoms that were ambiguous were more definitive when patients were then seen by expert.
Some symptoms–convulsions, increased strength, and insensitivity to pain–were common across Europe. But in Catholic countries the possessed manifested a secondary personality: the demon, with a different voice, spoke through the person. This rarely happened in Protestant countries, where there were convulsions, amnesias, extra strength, etc. but no alter personality.
Why were there such different symptoms in Catholic and Protestant countries? The main difference was that Catholic countries used exorcism–getting information from the demon (name, when the demon entered the body, why, how long demon planned to stay). The exorcist didn’t address the possessed person directly; he would say “I’m not talking to Mary; I’m talking to the demon.” If the demon didn’t reply, they would use brimstone, etc. to elicit a reply.
In Protestant countries it was believed that exorcism was inappropriate, because that would mean going to the Devil for help. They used prayer and fasting, but no attempt to communicate with the Demon. Hence, in France 20 nuns had secondary personalities, whereas in Protestant Salem, none of them had secondary personalities.
Often demon possession would occur to several people, with one person saying an image is attacking someone else, and then that second person would be possessed–so people would respond to social context, experience being possessed in terms of what that meant to them. Demonic possession was maintained by the community, so it was a social phenomenon.
Reports of ritual abuse then occurred, with witches talking about mockery of the Catholic mass, etc. Modern historians say these were fantasies, and that there were no witches’ Sabbaths or ritual abuse of children.
One could infer that a therapist may be carrying out a secularized exorcism when he diagnoses multiple personality disorder.
To examine the contribution of social context to the reports of alternate personalities, we conducted a series of experiments.
We experimentally studied people instructed to simulate “an accused murderer remanded for psychiatric evaluation,” and to behave as a criminal would. [They were hypnotized?] We used the interview employed with hypnotized Ss calling for a different part of themselves to speak. Of these simulators, 80% reported a secondary personality, and almost 100% claimed amnesia.

We took the people who displayed a secondary personality and amnesia and gave them psychological tests. They gave different pictures on the semantic differential [for the different personalities?].

A second experiment looked at how students would develop an alter personality. They were hypnotized and age regressed “to a past life,” and were told about reincarnation. We then studied those who reported a past life. For half we told them

studied those who reported a past life. For half we told them people with a past life were likely to be born of a different race, etc. (because that is rarely reported spontaneously). Those who were told this were more likely to incorporate that information in their report of a past life experience.
In a third study, we told them that people in past eras, being less enlightened, tended to punish their children more. Those given this information were more likely to report abuse than those who were uninstructed.
A fourth study looked at how a hypnotist could influence the belief that it is a real past life rather than fantasy. They varied what Ss were told: Group 1 was told reincarnation is real. Group 2 was told reincarnation is fantasy. Group 3 was not told anything.
The first group reported a stronger belief that it was real than fantasy. (Oddly, the neutral group was nearly as high.) The Fantasy group had lower mean rating for credibility.

Hughes, Dureen J.; Melville, Norbert T. (1990). Changes in brainwave activity during trance channeling: A pilot study. Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 22, 175-189.

Authors studied 10 people known trance channels–all had been channeling for more than one year. Used an anthropological field method. Electrode was placed only on left occipital (O1) area, referenced to left ear. Calculated difference between each S’s pre- trance and trance EEG beta percentages, for alpha and theta percentages also.
Basically, the pre-trance versus trance sums of differences scores were greater than the post-trance versus trance sums of different scores for each of the three frequency bands–indicating a residual of the trance state. There were large, statistically significant increases in amount and percentage of beta, alpha and theta brainwave activity, and some suggestion of a pattern. The large amount of beta differentiates these Ss from what has been observed with meditators (increases in alpha and theta). Among the Subjects, large amounts of beta activity were recorded continuously throughout the trance period and were coupled with large amounts of high amplitude alpha and theta (relative to the pre- and post-trance states).
The authors compare these results to older hypnosis literature. They conclude that the trance channeling state may be a distinctive state characterized by a particular EEG profile that differs from that found in certain meditative states, hypnotic states, various pathological states, or the waking states of the trance channel Subjects who participated in the study. Authors also liken the differences seen between trance and non-trance states of these Subjects to the differences seen for different alter personalities among people diagnosed with Multiple Personality Disorder.
DISCUSSION. The foregoing research suggests that the trance channeling state, as measured in the current study, is characterized by large, statistically significant increases in amount and percentage of beta, alpha and theta brainwave activity. There appear to be definite neurophysiological correlates to the trance channeling state, and furthermore there is some evidence that these correlates may be patterned. This pattern might be provisionally compared to those associated with other altered states of consciousness.



Fredericks, Lillian E. (2001). The use of hypnosis in surgery and anesthesiology. Springfield IL USA: Charles C Thomas.
