This study delineated two subgroups of highly hypnotizable subjects. The first (n = 19) entered trance rapidly, scored high on absorption, and described hypnosis as much like their rich and vivid waking fantasy life. The second subgroup of 15 took time to achieve a deep trance, saw hypnosis as very different from any prior experiences, and were more likely to exhibit amnesia for both hypnotic experience and waking fantasies.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarrettD. L. (1991) Deep trance subjects: a schema of two distinct subgroups. In KunsendorfR. (Ed.), Imagery: recent developments. New York: Plenum. Pp. 101–122.
2.
FieldP. (1965) An Inventory Scale of Hypnotic Depth. International journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 13, 238–249.
3.
LynnS. J.RhueJ. W. (1988) Fantasy proneness: hypnosis, developmental antecedents, and psychopathology. American Psychologist, 43, 35–44.
4.
ShorR. E.OrneE. C. (1962) The Harvard Croup Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
5.
TellegenA.AtkinsonG. A. (1974) Openness to absorbing and self-altering experiences (“absorption”), a trait related to hypnotic susceptibility. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 83, 268–277.
6.
WeitzenhofferA.HilgardE. (1962) Stanford Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form C. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
7.
WilsonS. C.BarberT. X. (1981) Vivid fantasy and hallucinatory abilities in the life histories of excellent hypnotic subjects (“somnambules”): a preliminary report. In KlingerE. (Ed.), Imagery. Vol. 2. Concepts, results, and applications. New York: Plenum. Pp. 133–149.
8.
WilsonS. C.BarberT. X. (1983) The fantasy-prone personality: implications for understanding imagery, hypnosis, and parapsychological phenomena. In SheikhA. A. (Ed.), Imagery: current theory, research, and application. New York: Wiley. Pp. 340–390.
