The effects of suggestions of alertness in hypnosis on paired‐associate learning¹

Abstract

The many studies which have compared performances of vanous kmds withm hypnosis with those within a nonhypnobc wakmg state have often failed to conbol S's mobvabon, on the supposibon that a hypnobzed S by virtue of the hypnotic state is highly mobvated to do what the hypnobst suggests to him In a previous mvestigabon from this laboratory (Slotnick, Liebert, & Hilgard, 1965) it was found that special "mvolving" mstructions, gomg beyond "exhortabon," led to enhanced performances by hypnotized Ss beyond their performances m the wakmg state or m the badibonal hypnotic state The present mvestigabon is concemed with the effect of mducmg a more alert hypnotic state withm hypnosis pnor to the undertaking of a leammg taskThe contradictory results of pnor expenmentabon designed to mvesbgate the lnffuence of hypnosis on leammg and recall may be understood m part on the basis of the failure to consider the mobvabonal or arousal state of S withm hypnosis Because it is difficult to untangle leammg and performance vanables, parbcularly m studies of acquisibon, the studies on f acilitabon of motor performance are also relevant In learmng studies, for example. Sears (1955) found some decrease m errors m the leammg of Morse code withm hypnosis as compared with a wakmg condibon, while Schulman and London (1963) found no significant improvement m the acquisibon of nonsense syllable pairs in hypnosis over that found in the wakmg state. In motor performance studies, London and Fuhrer (1961), Slotnick and London (1^5), and Levitt and Brady (1964) all found no supenonty for performance under tradibonal hypnosis as compared with wakmg performance When "exhortabon" was added to hypnosis, how-

Hypnosis, relaxation, and motor retardation.

“…Such an interpretation is in keeping with the findings of Liebert, Rubin, and Hilgard (1965) and Vingoe (1968) and seems to indicate that the measured effectiveness of any given set of hypnotic induction instructions depends more on the criterion measure than on the creation of a unique altered state of consciousness. Relaxation, drowsiness, and sleep are effective variables in the hypnoticinduction procedure, provided the desired subsequent behavior (e.g., pain amelioration, tension reduction) is commensurate with such a condition.…”

A comparison of active-alert hypnotic induction with traditional relaxation induction.

“…Others have begun with the usual relaxation induction and then converted it to an active state through subsequent suggestions; this is, in fact, a common practice within hypnosis, for the hypnotized person often engages in gross muscular activity that would be incompatible with complete relaxation. Liebert, Rubin, and Hilgard (1965) suggested alertness, following a standard induction, in order to improve performance in a paired-associate learning task. Gibbons (1973) produced an alert trance state which he named "hyperempiria," but only after suggesting relaxation and eye closure.…”

Application of cognitive‐behavioural hypnotic treatment for anxiety management in the Chinese

“…Active hypnosis (Liebert, Rubin and Hilgard, 1965) and benign progression were used to alleviate the cognitive part of anxiety. This intervened in the vicious cognitive cycle, and encouraged relatively positive attitudes towards, as well as motivating their active coping for, their anxiety situations.…”