In an earlier publication the writer formulated a series of twelve propositions in regard to two fundamental cognitive processes assumed to underlie hypnotic phenomena (Shor, 1959). These propositions are properly seen as an elaboration of White's dual-fador theory of hypnosis (White, 1941). The new formulations were advanced as a synthesis of many useful distinctions embedded in many theories of hypnosis. Expressly stated, however, was the conviction that more psychodynamically-oriented formulations must supplement these initial twelve propositions. In the present paper nine additional propositions are formulated which extend the present dual-factor theory to include a third factor. Each of these three factors is conceived as a dimension of hypnotic depth which may vary independently of the other two. Background material contributing to this view are certain selected Writings of White (1937; 1941) and of Schilder and Kauders (trans. 1956) which will be reviewed before presenting our additional propositions.
White's Diesatisfaction with Unidimeneional MeasuresWhite (1937) became dissatisfied with unidimensional measures of depth of hypnosis when, in spite of the use of rigorously uniform procedures in his experiments, he observed two distinct and consistent types of hypnotic behavior among individuals capable of entering deep hypnosis. White noticed that his outwardly standard induction techniques were not uniformly perceived by his subjects. A subject's personality, he 'This work was supported in part by contract AF49 (638)-728 from the Air Force Oflice of Scientific Research, and by granta from the InatitUte for Experimental Psychiatry and the Society for the Investigation of Human Ecology. ' Postdoctoral Fellow, MF-786043, National Institute of Mental Health, Public Health Service. 'I wish to thank my colleagues in the Studies in Hypnosis Project, Matnurchusette Mental Health Center, Harvard Medical SchooLMartin T. h e , Donald N. O'Connell. Emily F. Carob, and Eather H. Damaeer-for their critical commenta and editorial asaietance in the preparation of thia m a n k p t . Much appreciation also due in thia regard to Mrs. Elizabeth Scherer. Downloaded by [FU Berlin] at 05:50 26 November 2014 24 RONALD E. SHORfelt, predisposed him to select and respond to those aspects of s u g gestions which would fit his needs and expectations. Ordinary hypnotic suggestions request that the subject both obey and a t the same time "sleep". These two intertwined requests are no1 wholly consistent. Obedience requires activity and careful attention to the wishes of the hypnotist. "Sleep" requires passivity and oblivion White believed that a subject tends to select and emphasize in his behavior one of these two somewhat inconsistent commands (to obey or tc "sleep") and to de-emphasise the other. This differential emphasis on one or the other aspect of hypnotic suggestions produces two m e s oi hypnosis-active and passive."The active subject behavea aa if he were in a completely submissive state He seems to fall in eagerly with the h...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.