Kallio and Revonsuo (2003) present an Altered State Theory of hypnosis that they contend provides a multilevel framework to guide research that can lead to the ultimate resolution of the debate about whether or not hypnosis is an altered state of consciousness. In our commentary, we take the opportunity to clarify a number of simplifications and misrepresentations of sociocognitive theories inherent in the Kallio and Revonsuo's presentation, consider some of their criticisms of nonstate theories of hypnosis, and discuss a number of problems and limitations of their theory.
Key words: hypnosis, nonstate, state, virtuosoSince the nineteenth century, observations of the seemingly extraordinary, puzzling, and provocative behaviours and experiences (e.g. amnesia, hallucinations) of hypnotized participants have contributed to the idea that hypnosis is 'something more' than simply responding to suggestions. Mesmerism and later hypnotism became associated with the idea of unusual and even supernatural capabilities. Some early investigators argued that magnetized subjects could see without the use of their eyes, travel mentally to distant planets and report back accurately about the inhabitants, spot disease by seeing through the skin to the internal organs of sick individuals, and communicate with the dead (Lynn, Rhue and Spanos, 1994). During the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, hypnosis researchers concluded that hypnotized individuals acquired greater strength, more accurate memory, and the ability to accomplish feats previously impossible when not hypnotized (Orne, 1959). Whereas many such claims have since been debunked, the contemporary field of hypnosis remains riven with controversy regarding the question of whether or not hypnosis involves an altered or 'trance' state of consciousness that is responsible for the heightened suggestibility manifested by hypnotized individuals. Or put another way, are the effects of hypnotic suggestions the byproduct of something more, or nothing more than waking suggestibility and processes and mechanisms that govern mundane behaviours and experiences?In their interesting and provocative article, Kallio and Revonsuo (2003) propose that hypnosis is 'something more', and forward the Altered State Theory of hypnosis (AST), according to which hypnotic behaviour consists of both a special state of hypnosis and a 'degree of suggestibility that is not dependent on the presence of the state but is affected by it' (p. 113). They contend that 'if the empirical predictions of this theory would be systematically tested in the future, the central question of hypnosis research could be solved once and for all ' (p. 113). We applaud the authors for generating a new theory of
