The emerging neuroscience of hypnosis

Terhune, Devin Blair; Kadosh, Roi Cohen

doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2011.08.007

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is noteworthy that suggestions comparable to those in the AG profile are not represented on the HGSHS:A (Shor & Orne, 1962), SHSS:C (Weitzenhoffer & Hilgard, 1962), or WSGC (Bowers, 1993; see also Moran, Kurtz, & Strube, 2002), the most commonly used measures of hypnotic suggestibility, whereas the latter two scales include two items that are equivalent to suggestions on the DR profile, which was here shown to lack discriminant validity. In addition to reinforcing the claim that the standard scales of hypnotic suggestibility are poorly suited to the task of delineating individual differences in high hypnotic suggestibility (Terhune, et al, 2011b;Terhune & Cohen Kadosh, 2012), these results further suggest that greater representation of agnosia and inhibitory cognitive suggestions in future measures of hypnotic suggestibility will optimize the measurement of response variegation in this population.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 60%

Discrete response patterns in the upper range of hypnotic suggestibility: A latent profile analysis

Terhune

2015

Consciousness and Cognition

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 60%

Discrete response patterns in the upper range of hypnotic suggestibility: A latent profile analysis

Terhune

2015

Consciousness and Cognition

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A review of Figure 1 reveals that a great deal of activity was devoted to scale development in the 1960s. Despite the continued progress on research on basic mechanisms of hypnosis, its clinical application, and exploration of its features from a cognitive neuroscience perspective (Oakley & Halligan, 2009, there has not been reciprocal development in the area of measurement (Terhune & Cohen Kadosh, 2012;Woody & Barnier, 2008). Thus, the most recent introduction of a novel, standalone measure of hypnotic suggestibility was the SHSS:C nearly 60 years ago, which is widely referred to as the "gold standard" in the field (Kihlstrom, 2008).…”

Section: Standardized Scales Of Hypnotic Suggestibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

A Critical Review of Standardized Measures of Hypnotic Suggestibility

Acunzo

Terhune

2021

International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The most well-established finding gleaned from decades of experimental hypnosis research is that individuals display marked variability in responsiveness to hypnotic suggestions. Insofar as this variability impacts both treatment outcome in therapeutic applications of hypnosis as well as responsiveness to suggestions in experimental contexts, it is imperative that clinicians and researchers use robust measures of hypnotic suggestibility. The current paper critically evaluates contemporary measures of hypnotic suggestibility. After reviewing the most widely used measures, we identify multiple properties of these instruments that result in the loss of valuable information, including binary scoring and single-trial sampling, and hinder their utility, such as the inclusion of sub-optimal suggestion content. The scales are not well-suited for contemporary research questions and have outlived their usefulness. We conclude by outlining ways in which the measurement of hypnotic suggestibility can be advanced.

show abstract

“…Hypnosis consists of a set of procedures including an induction and one or more suggestions (Oakley and Halligan, 2009;Terhune and Cohen Kadosh, 2012a). Inductions vary but generally , chapter in Sensory Blending: On synaesthesia and other phenomena involve instructions and suggestions to promote minimized awareness of one's environment, reduced metacognition, and perceived effortless attention towards the instructions of the experimenter (Brown, Antonova, Langley, and Oakley, 2001).…”

Section: Posthypnotic Suggestionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Induction of Synaesthesia in Non-Synaesthetes

Terhune¹,

Luke²,

Kadosh³

2017

Oxford Scholarship Online

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this chapter we review research examining the induction of synaesthesia with training, posthypnotic suggestion, and pharmacological agents in non-synaesthetes. Each of these methods has been shown to produce different aspects of synaesthesia, but none have produced experiences that have been corroborated using neuroimaging assays. Nevertheless, the close parallels between induced and congenital synaesthesias have the potential to illuminate different facets of this condition. We argue that training may be a valuable model for studying the learning mechanisms underlying congenital synaesthesia, posthypnotic suggestion may have greater utility in the experimental manipulation of this condition, and the administration of pharmacological agents may serve as a useful tool for studying the development of synaesthesia or for large-scale studies of induced synaesthesia. Induced synaesthesias also raise important questions regarding espoused criteria for demarcating synaesthesia from other phenomena.

show abstract

The emerging neuroscience of hypnosis

Cited by 9 publications

References 33 publications

Discrete response patterns in the upper range of hypnotic suggestibility: A latent profile analysis

Discrete response patterns in the upper range of hypnotic suggestibility: A latent profile analysis

A Critical Review of Standardized Measures of Hypnotic Suggestibility

The Induction of Synaesthesia in Non-Synaesthetes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About