Preface: Definition of Hypnosis
History of Hypnosis in Surgery
Theories of Hypnosis
1. An Introduction to Hypnosis
2. Hypnosis in the Management of Chronic Pain
3. Hypnosis in Conjunction with Chemical Anesthesia
4. Hypnosis in Conjunction with Regional Anesthesia
5. Hypnosis as the Sole Anesthetic
6. Hypnosis in the Intensive Care Unit
7. Hypnosis in the Emergency Unit
8. Hypnosis in Pediatric Surgery
9. Hypnosis in Obstetrics and Gynecology
10. Perspectives from Physician-Patients
Barnier, Amanda J.; McConkey, Kevin M. (1999). Hypnotic and posthypnotic suggestion: Finding meaning in the message of the hypnotist. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 47 (3), 192-208.

High hypnotizable subjects were asked a question before, during, and after hypnosis and were given a suggestion before, during, or after hypnosis to rub their earlobe when they were asked this question. In this way, the experiment placed a question that required a verbal response in contrast with a suggestion that only sometimes required a behavioral response. Subjects were more likely to respond behaviorally when the question was associated with the suggestion but more likely to respond verbally when the question was a social interaction; furthermore, the likelihood of subjects responding behaviorally and/or verbally shifted across the tests with the changing message of the hypnotist. The findings highlight hypnotized subjects’ attempts to interpret the hypnotist’s communications and their ability to resolve ambiguity in the nexus of those messages in a way that promotes their hypnotic behavior and experience.
Temes, Roberta (Ed.) (1999). Medical hypnosis: An introduction and clinical guide. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace, W. B. Saunders.
Contributors to text include Dabney Ewin, Melvin Gravitz, Elvira Lang, Dorothy Larkin, Al Levitan, Karen Olness.

Barsby, Michael (1997). Hypnosis in the management of denture intolerance. In Mehrstedt, Mats ; Wikstrom, Per-Olof, (Eds.) (Ed.), Hypnosis international monographs : Number 3 : Hypnosis in dentistry (pp. 71-78). Munich Germany: M.E.G.-Stiftung.
Intolerance of dentures may have dental or psychological causes. It is within the latter group of patients, provided that they are genuinely motivated to wear a denture, that the use of hypnosis may be helpful. The importance of careful patient assessment and exploration of appropriate treatment strategies with the patient is emphasised. Principles of treatment including relaxation, controlled breathing, visual imagery and reframing are described. All of these techniques may be used in conjunction with conditioning / desensitisation and a gradual progression to denture wearing.

Matthews, William J.; Isenberg, Gail L. (1995). A comparison of the hypnotic experience between signing deaf and hearing participants. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 43 (4), 375-385.
This study compared the hypnotic responsiveness of 17 hearing and 34 deaf individuals, all of whom received visual induction and hypnotic suggestions via some form of signing. The comparison between deaf and hearing participants was analyzed on five dependent measures: (a) the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C (SHSS:C); (b) participants’ individual item performance; (c) overall trance depth; (d) a rapport scale; and (e) a resistance scale measuring attitudes of participants toward the hypnotist. Although all participants showed at least a moderate level of hypnotic responsiveness, the data did not indicate a significant main effect between deaf and hearing participants on any of the dependent measures. However, there was a tendency (p < .08) for hearing participants to show a greater hypnotic responsiveness than deaf participants. Additionally, there was a significant difference between all the signing participants combined when compared to the norming population on three items of the SHSS:C. Clinical and theoretical implications of these data are discussed. 1991 Lynn, Steven Jay; Weekes, J. R.; Neufeld, U.; Ziuney, O.; Brentar, J.; Weiss, F. (1991). Interpersonal climate and hypnotizability level: Effects of hypnotic performance, rapport, and archaic involvement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 737-743. Designed to extend research by McConkey and Sheehan, they tested 24 hypnotizable and 21 unhypnotizable Ss in high interpersonal/high rapport (including education about misconceptions about hypnosis, eye contact, and friendly self-disclosure) and low interpersonal/low rapport testing contexts. Overall, hypnotizable Ss were more responsive to hypnosis, rated the hypnotist more positively, and experienced greater involuntariness and archaic involvement than unhypnotizable subjects. However, results provide support for the hypothesis that low hypnotizable Ss are particularly sensitive to variations of the hypnotist's interpersonal behavior. Only low hypnotizable Ss' objective and subjective hypnotic performance on the SHSS, Form C, was enhanced by hypnotist behavior designed to optimize rapport. Hypnotizable Ss' behavior was stable across testing contexts. Sheehan, Peter W. (1991). Hypnosis, context, and commitment. In Lynn, S. J.; Rhue, J. W. (Ed.), Theories of hypnosis: Current models and perspectives (pp. 520-541). New York: Guilford Press. NOTES 1: "There are several different ways to classify the model that is expounded in this chapter. One may view it ... as an individual-differences model of hypnosis, because it emphasizes the significance of intragroup differences in the pattern of hypnotic performance. Alternatively, one may view it as a phenomenologically based model.... Invariably, however, single categories fail to do justice to the nature of theories, and hence it is perhaps wisest to view this theory as a means of exploring particular hypotheses about hypnotic phenomena that focus primarily on the meaning of suggestion as perceived by susceptible subjects. This model focuses, in a way that most other theories do not, on the motivational implications of the cognitive involvement of the susceptible subject in the events of the hypnotic setting. It offers a variant of contextual theories of psychological functioning, but is experiential in its emphasis rather than simply behavioral" (p. 537). 