An Experimental Comparison of Direct and Ericksonian Hypnotic Induction Procedures and the Relationship to Secondary Suggestibility

Woolson, Donald A.

doi:10.1080/00029157.1986.10402674

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The fact that both inductions produced similar correlations between SHSS:A scores and depth ratings is further evidence for their similar efficacy. These results are similar to those of studies employing other induction techniques (e.g., Lynn, et aI., 1987;Spanos, et aI., 1986;Woolson, 1986).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 90%

“…46 many of which are standardized, facilitating their use in research. Some recent studies have compared inductions for their effects on susceptibility scores (e.g., Lynn, Neufeld, & Matyi, 1987;Spanos, Lush, Smith, & de Groh, 1986;Woolson, 1986), finding little or no induction-induced differences in scores as measured by the standard objective scale items. In the present study we tested a recently standardized Chiasson (1973) induction technique (Page & Handley, 1987) for its relative efficacy in inducing hypnosis as measured by the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form A (SHSS:A) of Weitzenhoffer and Hilgard (1959).…”

Section: A Comparison Of the Effects Of Standardized Chiasson And Eyementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Comparison of the Effects of Standardized Chiasson and Eye-Closure Inductions on Susceptibility Scores

Page

Handley²

1991

American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerous induction techniques have been described in the literature, many of which are standardized, facilitating their use in research. Recent studies have compared inductions for their effects on susceptibility scores (e.g., Spanos, Lush, Smith, & de Groh, 1986; Woolson, 1986), finding little or no differences. In the present study we tested a Chiasson (1973) induction technique (recently standardized) for its relative efficacy at inducing hypnosis as measured by the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form A (SHSS:A) of Weitzenhoffer and Hilgard (1959). Subjects were 80 volunteer undergraduates at a midwestern university. We administered the SHSS:A using its standard eye-closure induction to half of the subjects; half were given the SHSS:A using the Chiasson induction. Following dehypnosis, all subjects gave a subjective rating of their depth. The results indicated that the two standard inductions have a comparable effectiveness as measured by susceptibility scores and subjective depth ratings.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: A Comparison Of the Effects Of Standardized Chiasson And Eyementioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of the Effects of Standardized Chiasson and Eye-Closure Inductions on Susceptibility Scores

Page

Handley²

1991

American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The Use of Indirect Hypnotic Suggestions for Insomnia Arising from Generalized Anxiety: A Case Report

Cochrane¹

1989

American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This case report concerns an aggressive, independent, and financially successful businessman who suffered with insomnia within the context of generalized anxiety disorder. The hypnotherapy included indirect suggestions for the insomnia delivered through the vehicle of metaphorical stories designed as an indirect intervention for the generalized anxiety. The client's perception of the problem was clarified and respected, but the choice of intervention strategy was designed to indirectly suggest more global changes. The creative changes made by the client were positive and enduring at 2-year follow-up.

show abstract

Direct Versus Indirect Suggestions: A Conceptual and Methodological Review

Lynn

Neufeld

Maré

1993

International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article reviews the literature on the effects of direct versus indirect hypnotic suggestions. A conceptual and methodological analysis of direct versus indirect suggestions is also provided. Three conclusions follow from the review: (a) Contrary to views of Ericksonian hypnotists, suggestion style has little effect on objective responding to hypnotic test items; (b) studies of clinical- and laboratory-induced pain and other measures of subjective experience have yielded contradictory results--however, the best controlled studies have not indicated that indirect suggestions are superior to direct suggestions; and (c) there is insufficient evidence to conclude that hypnotizability level and suggestion wording interact, such that low hypnotizable subjects are particularly responsive to indirect suggestions. Methodological and conceptual problems in defining and studying hypnotic communications, the lack of rigorous experimental controls, and research issues and directions are highlighted.

show abstract

An Experimental Comparison of Direct and Ericksonian Hypnotic Induction Procedures and the Relationship to Secondary Suggestibility

Cited by 3 publications

References 6 publications

A Comparison of the Effects of Standardized Chiasson and Eye-Closure Inductions on Susceptibility Scores

A Comparison of the Effects of Standardized Chiasson and Eye-Closure Inductions on Susceptibility Scores

The Use of Indirect Hypnotic Suggestions for Insomnia Arising from Generalized Anxiety: A Case Report

Direct Versus Indirect Suggestions: A Conceptual and Methodological Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About