Hypnotized individuals have traditionally been considered to be detached from the control of their own suggested behavior. We tested this and the alternative notion that hypnotized subjects attempt to self-generate the experiences (i.e., mainly of in voluntariness) as well as produce the behaviors thought to be prototypical of high hypnotic ability. In an experimental investigation, highly susceptible hypnotic subjects were found to engage in the kind of imaginative activity that would be expected of individuals who were attempting deliberately to generate their experiences of involuntariness; they engaged as actively in imagery-generation as did subjects who were specifically instructed to imagine during suggested responding, and they experienced as much involuntariness as subjects in whom suggested movements were produced by an external physical force. The implications of these findings for the neodissociation and social psychological theories of hypnotic responding are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BowersK. S., Hypnosis for the Seriously Curious, Brooks/Cole, Monterey, CA, 1976.
2.
HilgardE. R., A Neodissociation Interpretation of Pain Reduction in Hypnosis, Psychological Review, 80, pp. 396–411, 1973.
3.
HilgardE. R., Divided Consciousness, Wiley, New York, 1977.
4.
HilgardE. R., Divided Consciousness in Hypnosis: The Implications of the Hidden Observer, in Hypnosis: Developments in Research and New Perspectives, FrommE.ShorR. E. (eds.), Aldine, Chicago, 1979.
5.
SpiegelD.SpiegelH., Hypnosis, in Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry/IV, KaplanH. K.SadockB. J. (eds.), Williams and Wilkins, New York, 1984.
6.
ZamanskyH. S.BartisS. P., Hypnosis as Dissociation: Methodological Considerations and Preliminary Findings, American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 26, pp. 246–251, 1984.
7.
ZamanskyH. S.BartisS. P., Dissociation in Hypnosis: The Hidden Observer Observed, Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 92, pp. 243–248, 1985.
8.
HilgardE. R., Ability to Resist Suggestions within the Hypnotic State: Responsiveness to Conflicting Communication, Psychological Reports, 12, pp. 3–13, 1963.
9.
LeavittE. E., Compliance and Resistance: The Essence of Hypnosis Twenty-Five Years After Orne, Presidential Address, Division 30, Ninety-Fourth Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, Washington, D. C., 1986.
10.
BarberT. X., Hypnosis: A Scientific Approach, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1969.
11.
BarberT. X., Suggested (“Hypnotic”) Behavior: The Trance Paradigm Versus an Alternative Paradigm, in Hypnosis: Developments in Research and New Perspectives, FrommE.ShorR. E. (eds.), Aldine-Atherton, Chicago, 1979.
12.
BarberT. X.SpanosN. P.ChavesJ. F., Hypnosis, Imagination and Human Potentialities, Pergamon, New York, 1974.
13.
CoeW. C.SarbinT. R., Hypnosis from the Standpoint of a Contextualist, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 196, pp. 2–13, 1977.
14.
SarbinT. R., Contributions to Role-Taking Theory: 1. Hypnotic Behaviour, Psychological Review, 57, pp. 255–270, 1950.
15.
SarbinT. R., On Self-Deception, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 364, pp. 230–235, 1981.
16.
SarbinT. R., Nonvolition in Hypnosis: A Semiotic Analysis, Psychological Record, 34, pp. 537–549, 1984.
17.
SarbinT. R.CoeW. C., Hypnotic Behavior: The Psychology of Influence Communication, Aldine, New York, 1972.
18.
SarbinT. R.CoeW. C., Hypnosis and Psychopathology: Replacing Old Myths with Fresh Metaphors, Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 88, pp. 506–526, 1979.
19.
SpanosN. P., A Cognitive-Social Psychological Conceptualization of Hypnotic Behavior, Research Communications in Psychology, Psychiatry, and Behaviour, 7, pp. 199–213, 1982.
20.
SpanosN. P., Hypnotic Behavior: A Social-Psychological Interpretation of Amnesia, Analgesia, and “Trance Logic”, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 9, pp. 449–502, 1986.
21.
SpanosN. P., Hypnosis, Nonvolitional Responding, and Multiple Personality: A Social Psychological Perspective, Advances in Personality Research, 14, pp. 1–62, 1986.
22.
SpanosN. P., Goal-Directed Fantasy and the Performance of Hypnotic Test Suggestions, Psychiatry, 34, pp. 86–96, 1971.