1990 Coe, William C. (1990). Are the Conclusions Valid? Invited discussion of Levitt, Baker, and Fish: Some conditions of compliance and resistance among hypnotic subjects. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 32 (4), 237-239. NOTES 1: NOTES: The authors confounded variables, e.g. hypnotic susceptibility and monetary incentive (in Study IV), and Study IV was different from the other 3 studies, so that any differences/similarities between these studies can't be attributed to susceptibility level, degree of incentive, or interaction between them. A simulator design would clarify why 50% of Ss in Study IV did not resist and lost $100; also, postexperimental interviews focusing on Ss' reasons for resisting or not resisting would be helpful. Did nonresisters actually believe that they would receive $100 for resisting? The Subject population was not homogeneous in occupation, and students are financially poorer than others--which would affect incentive strength. Were those who resisted the ones who could use the money the most? Small sample sizes obviating statistical tests is a problem. Coe nevertheless evaluates 4 variables in terms of the 'power' of their effects on hypnosis: 1. Susceptibility level. Studies I, II, and III all show correlations between hypnotizability and compliance with resistance, suggesting that high hypnotizables are not as susceptible to resistance manipulation; however across studies, highs in one study seem to comply at the same rate as lows in another study, and as many as 50% of high hypnotizables in the strong incentive ($100) study were able to resist suggestions. 2. View of the Hypnotist. Coe states that one can't evaluate the question with the data given. One would need an experimental condition that would also create a negative view of the hypnotist, as all samples tended to view the hypnotist positively. 3. View of Resistance Instructor. Again, one would need a research design that separates the effects of hypnotic susceptibility from effects of Ss' views of the resistance instructor. "Nevertheless, Study IV suggests that for high susceptibles the view of the resistance instructor has little effect. Three resisters viewed him as positive, whereas the other three viewed him as negative; further, nearly all of the nonresisters viewed him as neutral" (p. 238). 4. Degree of Incentive. This too was confounded with susceptibility level, as "the higher value was only offered to the very high susceptibles in study IV. Half of them took it, half did not" (pp. 238-239). Coe also remarks that "the expectational effects on subjects of being in an experiment have not been addressed adequately. It is possible that the experimental paradigm as currently presented is incapable of providing an unambiguous answer to the question of coercion. In naturalistic settings subjects may react quite differently than they do when they know they are participating in an experiment" (p. 239). Holroyd, Jean (1990). How hypnosis may potentiate psychotherapy. In Fass, Margot L.; Brown, Daniel (Ed.), Creative mastery in hypnosis and hypnoanalysis (pp. 125-130). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. NOTES 1: This chapter is a reprint of an article published in the American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis in 1987. It provides a conceptual framework for understanding psychotherapy processes in the context of a hypnotic state. Based on empirical and theoretical considerations, the author identified nine changes occurring with hypnosis: changes in attention and awareness, imagery, dissociation, reality orientation, suggestibility, mind-body interactions, initiative or volition, availability of affect, and relationship. "This chapter proposes that hypnotherapy exploits hypnotic phenomena-- takes advantage of them--in the service of standard therapy endeavors" (p. 125). Smith, Alexander (1990). The hypnotic relationship and the holographic paradigm. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 32 (3), 183-193. The holographic paradigm is a recently constructed model of consciousness derived from neuropsychology and quantum physics. It views the processing of mental forms as occurring within the context of a part/whole relationship, where the identified part exists within the code of the whole. In this paper I have applied this paradigm to the hypnotic relationships, viewing the hypnotic process as an undulation of form and transitional states and proposing the holographic paradigm as a cutting edge to understand the curative processes in hypnosis. NOTES 1: The proposed model represents a synthesis of neuropsychology and quantum physics. "Based on precise neuroanatomical and neurophysiological processes, Pribram was able to account for a distribution of memory across the brain in its entirety. This occurs not within each neuron, but between them. Graded waves of neural potentials, rather than neural impulses, accounted for the structure of interference patterns (Pribram, 1982, p. 32)" (p. 185). "Pribram then set out to answer these implied questions: What if there is no world of objects 'out there?' What if the world as we know it is a hologram itself? This search led him to David Bohm's work on the quantum theory. "Bohm's (1980) world