Hypnosis, suggestion, and placebo in the reduction of experimental pain.

Spaños, Nicholas P.; Perlini, Arthur H.; Robertson, Lynda A.

doi:10.1037/0021-843x.98.3.285

Cited by 63 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Another study argues that when participants are given both types of suggestion in a within-subjects design, differences can be a function of order [39]. In addition, a fourth set of studies indicates that low-suggestible individuals derive as much benefit from imaginative suggestions for pain reduction as highly suggestible persons do from either hypnotic or imaginative analgesia suggestions [23,24].…”

Section: Imaginative Suggestibility and Imaginative Pain Reductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Most of the studies included in the meta-analysis by Montgomery et al [4] and the reviews by Patterson and Jensen [1,2] were not designed and analyzed in a way that allows us to evaluate the effectiveness of hypnotic pain interventions for people of low suggestibility. The number of studies that clearly speak to this issue is small, and the evidence is conflicting [22][23][24][25][26]. More research, from multiple investigative teams, is needed to determine whether hypnosis is more effective than control conditions, or is as effective as logical comparison conditions (eg, cognitive-behavioral interventions), in treating pain experienced by those of low hypnotic suggestibility.…”

Section: Hypnotic Suggestibility and Hypnotic Pain Reductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Is high hypnotic suggestibility necessary for successful hypnotic pain intervention?

Milling

2008

Current Science Inc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hypnotic suggestibility is a trait-like, individual difference variable reflecting the general tendency to respond to hypnosis and hypnotic suggestions. Research with standardized measures of hypnotic suggestibility has demonstrated that there are substantial individual differences in this variable. Higher suggestibility has been found to be associated with greater relief from hypnotic pain interventions. Although individuals in the high suggestibility range show the strongest response to hypnotic analgesia, people of medium suggestibility, who represent approximately one third of the population, also have been found to obtain significant relief from hypnosis. Thus, high hypnotic suggestibility is not necessary for successful hypnotic pain intervention. However, the available evidence does not support the efficacy of hypnotic pain interventions for people who fall in the low hypnotic suggestibility range. However, some studies suggest that these individuals may benefit from imaginative analgesia suggestions, or suggestions for pain reduction that are delivered while the person is not in hypnosis.

show abstract

Section: Imaginative Suggestibility and Imaginative Pain Reductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Hypnotic Suggestibility and Hypnotic Pain Reductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Is high hypnotic suggestibility necessary for successful hypnotic pain intervention?

Milling

2008

Current Science Inc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In most experiments, hypnotic suggestibility proved to be unrelated to the magnitude of the placebo effect, which can be considered as a sort of indirect suggestibility (Evans, 1989;Baker & Kirsch, 1993;Kirsch, 1997;McGlashen, Evans, & Orne, 1969;Netter, Gheorghiu, Kruse, & Hübner, 1989;Spanos, Perlini, & Robertson, 1989;Spanos, Stenstrom, & Johnston, 1988;Van Dyck & Hoogduin, 1990). In contrast, Woody, Drugovic, and Oakman (1997) were able to find a significant relationship between hypnotic responding and nonhypnotic suggestibility related to placebo.…”

Section: Types Of Suggestibilitymentioning

confidence: 87%

Factor structure of suggestibility revisited: new evidence for direct and indirect suggestibility

Polczyk¹

2016

Current Issues in Personality Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

