Theories of Hypnosis

1
Theories of Hypnosis
2
Controversial Question

• When someone is hypnotised, do they ener a
  different state of consciousness or is there
  another explanation for their behaviour.

3
State versus Non-state

• State Theory Hypnosis is a different state from
  waking or sleeping
• Non-state Hypnosis promotes relaxation,
  imagination and compliance. So hypnotised people
  are not in a different state, the just behave
  differently

4
State Explanations

• Neodissociationist View Hilgard(1977)
• Neo-state view Oakley (1999)

5
2. (Neo-) Dissociation theory (Hilgard, 1970s,
1980s) The mind consists of a hierarchy of
control structures
Ernest Hilgard 1904-2001
6
Hypnosis dissociates the Executive Ego, so that
part of it is under direct control of hypnotic
instructions
   gt   There should be part of the person aware
of everything that is happening Hilgard called
this the Hidden Observer
7
Hidden Observer

• Part of the executive ego is not under the
  control of the hypnotist and is watching
  everything that is happening during hypnosis.
• The hidden observer may not always be consciously
  watching, but is aware of everything (see p151)

8
Hidden Observer

• Hilgard demonstrated this using freezing cold
  water
• During hypnotic analgesia subjects rates very
  little pain as arm is held in ice cold water.
• There is a hidden part of you that really knows
  everything that is going on. When I put my hand
  on your shoulder, I can contact this hidden part
• The hidden observer gives high pain ratings, and
  insists they have always been high when the hand
  is off the shoulder the person gives low pain
  ratings!

9
Hilgard State or Non-State?

• (NB According to Hilgard, hypnosis need not be
  an altered state of consciousness it just
  involves a split in the executive ego.
• On the other hand, it could be an altered state
  of consciousness if there were enough cognitive
  structures under dissociated control

10
Reals Versus Fakers

• If hypnosis is a real state, we should be able to
  spot if someone is faking it.
• Evans Orne (1971) found that hypnotised
  subjects continued in a behaviour longer than
  fakers.
• Hypnotised subject also show stronger
  post-hypnotic response (Evans and Orne 1968
• Why does this support the State view?
  Counterarguments?

11
Neo state-view Oakley(99)

• Use this as AO2
• Normal consciousness executive control system
  (in frontal cortex) does 2 things
• Monitors information and makes decisions
• Monitors our behaviour and gives us a sense of
  self-awareness

12
Neo state-view Oakley(99)

• During hypnosis, the hypnotist hacks into the
  executive control system.
• So the hypnotists instructions direct behaviour
• So self-awareness is reduced, causing a different
  state of consciousness.

13
Neo state-view
14
Evidence in favour of hypnosis being a separate
state of consciousness

• For some time now hypnosis has been successful
  when anaesthetics cannot be used and in the
  treatment of chronic pain (Hilgard and Le Baron
  1984).
• People can imitate clinical depression
  successfully but that is not to say clinical
  depression does not exist. The crucial point is
  that the hypnotised person believes they are in a
  different state, whilst the imitator does not.
  (McIlveen 1995).
• An important feature of the Hilgard model is the
  hidden observer. Hilgard (1973) induced
  hypnotic deafness in a participant but also
  suggested that he should raise a finger when
  asked if there was any part of him that could
  still hear. Deafness was convincingly established
  but a finger was still raised when the question
  was asked. In Hilgards view this is the hidden
  observer monitoring the situation and replying to
  the question without the participants awareness.
• Some researchers feel that hypnosis is associated
  with specific changes in brain electrical
  activity (Crawford and Gruzlier 1992)
• It is possible we are looking at the wrong
  measures or the wrong part of the brain for
  hypnotic phenomena.
• Although Kosslyn et al (2000) found that when pps
  were asked to visualise adding colour to a grey
  image there was increased brain activity in the
  left hemisphere when they were hypnotised but not
  when they werent.

15
Alternative explanations of hypnosis Non-state
theories

• Barber (1969) suggests that hypnosis is simply
  the result of experimental demand
  characteristics i.e. the participant pleases the
  experimenter and tries not to ruin the show.
• All hypnotic phenomena can be imitated by non
  hypnotised people, indistinguishably from the
  hypnotised (Barber 1979)
• In a study by Orne (1959) subjects were told
  prior to being hypnotised that a common feature
  of a trance is stiffening of the muscles in the
  dominant hand.
• This information was fictitious.
• When the subjects were hypnotised, 55
  spontaneously displayed hand stiffening.
• No subjects in a control group showed this
  behaviour.
• No measure of brain activity successfully
  distinguishes between hypnotised and non
  hypnotised states consistently. (Sarbin and
  Slagle 1972).
• Council and Kenny (1992) showed that expert
  ratings also failed to distinguish between self
  reports of subjects experiencing hypnotic
  induction from those experiencing relaxation
  training and they conclude that the state of
  consciousness produced by the two procedures is
  indistinguishable.
• Wagstaff (1995) indicates that research and
  debate in hypnosis flourishes but we do not seem
  to be any further forward in deciding whether
  there is an altered state of consciousness we can
  call hypnosis.