Hypnosis and response expectancies.

Abstract

Despite its long history, there has been a chronic failure among experts to agree on a definition of hypnosis. In response to this problem, Division 30 (Psychological Hypnosis) of the American Psychological Association generated a definition of hypnosis based on the consensus of a group of eminent hypnosis scholars (Kirsch, 1994). The main points of this definition are as follows:1. Hypnosis is a procedure during which a health professional or researcher suggests that a client, patient, or participant experience changes in sensations, perceptions, thoughts, or behawior. Hypnosis involves an interpersonal interaction between the hypnotist and client. With regard to the topic of this chapter, the hypnotist could be seen as issuing communications designed to induce expectancies for the occurrence of hypnotic responses.2. The hypnotic context is generally established by an induction procedure. Hypnotic inductions may help clients relax and attend to the hypnotic experience] but their primary function is to establish the hypnotic context. In fact, labeling the situation as one in which hypnotic responses are expected and appropriate may be the only common feature across the myriad methods that have been used to induce hypnosis.3. People respond to hypnosis in different ways. Some people are highly responsiwe to hypnotic suggestions and others are less responsiwe. People who are highly responsive to hypnosis tend to describe their experiences as vivid, absorbing, and even profound. At the other extreme are those who merely think about the suggestions and respond only to comply with experimental demands (Radtke & Spanos, 1981; Wagstaff, 1981). Most people fall in between these extremes. Individual differences in hypnotic suggestibility can be reliably and validly measured with standardized hypnotic suggestibility scales. The major scales used in current research include the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C (Weitzenhoffer 6r Hilgard, 1962) and the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility (HGSHS; Shor 6r Orne, 1962). Standardized hypnotizability scales typically begin with a scripted eye-fixation/relaxation induction procedure, followed by a set of standard suggestions of varying difficulty. Responses are scored passfail according to objective criteria (e.g., swatting at a hallucinated mosquito). Subjective scoring criteria have also been developed in which respondents rate the vividness or "reality" of their responses (Kirsch, Council] & Wickless, 1990).4. People who have been hypnotized do not lose control ower their behawior. As White (1941) put it, the hypnotized individual strives to "behave like a hypnotized person as this is continuously defined by the operator and understood by the subject" (p. 483). Good hypnotic clients actively process information in the hypnotic situation, thinking and imagining 384

What makes recovered-memory testimony compelling to jurors?

“…The apparently conflicting findings of our two studies may reflect, in part, the interaction of culturally based expectancies about the effectiveness and dangers of hypnosis (Council, 1999) with the particular goals and tasks in trials involving sexual abuse as opposed to therapist malpractice (Behnke, 1999). In cases involving alleged childhood sexual abuse, jurors must decide whether the perpetrator is guilty.…”

“…People invest hypnosis with enormous power, viewing it as therapeutically effective yet unconventional and potentially hazardous. This seemingly inconsistent outlook toward hypnosis very likely reflects a shared set of response expectancies acquired from the media through promotional advertising and theatrical depictions of the technique (e.g., dramatic portrayals of age regression through which one supposedly can re-experience past events; Council, 1999). Given such conflicting expectancies, it is unclear how prospective jurors will respond to trial evidence concerning hypnotically recovered memories of childhood sexual abuse.…”

Mediation and moderation of hypnotic and cognitive‐behavioural pain reduction

“…A response expectancy explanation of hypnotic analgesia would be consistent with the neodissociation model in that individuals may generate expectancies for hypnotic pain reduction in part based on perceptions of their general responsiveness to hypnosis. That is, response expectancies may partially mediate the relationship between hypnotic suggestibility and hypnotic pain reduction (see Council, 1999). A second influential perspective is offered by Spanos (1986).…”

Strategic Eclecticism in Hypnotherapy: Effectiveness Research Considerations

“…The ability to create reasonable novelty and raise hope is a robust factor significant to treatment. Expectancy, as perhaps the over-arching core process variable, has a role in any treatment, but perhaps more so in hypnosis (Coe, 1993;Council, 1999;Kirsch, 1999). These authors have opined that perhaps the single strongest prediction of hypnotic effect or change in a patient arises from expectancy.…”