backgroundYielding to suggestions can be viewed as a relatively stable individual trait, called suggestibility. It has been long proposed that there are two kinds of suggestible influence, and two kinds of suggestibility corresponding to them: direct and indirect. Direct suggestion involves overt unhidden influence, while indirect suggestion concerns influence that is hidden, and the participant does not know that the suggestibility is being measured. So far however, empirical evidence for the existence of the two factors has been scarce. In the present study, more sophisticated and reliable tools for measuring suggestibility were applied than in the previous research, in the hope that better measurement would reveal the factor structure of suggestibility. Two tests of direct suggestibility were used: the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A, measuring hypnotic susceptibility, and the Barber Suggestibility Scale, measuring non-hypnotic direct imaginative suggestibility. Three tests served to measure indirect suggestibility: the Sensory Suggestibility Scale, measuring indirect suggestibility relating to perception; the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale, measuring the tendency to yield to suggestive questions and changing answers after negative feedback; and the Emotional Dialogs Tests, measuring the tendency to perceive nonexistent aggression. participants and procedureIn sum, 115 participants were tested, 69 women, 49 men, mean age 22.20 years, SD = 2.20. Participants were tested in two sessions, lasting for a total of four hours. resultsConfirmatory factor analyses confirmed the existence of two uncorrelated factors of suggestibility: direct and indirect.conclusions Suggestibility may indeed involve two factors, direct and indirect, and failure to discover them in previous research may be due to methodological problems.key words confirmatory factor analysis; suggestion; suggestibility; direct suggestibility; indirect suggestibility

show abstract

“…Another investigation suggests that when participants receive both kinds of suggestions in a within-subjects design, differences are a function of order (Stam and Spanos, 1980). A fourth set of studies shows that individuals scoring in the low range of hypnotic suggestibility benefi t as much from imaginative suggestions for analgesia as highly suggestible individuals do from either hypnotic or imaginative suggestions (Spanos, Perlini, Patrick, Bell and Gwynn, 1990;Spanos, Perlini and Robertson, 1989). To add to this small literature, the fi rst purpose of this study is to compare the effectiveness of imaginative and hypnotic suggestions for relieving pain.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

Response expectancies: a psychological mechanism of suggested and placebo analgesia

Milling

2009

Contemporary Hypnosis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Response expectancies, or the expectation of one's own non-volitional reactions to situational cues, are hypothesized to be a psychological mechanism of both hypnotic and placebo responding (Kirsch, 1990). In this study, response expectancies were evaluated as a mediator of suggested and placebo analgesia using Baron and Kenny's (1986) classic method of testing mediation. One hundred and seventy-two volunteers were randomly assigned to hypnotic analgesia suggestion, imaginative analgesia suggestion, placebo analgesia, or no-treatment control conditions. The hypnotic, imaginative and placebo treatments were more effective than the no-treatment control condition in relieving fi nger pressure pain. The hypnotic treatment was also more effective than the placebo. Each of the three treatments was partially mediated by response expectancies, although the percentage of mediation varied across the hypnotic (25%), imaginative (29%) and placebo (41%) conditions. The fi ndings support the position that response expectancies are one of the major psychological mechanisms of suggested and placebo analgesia. Key words: hypnosis, pain, placebos, response expectancies, suggestions Hypnosis has proven to be a potent tool for relieving pain. For example, in a meta-analysis of research on hypnotically-induced analgesia, Montgomery, DuHamel and Redd (2000) calculated 41 effect sizes from 18 studies and obtained a moderate to large effect (D = .67) for hypnosis. These scholars determined that the average participant treated with hypnosis achieved more pain reduction than 75% of individuals in standard treatment and no-treatment control conditions. Similarly, important qualitative reviews of the use of hypnosis for treating clinical pain recently concluded that hypnosis is effective for alleviating both acute and chronic pain conditions (Patterson and Jensen, 2003;Jensen and Patterson, 2006).A hypnotic suggestion consists of a hypnotic induction, followed by a suggestion in which the person is invited to experience some imaginary state of affairs. When such suggestions are provided without an induction, they have been termed 'waking' or imaginative suggestions (see Kirsch, 1997a). Studies comparing the effectiveness of imaginative and hypnotic suggestions for pain reduction have yielded contradictory results. Some research indicates that there is no difference between imaginative and hypnotic analgesia suggestions (Houle, McGrath, Moran and Garrett,

show abstract

Hypnosis, suggestion, and placebo in the reduction of experimental pain.

Cited by 63 publications

References 20 publications

Is high hypnotic suggestibility necessary for successful hypnotic pain intervention?

Is high hypnotic suggestibility necessary for successful hypnotic pain intervention?

Factor structure of suggestibility revisited: new evidence for direct and indirect suggestibility

Response expectancies: a psychological mechanism of suggested and placebo analgesia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About