23.
SpanosN. P.BridgemanM.StamH. J.GwynnM.SaadC. L., When Seeing is Not Believing: The Effects of Contextual Variables on the Reports of Hypnotic Hallucinators, Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 2, pp. 195–210, 1982–83.
24.
SpanosN. P.GorassiniD. R., Structure of Hypnotic Test Suggestions and Attributions of Responding Involuntarily, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, pp. 688–696, 1984.
25.
SpanosN. P.RadtkeH. L., Hypnotic Visual Hallucinations as Imaginings: A Cognitive-Social Psychological Perspective, Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 1, pp. 147–170, 1981–82.
26.
SpanosN. P.CobbP.GorassiniD. R., Failing to Resist Hypnotic Suggestions: A Strategy for Self-Presenting as Deeply Hypnotized, Psychiatry, 48, pp. 282–293, 1985.
27.
SpanosN. P.RadtkeH. L.BertrandL. D., Hypnotic Amnesia as a Strategic Enactment: The Successful Breaching of Hypnotic Amnesia in High Susceptible Subjects, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, pp. 1155–1169, 1984.
28.
SpanosN. P.StamH.D'EonJ.PawlakA.Radtke-BodorikH. L., The Effect of Social Psychological Variables on Hypnotic Amnesia, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, pp. 737–750, 1980.
29.
SpanosN. P.RadtkeH. L.HodginsD. C.BertrandL. D.StamH. J.DubreuilD., The Carleton University Responsiveness to Suggestion Scale: Stability, Reliability, and Relationships with Expectancy and “Hypnotic Experiences”, Psychological Reports, 53, pp. 523–535, 1983.
30.
SpanosN. P.RadtkeH. L.HodginsD. C.BertrandL. D.StamH. J.MorettiP., The Carleton University Responsiveness to Suggestion Scale: Relationship with Other Measures of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Expectancy, and Absorption, Psychological Reports, 53, pp. 723–734, 1983.
31.
SpanosN. P.RadtkeH. L.HodginsD. C.StamH. J.BertrandL. D., The Carleton University Responsiveness to Suggestion Scale: Normative Data and Psychometric Properties, Psychological Reports, 53, pp. 555–563, 1983.
32.
SpanosN. P.SalasJ.MenariE. P.BrettP. J., Comparison of Overt and Subjective Responses to the Carleton University Responsiveness to Suggestion Scale and the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale Under Conditions of Group Administration, Psychological Reports, 58, pp. 847–856, 1986.
33.
BowersK. S., Do the Stanford Scales Tap the Classic Suggestion Effect?, International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 29, pp. 42–53, 1981.
34.
ArnoldM. B., On the Mechanism of Suggestion and Hypnosis, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41, pp. 107–128, 1946.
35.
LynnS. J.NashM. R.RhueJ. W.FraumanD. C.StanleyS., Hypnosis and the Experience of Nonvolition, International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 31, pp. 293–308, 1983.
36.
SpanosN. P.BarberT. X., Toward a Convergence in Hypnosis Research, American Psychologist, 29, pp. 500–511, 1974.
37.
BowersK. S., The Effect of Demands for Honesty on Reports of Visual and Auditory Hallucinations, International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 15, pp. 31–36, 1967.
38.
KunzendorfR. G., Hypnotic Hallucinations as “Unmonitored” Images: An Empirical Study, Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 5, pp. 255–270, 1985–86.
39.
SheehanP. W., Escape from the Ambiguous: Artifact in Methodologies of Hypnosis, American Psychologist, 28, pp. 983–993, 1973.
40.
SpiegelD.CutcombS.RenC.PribramK., Hypnotic Hallucination Alters Evoked Potentials, Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 94, pp. 249–255, 1985.
41.
LynnS. J.SnodgrassM.RhueJ. W.HardawayR., Goal-Directed Fantasy, Hypnotic Susceptibility, and Expectancies, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, in press.
42.
SpanosN. P.WeekesJ. R.de GrohM., The “Involuntary” Countering of Suggested Requests: A Test of the Ideomotor Hypothesis of Hypnotic Responsiveness, British Journal of Experimental and Clinical Hypnosis, 1, pp. 3–11, 1984.