view, based upon study of light waves, consists of a primary reality that remains enfolded (within the frequency domain) and unfolded reality (the world of 'objects' and images). Appearances or objects and images are abstractions reconstructed from the frequency domain" (p. 185). "A holographic interpretation resets the therapy relationship as a shared partnership: 'The sharing emphasizes the whole of which a partner holds a part, but the holographic paradigm makes it clear that each partner holds not just a part, but the whole because each part contains the whole' (Zinkin, 1987, p. 18)" (p. 186). "Pribram (1983) seems to suggest, in a similar vein, that the unconscious and consciousness are 'opponent processes' of implicate and explicit orderings. Citing Matte Blanco's (1975) concept of unconscious processes as infinite sets (of opponent emotional states, for example), he considers the process relationship between conscious and unconscious: 'Conscious intelligence is manifest when circumscribed sets can be appropriately partitioned into reasonably unambiguous categories. When behavior is guided by sets of variables which cannot be readily partitioned--variables which show opponent characteristics--we are apt to conclude that behavior is based on intention or that unconscious processes are at work' (Pribram, 1983, p. 10)" (p. 187). "Tart's (1967) procedure of mutual hypnosis resulted in such an overlapping of experiential detail between participants that the startling, consensually derived reality became too much to tolerate" (p. 187). "It is possible that during hypnosis, at some point the therapist and patient's organizations of consciousness in some way literally and not metaphorically cross into a wave length or plane in which there is neither reality nor fantasy but the enfolded- implicate-primary reality that is mutually shared? If so, how would these wave length resonances be determined? What would this mean for various psychopathological states? "To answer these questions we may be catapulted into a whole rethinking of just what hypnosis is in connection to repression, to developmental capacities to form self and object images, and to the shifts to more advanced levels of adaptation. In particular, the hologram will become perhaps a means of exploring this challenging advance, if it can bring the hypnotic relationship more squarely into focus. "The expansion and contraction of conscious awareness, as a holistic process between therapist and patient within the context of the trance, may provide us with more precise clues to understand altered states of consciousness, rather than the other way around" (p. 191). 1989 Matheson, George; Shu, Karen L.; Bart, Catherine (1989). A validation study of a short-form hypnotic-experience questionnaire and its relationship to hypnotizability. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 32, 17-26. NOTES 1: Investigated the validity of a 16-item scale inquiring about hypnotic experience, drawn from the Hypnotic Experience Questionnaire developed by Kelly (1985) to measure components of hypnotic experience. We administered the HEQ-S and the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility: Form A (HGSHS:A) to 198 students. Factor analysis of the scale produced three stable principal components accounting for 70% of the data variance: Dissociation/Altered State (DAS), Rapport (RAP), and Relaxation (REL). Subscales representing these three factors and a composite measure, "General Depth," were constructed. Subscale correlations with HGSHS:A scores were highest for the DAS subscale (.69) and lowest for REL (.41). Applications of the HEQ-S in clinical and research use are considered. Using the phenomenological studies and theories of J. R. Hilgard (1979) and Shor (1962), Kelly (1985) constructed the Hypnotic Experience Questionnaire (HEQ), a 47- item scale designed to demonstrate the existence of five factors of the hypnotic experience. These factors included dissociation/altered state, relaxation, rapport, visual imagery, and a negatively correlated factor of cognitive rumination measuring the amount of anxious self-reflective, and interfering thought. A composite scale, General Depth, was also derived to provide a summary measure of the subjective quality of the hypnotic experience. The HEQ was developed as a research instrument. The HEQ-S was administered immediately after Ss completed the Harvard response record. Items were responded to on a 5-point Likert scale ranging form one (No, none or not at all) to 5 (Yes, a great deal, or almost completely). Ronnestad, Michael Helge (1989). Hypnosis and autonomy: A moderator analysis. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 37, 154-168. The study focused on autonomy as a moderator variable in the prediction of subjectively reported hypnotic depth. Ss in the experimental part of the study were 56 undergraduate psychology and education majors classified as either high or low in autonomy. Ss who were equated on capacity for absorption were individually administered 1 of 3 hypnotic inductions: an authoritarian induction, a permissive hetero- induction, or a self-hypnosis induction. The study had a double-blind design. The data suggest that situational manipulation has greater impact on low than on high autonomy Ss. Individual-difference variables such as absorption, have greater impact on hypnotic depth for high than for low autonomy Ss. The data indicate that the hypnotic behavior of high autonomy Ss is more likely to be self-congruent and less likely to be demand-congruent. A factor-analytic inquiry of absorption confirmed the importance of affective/regressive capacity for hypnotic functioning for high autonomy Ss. The study supported the alternate-path perspective of