Forty college students were taught facilitated communication via a commercially available training videotape. They were then asked to facilitate the communication of a confederate, who was described as developmentally disabled and unable to speak. All 40 participants produced responses that they attributed at least partially to the confederate, and most attributed all of the communication entirely to her. Eighty-nine percent produced responses corresponding to information they had received, most of which was unknown to the confederate. Responding was significantly correlated with simple ideomotor responses with a pendulum and was not affected by information about the controversy surrounding facilitated communication. These data support the hypothesis that facilitated communication is an instance of automatic writing, akin to that observed in hypnosis and with Ouija boards, and that the ability to produce automatic writing is more common than previously thought.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AnsfieldM.E.WegnerD.M. (1996). The feeling of doing. In GollwitzerP.M.BarghJ.A., (Eds.), The psychology of action: Linking cognition and motivation to behavior (pp. 482–506). New York: Guilford Press.
2.
BanduraA. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.
3.
BernsteinE.M.PutnamF.W. (1986). Development, reliability, and validity of a dissociation scale. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 174, 727–735.
4.
BiklenD. (1990). Communication unbound: Autism and praxis. Harvard Educational Review, 60, 291–315.
5.
BlighS.KuppermanP. (1993). Evaluation procedure for determining the source of the communication in facilitated communication accepted in a court case. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 23, 553–557.
6.
EastonR.D.ShorR.E. (1976). An experimental analysis of the Chevreul pendulum illusion. The Journal of General Psychology, 95, 111–125.
7.
GreenG.ChellquistK.Krendel-AmesS.RossS.MacDonaldR. (1993, May). Analyzing the source of facilitated communications. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Behavior Analysis, Chicago.
8.
HilgardE.R. (1965). Hypnotic susceptibility. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.
9.
HilgardE.R. (1986). Divided consciousness: Multiple controls in human thought and action (expanded ed.). New York: Wiley.
10.
HudsonA.MelitaB.ArnoldN. (1993). Assessing the validity of facilitated communication: A case study. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 23, 165–173.
11.
JacobsonJ.W.MulickJ.A.SchwartzA.A. (1995). The history of facilitated communication: Science, pseudoscience, and anti-science. American Psychologist, 50, 750–765.
12.
KallstromS.PiazzaC.HuntL.OwenJ. (1993, May). Experimental analysis of Facilitated Communication training with developmentally disabled and autistic clients. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Behavior Analysis, Chicago.
13.
KirschI. (1997). Suggestibility or hypnosis: What do our scales really measure?International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 45, 212–225.
14.
KirschI.LynnS.J. (1995). The altered state of hypnosis: Changes in the theoretical landscape. American Psychologist, 50, 846–858.
15.
KirschI.LynnS.J. (in press). Hypnotic involuntariness and the automaticity of everyday life. In KirschI.CapafonsA.CardeñaE.AmigóS., (Eds.), Clinical hypnosis and self-regulation therapy: A cognitive-behavioral perspective. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
16.
KirschI.SilvaC.E.ComeyG.ReedS. (1995). A spectral analysis of cognitive and personality variables in hypnosis: Empirical disconfirmation of the two-factor model of hypnotic responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 167–175.
17.
PalfremanJ. (1993). Prisoners of silence (J. Palfreman, Director). In FanningD. (Executive Producer), Frontline. Boston: Public Broadcasting Service.
18.
SchubertA.BiklenD. (Executive Producers). (1992). Getting started [Videotape]. (Available from Douglas Biklen, Syracuse University, Institute on Facilitated Communication, 805 South Crouse Avenue, Syracuse, NY 13244)
19.
ShaneH.C.KearnsK. (1994). An examination of the role of the facilitator in Facilitated Communication. American Journal of Speech and Language Pathology, 50, 750–765.
20.
SpiegelH.SpiegelD. (1978). Trance and treatment: Clinical uses of hypnosis. New York: Basic Books.
21.
SpitzH.H. (1997). Nonconscious movements: From mystical messages to facilitated communication. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
22.
StroopJ.R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643–662.
23.
TellegenA.AtkinsonG. (1974). Openness to absorbing and self-altering experiences (“absorption”), a trait related to hypnotic susceptibility. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 83, 268–277.
24.
WallerR.W.KeeleyS.M. (1978). Effects of explanation and information feedback on the illusory correlation phenomenon. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46, 342–343.
