The influence of experimentally induced expectations on responses to the harvard group scale of hypnotic susceptibility, form a

Saavedra, Ramón L.; Miller, Robert J.

doi:10.1080/00207148308407180

Cited by 13 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Absorption, as indexed by the TAS, correlates somewhat variably with hypnotizability (r = .13-.89; Ashton & McDonald, 1985;Bowers, 1978Bowers, ,1982Council et al, 1983;Council et al, 1986;Crawford, 1982;Farthing, Venturino, & Brown, 1983;Finke & Macdonald, 1978;Frischholz, Spiegel, Trentalange, & Spiegel, 1987;E. R. Hilgard, Sheehan, Monteiro, & Macdonald, 1981;Hoyt et al, 1989;Kihlstrom et al, 1989;McConkey & Nogrady, 1986;Monteiro, Macdonald, & Hilgard, 1980;Saavedra & Miller, 1983;Spanos, Cross, Menary, Brett, & de Groh, 1987;Spanos & McPeake, 1975a, 1975bSweeney, Lynn, & Belleza, 1986;Tellegen & Atkinson, 1974;Yanchar & Johnson, 1981) and with suggestibility (r = .35-.55; Council & Loge, 1988; E. R. Hilgard et al, 1981;Monteiro et al, 1980;Spanos et al, 1983). Moreover, the relationship of absorption with hypnotizability (r = -.19-.02; Barabasz et al, 1983;Chiofalo & Coe, 1982;Matthews, Bennett, Bean, & Gallagher, 1985) and with suggestibility (r = -.13-.23; Spanos, McPeake, & Churchill, 1976) is sometimes quite low.…”

Section: Hypnosis and Hypnotizabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Absorption: Nature, assessment, and correlates.

Roche

McConkey²

1990

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

300

208

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reviews theoretical and empirical work on absorption and the relationship of absorption with selected variables. Absorption is denned as a characteristic that involves an openness to experience emotional and cognitive alterations across a variety of situations. The nature and assessment of absorption, and the relationship of absorption with (a) hypnosis and hypnotizability, (b) imagery, daydreaming, and consciousness, and (c) attentional processing and psychophysiological responding is considered. Conceptual and methodological issues are examined, and directions for future research are specified. Absorption is argued to be central to an understanding of the nature of subjective experience as well as to aspects of cognition and behavior.We are grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their detailed comments on an earlier version of this article. Final preparation of this article occurred when Kevin M. McConkey was visiting the University of Arizona.

show abstract

Section: Hypnosis and Hypnotizabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Absorption: Nature, assessment, and correlates.

Roche

McConkey²

1990

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

300

208

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although hypnotizability has been viewed as a relatively stable trait (Perry, ECHTERLING 1977), experience can change a subject's perceptions of hypnotizability, leading to corresponding changes in responsiveness to hypnotic procedures (Gregory & Diamond, 1973;Saavedra & Miller, 1983). The stage hypnosis program often begins with particularly dramatic demonstrations that quickly and significantly increase the potential subjects' assessment of their own hypnotizability.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Contrasting Stage and Clinical Hypnosis

Echterling¹

1988

American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For both instructional sets, the expectancy measure was significantly correlated with suggestibility scores. Subsequent research has also shown moderate correlations between global predictions and suggestibility in naive participants (Ashford & Hammer, 1978;Diamond, Gregory, Lenny, Steadman, & Tallone, 1974;Saavedra & Miller, 1983).…”

Section: Self -Predictionsmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Sarbin's (Sarbin & Anderson, 1963;Sarbin & Coe, 1972) role-theoretical analysis of hypnotic behavior emphasizes a person's perceptions of the responses appropriate to the role of the hypnotized individual. Hypnotic role expectations stem from general cultural knowledge of hypnosis and from expectancy statements made by the hypnotist in the hypnotic situation.…”

Section: Contemporary Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hypnosis and response expectancies.

Council¹

How Expectancies Shape Experience.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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

show abstract

The influence of experimentally induced expectations on responses to the harvard group scale of hypnotic susceptibility, form a

Cited by 13 publications

References 31 publications

Absorption: Nature, assessment, and correlates.

Absorption: Nature, assessment, and correlates.

Contrasting Stage and Clinical Hypnosis

Hypnosis and response expectancies.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About