hypnosis. NOTES 1: There is very little research on autonomy and hypnosis. The authors cite studies showing only a modest relationship between hypnotizability and locus of control. In this study, 176 students were assigned to the high autonomy group if they were in the upper 1/3 of two of 3 autonomy scales (Rotter's Locus of Control Scale, the Inner- Directedness Subscale of the Shostrom Personal Orientation Inventory, and the Autonomy subscale of Jackson's Personality Research Form) and not in the lower 1/3 of the third scale. Ss were designated as low autonomy if the obverse obtained. This procedure yielded 27 high and 29 low autonomy Ss. Ss were hypnotized with one of three inductions: authoritarian with many motor items (Barber Suggestibility Scale), permissive with mostly imagery (Barber & Wilson's Creative Imagination Scale), or guided self-hypnosis with mostly imagery (taken from Fromm et al, 1981). After hypnosis, Ss rated their own hypnotic depth on a 1-10 scale, and their perception of E or the procedure as authoritarian and directive. Ss' attitude, expectations, motivation, and experienced effortlessness were measured. E rated Ss for pre-hypnosis rapport and post-hypnosis rapport. The results indicated that there was no difference in hypnotizability level between high and low autonomy Ss. The correlation between effortlessness of experience and hypnotic depth was high for low autonomy Ss (.51) but not significant for high autonomy Ss (.12). In general the two groups were very similar in terms of mean scores on most variables. The differences appeared in the correlations between self-reported hypnotic depth and the other variables. For low autonomy Ss correlations were not significant between depth and pre-hypnotic variables (rapport-pre, absorption, expectation) but for highs the same correlations were significant (rapport-pre .47, absorption .54, expectation .48). But for post-hypnosis variables, low autonomy Ss had significant correlations between depth and the two variables measured from post-hypnosis interviews (perceived authoritarian/directiveness .40, effortlessness .51) and the highs did not have significant correlations. The multiple correlation between these variables and depth was R = .28 for low autonomy Ss (with no contribution from rapport-pre) and R = .72 for high autonomy Ss, with absorption contributing most. The more they perceived the induction as authoritarian or directive, the greater depth reported by low autonomy Ss. Although low and high absorption Ss did not differ on the Absorption Scale, absorption predicted hypnotic depth better for the highs. The author divided the Absorption Scale into four rational factors: Affective/Regressive, Perceptual/Cognitive, Dissociative, and Mystical. Low and high autonomy Ss scored at approximately the same level on these categories, but correlations between these categories and depth for low and high autonomy Ss were somewhat different. (See Table.) Correlations between Categories of Absorption and Hypnotic Depth for Low and High Autonomy Ss Absorption Low Autonomy High Autonomy All Ss Category r r r Affective/Regressive .14 .56** .33** Perceptual/Cognitive .25 .33* .29* Dissociative .32* .57** .47** "Mystical" .07 .16 .11 In their discussion, the authors note that one might assume that high autonomy Ss would be less affected by variations in hypnosis procedures than low autonomy Ss. The differences found in depth scores for these two groups were supportive of this expectation. "Fluctuations in subjectively reported depth scores for low autonomy Ss only, clearly suggest autonomy to be a moderator variable" (p. 163). Moreover, the results indicate "that high autonomy Ss in comparison to low autonomy Ss are more likely to express their inner dispositions, such as absorption and expectation, in the hypnotic setting. High autonomy Ss may be more reflective of and attuned to individual predisposing characteristics and less influenced by situational demands. ... the hypnotic behavior of high autonomy Ss is more likely to be self- congruent and less likely to be demand-congruent. Low autonomy Ss, however, are more likely to be demand congruent and less likely to be self-congruent. The latter finding was suggested both by the significant F ratio for low autonomy Ss across treatments, and also by the stronger relationship found for this group between depth and how authoritarian/directive they perceived the procedure to be" (p. 163). [Paradoxically, among low autonomy Ss an authoritarian approach yields less depth but greater suggestibility (higher hypnotizability scores).] "The tendency for low autonomy Ss to have a higher behavioral score on the authoritarian procedure is consistent with Tellegen's (1979) assumption that there are two pervasive dimensions in current hypnotizability measures--a compliance dimension and a true hypnotic responsiveness dimension. According to Tellegen, motor items may be more saturated with compliance, while cognitive items may be more saturated with true hypnotic responsiveness. The BSS has a motor emphasis, and the higher behavioral scores for the low autonomy group of Ss may be interpreted as an expression of compliance. "In addition to the inner-directedness and self-congruence hypothesis of why autonomy may be a moderator variable, another possible explanation is related to accuracy of self-perception. The intercorrelational and multiple regression data showed repeatedly that a stronger relationship existed between prehypnotic variables and hypnotic depth for high autonomy than for low autonomy Ss. The relational capacity, as tapped by the rapport-pre variable, absorption, which may be conceptualized as a personality trait; and expectation, a cognitive variable, were all related to depth for high autonomy