A componential approach to individual differences in hypnotizability.

Abstract

Although responsiveness to hypnotic suggestions (hypnotizability) typically is conceptualized and studied as a singular homogeneous capability, numerous lines of evidence suggest instead that it is a hierarchically-structured cognitive capacity comprising a core superordinate ability and ancillary subordinate component abilities. After reviewing current approaches to the measurement of hypnotizability and componential approaches to other cognitive capabilities, we highlight outstanding questions in the field and argue for a componential approach to the study of hypnotizability. Such an approach assumes that hypnotizability is not a unitary construct but is rooted in multiple sub-abilities that interact to give rise to individual differences that are expressed within specific contexts. We revisit previous componential work on hypnotizability and propose a series of steps by which a componential model can be more rigorously interrogated and integrated with contemporary advances in our understanding of human cognition.

Pedunculopontine-induced cortical decoupling as the neurophysiological locus of dissociation.

“…Phenomenological, behavioral, cognitive, and developmental data suggests different modes of responding to verbal suggestions and dissimilar neurocognitive profiles of highly suggestible individuals (Terhune & Cardeña, 2015). One model attributes this heterogeneity to the interaction between a core latent trait of hypnotic suggestibility and ancillary componential traits that facilitate response to certain suggestions (Barnier et al, 2021; Woody et al, 2005). As in other research domains (Feczko et al, 2019), an alternative interpretation models heterogeneity by reference to a latent typology in which a dissociative subtype of highly suggestible individuals experiences suggestions through dissimilar mechanisms than a second nondissociative subtype (Barber, 1999; Carlson & Putnam, 1989).…”

Anxiety and Depression in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Perspectives on the Use of Hypnosis

“…Oftentimes, practitioners wonder whether a hypnotic intervention’s efficacy will be conditioned to the patients’ hypnotic suggestibility. While, indeed, hypnotizability is the main predictor of successful hypnotic responding in experimental hypnosis ( Barnier et al, 2021 ), suggestions posed in the context of medical treatments are generally easy to follow and do not demand a particularly high susceptibility (e.g., relaxation, searching for positive memories, and evoking mental imagery). Further, existing evidence has indicated that the success of hypnosis in the clinical milieu depends primarily on patient motivation and expectation ( Barber, 1980 ), even when treating psychological conditions as complex as anxiety and depression ( Yapko, 2001 ).…”

The case for clinical hypnosis: Theory and research-based do’s and don’ts for clinical practice.

“…It is important to recognize that clients who pass some suggestions (e.g., relaxation) may not pass others (e.g., for arm levitation), as hypnotic responsiveness involves multiple abilities (Barnier, Terhune, Polito, & Woody, 2020). For example, imaginative abilities come into play for an arm levitation suggestion with balloon imagery, whereas the ability to alter sensations or dissociate sensory and affective components of sensations appear especially relevant to modifying responses to pain (see Rainville, Carrier, Hofbauer, Bushnell, & Duncan, 1999).…”