Metacognition of agency is reduced in high hypnotic suggestibility

Terhune, Devin Blair; Hedman, Love R. A.

doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2017.06.026

Cited by 51 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An emblematic case is hypnosis. Hypnotic induction and suggestions induce in highly hypnotizable participants marked alterations in sense of agency, a lack of awareness of movement, and a sense of involuntariness [7][8][9] . Despite the lack of awareness, the person in hypnosis is still able to monitor and process sensory inputs.…”

Section: The Rubber Hand Illusion In Hypnosis Provides New Insights Imentioning

confidence: 99%

The rubber hand illusion in hypnosis provides new insights into the sense of body ownership

Fiorio

Modenese

Cesari

2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Body ownership can be experimentally investigated with the rubber hand illusion (RHI), in which watching a rubber hand stroked synchronously with one’s own hidden hand induces a feeling of ownership over the rubber hand. The aim of this study was to investigate response to the RHI in high (N = 21) and low (N = 19) hypnotizable individuals in normal waking state and in hypnosis. Response to the RHI was measured via a question on the illusory feeling of ownership and with proprioceptive drift. The Highs expressed an overall feeling of more ownership over the rubber hand in both the normal waking state and hypnosis, although both groups gave higher ownership scores after synchronous than after asynchronous stroking and the difference between conditions was similar across groups. Conversely, the proprioceptive drift appeared to be differentially modulated by hypnosis and hypnotic suggestibility: it was increased in the Highs and decreased in the Lows after hypnosis induction. These findings hint at an interplay between hypnotic suggestibility and hypnosis in modulating response to the RHI. The selective breakdown of proprioceptive drift among the Lows suggests resistance to recalibrate one’s own limb in hypnosis.

show abstract

Section: The Rubber Hand Illusion In Hypnosis Provides New Insights Imentioning

confidence: 99%

The rubber hand illusion in hypnosis provides new insights into the sense of body ownership

Fiorio

Modenese

Cesari

2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, they are less sensitive to disruptions of control when forming judgements of agency in a task designed to measure metacognition of sense of agency (Terhune & Hedman, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intentional binding as Bayesian cue combination: Testing predictions with trait individual differences.

Lush¹,

Roseboom²,

Cleeremans³

et al. 2019

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigated differences in intentional binding in high and low hypnotisable groups to explore two questions relating to (i) trait differences in the availability of motor intentions to metacognitive processes and (ii) a proposed cue combination model of binding. An experience of involuntariness is central to hypnotic responding, and may arise from strategically being unaware of one's intentions. Trait differences in the ability to respond to hypnotic suggestion may reflect differing levels of access to motor intentions. Intentional binding refers to the subjective compression of the time between an action and its outcome, indicated by a forward shift in the judged time of an action toward its outcome (action binding) and the backward shift of an outcome toward a causal action (outcome binding). Intentional binding is sensitive to intentional action without requiring explicit reflection upon agency. One way of explaining the sensitivity of intentional binding is to see it as a simple case of multisensory cue combination in which awareness of intentions increases knowledge of the timing of actions. Here we present results consistent with such a mechanism. In a contingent presentation of action and outcome events, low hypnotisables had more precise timing judgements of actions and also showed weaker action binding than highs. These results support the theory that trait hypnotisability is related to access to information related to motor intentions, and that intentional binding reflects the Bayesian combination of crossmodal cues.

show abstract

“…The low self-awareness of highs may similarly relate to the "classical suggestion effect" of involuntariness (Weitzenhoffer, 1980; see also Terhune & Hedman, 2017). Cardeña and Spiegel (1991, p. 104) earlier stated that, "because of the diminished competition with other types of mental occurrences (including self-reflective appraisals), hypnotic suggestions entail greater salience, influence, and perceived involuntariness."…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Roles of Response Expectancies, Baseline Experiences, and Hypnotizability in Spontaneous Hypnotic Experiences

Cardeña

Terhune

2019

International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study evaluated factors underlying individual differences in spontaneous (unsuggested) experiences during hypnosis. Participants varying in hypnotizability (low, medium, and high) completed a questionnaire about various dimensions of consciousness they would expect to experience at the "deepest level of hypnosis" (expectancy), an eyes-closed resting condition (baseline), and their actual experiences during "neutral hypnosis" (hypnosis). Responses during hypnosis were characterized by higher scores in dimensions related to alterations in conscious experience, affect, and imagery, and lower scores in rationality and agency. Only highs and mediums evinced increases in altered experience and body image. Across conditions, highs reported greater alterations in time experience and lower selfawareness than other groups. Participants overall tended to overestimate the changes they would experience in hypnosis. Baseline and hypnosis correlated in various dimensions, including affect, arousal, and internal dialogue. After controlling for baseline scores and hypnotizability, expectancies correlated with some dimensions having to do with alterations in consciousness. In sum, spontaneous experiences during hypnosis are driven by response expectancies, hypnotizability, and baseline experiences, which show differential effects. A discussion by White (1941) on the importance of individuals' expectations on their responses to hypnosis was the impetus for important research and theoretical developments (e.g., Kirsch, 1991; Shor, 1971). In recent decades, as part of a broader line of research on the role of expectations in human behavior and experience (Kirsch, 1999), various studies have investigated whether

show abstract

Metacognition of agency is reduced in high hypnotic suggestibility

Cited by 51 publications

References 38 publications

The rubber hand illusion in hypnosis provides new insights into the sense of body ownership

The rubber hand illusion in hypnosis provides new insights into the sense of body ownership

Intentional binding as Bayesian cue combination: Testing predictions with trait individual differences.

The Roles of Response Expectancies, Baseline Experiences, and Hypnotizability in Spontaneous Hypnotic Experiences

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About