Ss. For low autonomy Ss, none of these variables were individually related to depth. Differences in Ss' accuracy of self-reporting may explain this. According to ego-psychology theory, highly individuated Ss, with clear self-other differentiation and congruence in self-perception, are better able to make accurate statements about themselves. The self-assessments of Ss with low differentiation capability may be less accurate and possibly more affected by demand characteristics and response set. In other words, their self-assessments have more error. The generally lower correlations for the low autonomy Ss may reflect this" (p. 164). "A report of subjectively reported hypnotic depth following CIS and the self- hypnosis scales may reflect clarity of imagery, while a report of depth following BSS may reflect experiences of kinesthetic/bodily changes" (p. 165). 1989-1990 Spanos, Nicholas P.; Flynn, Deborah M.; Niles, Judy (1989-90). Rapport and cognitive skill training in the enhancement of hypnotizability. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 9 (3), 245-262. The role of interpersonal rapport in facilitating the enhancements in hypnotizability produced by cognitive skill training was examined in two experiments. In Experiment 1 low hypnotizable subjects either received skill training or passively oriented training that was designed to facilitate rapport with the trainer without teaching subjects how to generate the responses called for by test suggestions. Subjects in the two treatments reported equivalently high levels of rapport with their trainer, but only those given skill training attained large gains on two hypnotizability posttests. Subjects given passive training did not differ from untreated controls at posttesting. In Experiment 2 subjects received skill training under conditions designed to either heighten or minimize rapport with the trainer. Those in the high rapport condition showed large hypnotizability gains on both posttests, whereas those in the low rapport condition failed to differ from no treatment controls in the regard. Our findings indicate that high rapport is not sufficient for producing training-induced enhancements in hypnotizability. However, the absence of such rapport may interfere with subjects' learning and applying skills that can enhance hypnotizability. 1988 Lynn, Steven Jay; Weekes, John R.; Matyi, Cindy L.; Neufeld, Victor (1988). Direct versus indirect suggestions, archaic involvement, and hypnotic experience. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 97 (3), 296-301. This study examined the effects of direct (Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility; Shore & Orne, 1962) versus indirect (Alman-Wexler Indirect Hypnotic Susceptibility Scales; Pratt, Wood, & Alman, 1984) suggestions on archaic involvement (Nash & Spinler, in press) with the hypnotists, objective responding, and subjective involvement and involuntariness ratings, when the scales were administered in all possible combinations (direct/indirect, N = 61; indirect/direct, N = 61, direct/direct, N = 57; indirect/direct, N = 95), across two sessions. At the initial testing, subjects who received indirect suggestions reported a greater emotional bond with the hypnotist and increased fear of negative appraisal than subjects who received direct suggestions. Repeated testing resulted in response decrements on measures of objective responding, subjective involvement, and involuntariness that were paralleled by diminished involvement with the hypnotist. The most stable relation between scales was evident when scales were defined as direct hypnosis across both sessions. Although direct and indirect suggestions produced comparable effects in the first session, in the second session, direct suggestions fostered greater subjective involvement and feelings of involuntariness. Diamond, Michael Jay (1987). The interactional basis of hypnotic experience: On the relational dimensions of hypnosis. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 35, 95-115. The ubiquitous interactional basis of hypnosis remains neglected and poorly understood. Vignettes from clinical practice are research are presented to illustrate the significance of hypnotic relational factors and their internal representations. A descriptive theoretical framework is formulated enumerating 4 relational dimensions: (a) transference phenomena in which previous object relationships are enacted; (b) a goal- oriented working alliance comprised of "rational'' and "irrational" expectations about the efficacy of hypnotic procedure and its participants; (c) a symbiotic or fusional alliance in which the hypnotist is experienced as a purely internal figure; and (d) a realistic contemporary relationship. Each dimension is considered as it subjectively operates within hypnosis, and a case example is employed to compare the psychotherapeutic operation of these dimensions in waking and hypnotic contexts. Implications of the interactional framework are discussed and further empirical and clinical directions suggested. 