Attempting to breach posthypnotic amnesia.

Abstract

Traditionally, posthypnotic amnesia has been construed as a subjectively compelling deficit in memory retrieval. Alternatively, it may represent a motivated failure to utilize appropriate retrieval cues, lack of effort in recall, active suppression of memory, or unwillingness to verbalize the critical material. In an effort to test the alternative hypothesis of amnesia, 488 subjects were presented with four kinds of instructions designed to overcome the effects of suggested posthypnotic amnesia. The instructions particularly affected subjects of low and moderate hypnotizability who failed the criterion for amnesia. For those of moderate and high hypnotizability who met the criterion for amnesia, however, explicit requests for temporal organization, exhortations to maximize recall, and demands for honesty in reporting produced no greater effect on memory than did a simple retest. These results place some boundaries on both the traditional and alternative views of posthypnotic amnesia and invite further exploration of both cognitive and contextual models of the phenomenon.

Using hypnosis to disrupt face processing: mirrored-self misidentification delusion and different visual media

“…However, the fact that some highs breached the delusion is consistent with previous research, which found that directly challenging the hypnotic delusion with confronting evidence led some participants to breach the delusion and report seeing themselves in the mirror (Connors et al, 2012a). The finding is also consistent with research that has found that a proportion of highs experiencing a hypnotic delusion (Noble and McConkey, 1995; Cox and Barnier, 2009) or posthypnotic amnesia (Kihlstrom et al, 1980; McConkey and Sheehan, 1981; Coe, 1989; Coe and Sluis, 1989) breach their experience in response to challenges. Hypnotic effects require participants to resolve the conflict between objective reality and the suggested experience (McConkey, 1983; Mallard and Bryant, 2006).…”

Hypnotic Conflict: A Brief Report

“…Hypnosis researchers have manipulated conflict by varying the information that contradicts the hypnotic suggestion. For example, previous research has manipulated the salience of the reality information (Bryant & McConkey, 1989), modified the hypnotist's communication to highlight the conflict (McConkey, 1983b;Zamansky, 1977), and administered "countersuggestions" while participants attempted to respond to a hypnotic suggestion (Kihlstrom, Evans, Orne, & Orne, 1980;Zamansky). Overall, this research demonstrates that hypnotic participants maintain a commitment to the most salient message from the hypnotist, despite conflicting information or suggestions.…”

Modern Trends in Hypnosis

“…While imaginings may legitimate and reinforce the interpretation of effortless responding, they are not a direct cause of actions during hypnosis. Finally, and Kihlstrom et al, (1980) have advocated the position that hypnotizable subjects actually do lose conscious control over their behavior because control over movements may be dissociated from normal consciousness during hypnosis. Reports of nonvolition, then, accurately reflect the fact that behavior normally under conscious control is no longer under such control.…”