An Exploratory Study of Hypnotic Capacity of Schizophrenic and Borderline Patients in a Clinical Setting

Abstract

A review of current clinical and experimental research discloses that psychotic patients display hypnotic capacity. There is disagreement about the degree of this capacity. The most recent research indicates that schizophrenic populations are comparable to normal populations on the Stanford Scales of Hypnotic Susceptibility and the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility. However, on the Hypnotic Induction Profile the mean scores of schizophrenics are significantly lower than normals. To investigate these inconsistencies, I undertook and exploratory study of the hypnotizability of schizophrenic and borderline patients in a clinical setting. Test results in this clinical setting, using the Stanford Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility: Form A and the Hypnotic Induction Profile, indicated higher than usual hypnotizability. The effects of transference in the clinical setting may be a possible explanation for some of the differences in the test results. Posttest questioning revealed response patterns and conflicts that may be unique to the severely disturbed patient population. These response patterns may influence the test norms for this population and may further help explain differences in findings.

Hypnotic Assessment and Treatment of Trauma-Induced Psychoses: The Early Psychotherapy of H. Breukink and Modern Views

“…The emphasis these old masters placed on hypnosis as a diagnostic and prognostic tool was a forerunner of the modern use of hypnotizability assessment of psychotic patients in both laboratory and clinical settings (Hilgard, 1965;Lavoie & Sabourin, 1980;Murray-Jobsis, 1991;Pettinati, 1982;Spiegel et aL, 1982;Spiegel & Spiegel, 1978/1987). In particular, Breukink's concIusion that high hypnotizability in psychotic patients is a good prognostic sign has been supported by modern research (see Lavoie & Elie, 1985; as weU as clinical studies (see Lavoie & Sabourin, 1980;Murray-Jobsis, 1991;Scagnelli, 1976;Scagnelli-Jobsis, 1982;Spiegel & Fink, 1979).…”

“…The emphasis these old masters placed on hypnosis as a diagnostic and prognostic tool was a forerunner of the modern use of hypnotizability assessment of psychotic patients in both laboratory and clinical settings (Hilgard, 1965;Lavoie & Sabourin, 1980;Murray-Jobsis, 1991;Pettinati, 1982;Spiegel et aL, 1982;Spiegel & Spiegel, 1978/1987). In particular, Breukink's concIusion that high hypnotizability in psychotic patients is a good prognostic sign has been supported by modern research (see Lavoie & Elie, 1985; as weU as clinical studies (see Lavoie & Sabourin, 1980;Murray-Jobsis, 1991;Scagnelli, 1976;Scagnelli-Jobsis, 1982;Spiegel & Fink, 1979). It should be noted, however, that a great number of important follow-up studies in the field of schizophrenia indicate that there is a wide range of outcome in schizophrenia (M. Bleuler, 1978Bleuler, , 1983Carpenter, Bartko, Strauss, & Hawk, 1978;Carpenter & Strauss, 1977;Ciompi, 1978;Harding & Brooks, 1984;Harding, Brooks, Ashikaga, Strauss, & Breier, 1987;Huber & Gross, 1980).…”

The borderline patient and the psychotic patient.

“…Such supportive techniques will typically be reflected in a permissive, nonauthoritarian style of hypnotic interaction and are helpful in avoiding patient resistance. Empirical research indicates that psychotic and borderline patients report and evidence increased resistance and noncooperation toward controlling, authoritarian, or intrusive messages or methods (Murray-Jobsis, 1991a). A supportive style is also important because it provides an excellent framework for promoting the nurturance and acceptance that so many severely disturbed patients require as an essential and primary element in developing their capacity for bonding and relationship.…”

“…The therapist can also signal assurance to the patient by entering hypnosis with the patient and thus modeling the safety of hypnosis and the willingness of the therapist to be momentarily "viewed" by the patient. Thus, the therapist uses his or her own autohypnotic experience to model the safety of hypnosis and of being viewed by another (i.e., of being vulnerable; Murray-Jobsis, 1984, 1991aScagnelli, 1976).…”