1987 Gfeller, Jeffrey D.; Lynn, Steven Jay; Pribble, W. Eric (1987). Enhancing hypnotic susceptibility: Interpersonal and rapport factors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52 (3), 586-595. This research supported the hypothesis that hypnosis can be thought of as a set of potentially modifiable social-cognitive skills and attitudes. A low-interpersonal- training treatment devised by Gorassini and Spanos (1986) was compared with a treatment designed to modify not only cognitive factors but also to augment rapport with the trainer and diminish resistance to responding (high-interpersonal training). Fifty percent of the initially unhypnotizable subjects in the high-interpersonal condition tested as being highly susceptible to hypnosis (high susceptibles) at posttest on the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility (Shor & Orne, 1962); 25% of the unhypnotizable subjects in the low-interpersonal condition responded comparably. Eighty-three percent of the medium- susceptibility (medium susceptibles) subjects tested as being highly susceptible at posttest in both conditions. Practice-alone control subjects' performance was stable across testings. The study was the first to demonstrate that treatment gains generalize to a battery of novel, demanding, suggestions (generalization index) that have been found to differentiate highly susceptible subjects from unhypnotizable simulating subjects. The importance of rapport was evidenced by the finding that rapport ratings paralleled group differences in hypnotic responding and that rapport correlated substantially with susceptibility scores at posttest and with the generalization index. Whereas initial hypnotizability scores correlated significantly with retest susceptibility scores, initial hypnotizability failed to correlate significantly with the generalization index. NOTES 1: On p. 593 one could get the impression that S's feelings of rapport may result from success in the hypnotic experience. Holroyd, Jean (1987). How hypnosis may potentiate psychotherapy. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 29, 194-200. Hypnotherapy is defined as doing psychotherapy in the hypnotic state. This article reviews cognitive, affective, and motivational changes associated with hypnotic trance, attempting to demonstrate how the hypnotic state might influence ordinary psychotherapy processes. Nine characteristics of trance probably potentiate psychotherapy: (1) changes in attention and awareness, (2) imagery enhancement, (3) increase in dissociation, (4) decrease of reality orientation, (5) increase in suggestibility, (6) increased accessibility of mind-body interactions, (7) diminution of initiative resulting in a sense of nonvoluntariness, (8) increased availability or manipulability of affect, and (9) development of a fusional relationship (rapport). This article touches upon the psychotherapeutic implications of these hypnosis attributes. Diamond, Michael Jay (1986). Hypnotically augmented psychotherapy: The unique contributions of the hypnotically trained clinician. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 28 (4), 238-247. In the last century, psychotherapists trained in clinical hypnosis have made a number of unique contributions to the psychotherapeutic endeavor, particularly in the areas of psychotherapeutic theory, technique, and practice. Nine factors indexing the contribution of hypnotherapists are discussed. They are: 1) communication focus; 2) maximizing expectation and belief; 3) mind-body emphasis; 4) handling of resistance; 5) employing trance phenomena; 6) using archaic levels of relationship; 7) stressing healthy, adaptive ego functions; 8) using therapist trance; and 9) permitting responsible creativity. Each factor is considered as it pertains to hypnotic technique and phenomena as well as how it is manifested in clinical treatment. 1985 Kelly, Paul James (1985, November). The relationship between hypnotic ability and hypnotic experience (Dissertation). Dissertation Abstracts International, 46 (5), 1690-B. This study investigated the relationship between four types of hypnotic experience and hypnotic ability. The types of experiences 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 47-item scale, the Hypnotic Experience Questionnaire was developed to measure types of hypnotic experience. It was given to 484 subjects and then to a subsample of 272 students. When the scale was factored, four stable factors emerged: Nonconscious/Trance, Rapport, Relaxation, and Cognitive Rumination. A Group Profile Scale was also developed to measure students and when it was factor analyzed four factors were extracted: Hallucinations and Fantasies, Amnesias and Post-Hypnotic Compulsions, Motor Inhibition, and Direct Motor Suggestion. "Two statistical approaches were used to investigate the connections between hypnotic ability and hypnotic experience . Canonical analysis was used to identify the main relationships between hypnotic ability and hypnotic experience and factor analysis was used to explore the relationship among measures of hypnotizability and hypnotic experience. Two canonical variates from the canonical analysis were significant. The first variate was characterized by a dissociative-imaginative involvement process, and the second variate tapped a rapport-social compliance process. "When 25 variables, representing components of hypnotic ability and hypnotic experience, were factored, five factors were extracted. Imaginative Involvement, Ideomotor Response, Rapport, Cognitive Inhibition, and Relaxation. The results of the factor analysis suggested that dissociative experience and altered state experience are related to hypnotic ability but rapport and relaxation are not. "The results of study, taken as a whole, suggest that relaxation and rapport may happen in the hypnotic situation, but neither experience is related to the condition of being hypnotized in any essential way. The results suggest that the hypnotic condition is characterized by dissociative experience, altered state experience, and by successful performance on hypnotic ability tasks. From a theoretical point of view, the results strongly supported Hilgard's theory, partially supported Shor's theory, and failed to support Edmonston's theory" (p. 1690). 1984 Frauman, David C.; Lynn, Steven Jay; Hardaway, Richard; Molteni, Andrew (1984). Effect of subliminal symbiotic activation on hypnotic rapport and susceptibility. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 93 (4), 481-483. L. H. Silverman's subliminal symbiotic activation paradigm (Silverman, 1982) was used to manipulate unconscious affective factors in hypnosis to determine whether gratification of symbiotic fantasy would enhance hypnotic susceptibility and rapport with the hypnotist. Seventy-two male undergraduates were divided into two groups matched for susceptibility (high, medium, low). The experimental group received symbiotic, MOMMY AND I ARE ONE, subliminal stimulation via tachistoscope in a double-blind design. The comparison group received a psychodynamically neutral stimulus, PEOPLE ARE WALKING. Following subliminal stimulation, subjects were hypnotized individually. Projective tasks that indexed rapport with the hypnotist and the mother were administered during hypnosis. Rapport was also measured by rated intimacy of self-disclosure topics and by valence of topics selected to disclose to the hypnotist. A significant multivariate group selected more positively valenced topics to disclose on. The effect for symbiotic activation on hypnotic susceptibility was not quite significant (p<.056, two-tailed). NOTES 1: 2350, Frauman, Lynn, Mare, & Kvaal, 1992 NOTES: [Paper presented by Lynn.] A number of observations and conclusions are based on literature reviews done with Brentar (British Journal of Experimental and Clinical Hypnosis; Chapter in Rhue, Lynn, & Kirsch [Eds.] Handbook of Clinical Hypnosis) and 15 years of training students in hypnotherapy. Some of this may seem elementary to some of you. For half a century there have been reports of negative effects after hypnosis: minor, serious, transient, and chronic. Clinicians need be as wary (but no more wary) of negative effects in hypnosis as in other therapies. There are more negative effects in clinical situations than non clinical situations. Therapists must be prepared to recognize negative effects and intervene. Too often hypnosis is seen as a technique divorced from psychotherapy. The hypnotist must be a competent psychotherapist. What makes you a good therapist will make you a good hypnotherapist. There should be careful assessment of the client for: 1. those with history of unusual experiences following anesthesia or drugs 2. those with a history of dissociation People may recapitulate a previous bad experience with anesthesia, based on the unusual physiological feelings. The dissociative client must be stabilized before using hypnosis. Depressed clients may also have problems, with the imagery becoming dysphoric. Those vulnerable to psychotic decompensation, with paranoid or borderline character structures, must be evaluated carefully. A lot depends on your comfort zone in therapy. Life experiences with parents and authority figures may also play into the reaction. Many clients, and experimental Ss, are ambivalent about hypnosis. This ambivalence must be acknowledged and one must work with the ambivalence before proceeding. One may: - explain hypnosis - reframe in terms of self hypnosis or relaxation - explain as a state of awareness with full consciousness - offer active induction which is just as effective as the passive induction - do induction with eyes open Research clearly shows that Subjects can monitor events outside the framework of a suggestion--especially if you suggest they can do so with ease. We do not use ideomotor suggestions because they aren't necessary. We tell them to open their eyes and communicate with us during hypnosis. We always assess their feelings about hypnosis, have them have a fantasy about what hypnosis would be like, do an informal semantic analysis of the descriptors clients use (and then reframe them), inquire about previous experiences with counseling and psychotherapy, and do a mental status. Don't make assumptions. We want to know about early life experiences to know about transference and form an alliance. Hypnosis procedures employed must have explicit informed consent (cf MacHovic book), which also provides opportunity to demystify the experience. Our research shows the great majority of Ss find it relaxing, invigorating. Even perceptual distortions can be created without hypnosis. Can create confidence by sharing the research information on hypnosis. Elicit cooperation with easier suggestions, then use graded suggestions. We want to titrate the demands on clients, move at a pace that keeps anxiety low, promote self efficacy and mastery through ... [missed a few words] and graduated tasks. Carefully monitor clients for frowns, lack of attention, etc. It is important to ask them what they are experiencing. Rarely, a client appears unable to talk, in which case the therapist can offer hypotheses to the hypnotized client. Don't terminate hypnosis if there is a problem (Orne also says this); instead, offer reassurance to explore/release the feelings. It is beneficial to work through what is being experienced. There is a somewhat higher risk of emotional reactions with age regression or induced dreams. We simply tell people they can tell us at any time about what they are experiencing, without going through any ritual. When we give suggestions about amnesia, we ask what they would like to remember and suggest that they forget what they would like to forget. The usual permissive suggestion doesn't work; find out what it is, exactly, that they want to forget and then devise strategies for it. Follow for 2 weeks after any abreactive experience that may have occurred. Let them know they can contact you. Forceful suggestions to abandon symptoms can promote resistance and the therapist may generate negative transference. (See their chapter in book edited by Rhue, Lynn, and Kirsch, Handbook of Clinical Hypnosis, published by the Amer Psychological Association.)