Attributions, Involuntariness, and Hypnotic Rapport

Lynn, Steven Jay; Snodgrass, Michael; Rhue, Judith W.; Nash, Michael R.; Frauman, David C.

doi:10.1080/00029157.1987.10402720

Cited by 17 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In keeping with the hypothesis that involuntariness reports are associated with occurrence schemata, research has shown that subjects' ratings of involuntariness are associated with the belief that their hypnotic behavior is a function of the hypnotist's ability and effort (Lynn, Snodgrass, Hardaway, & Lenz, 1984;Lynn, Snodgrass, Rhue, Nash, & Frauman, 1987). In one study (Lynn, Snodgrass, Rhue, Nash, & Frauman, 1987), subjects' posthypnotic attributions of response causality to the hypnotist's ability and effort were found to be associated with posthypnotic ratings of involuntariness. In a second study (Lynn, Snodgrass, Hardaway, & Lenz, 1984), subjects' prehyp-This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.…”

Section: Situational Representationsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Hypnotic involuntariness: A social cognitive analysis.

Lynn¹,

Rhue²,

Weekes³

1990

Psychological Review

Self Cite

142

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The experience of involuntariness is a hallmark of hypnosis. A framework for understanding involuntary experiences that draws from social psychological and cognitive perspectives on hypnotic responding is presented. There are at least 5 reasons to reject the hypothesis that hypnotic responding is automatic and involuntary: (a) Hypnotic responses have all of the properties of behavior that is typically defined as voluntary. That is, they are purposeful, directed toward goals, regulated in terms of subjects' intentions, and can be progressively changed to better achieve subjects' goals, (b) Hypnotizable subjects can resist suggestions when resistance is denned as consistent with the role of a good hypnotized subject, (c) Hypnotic behaviors are neither reflexes nor manifestations of innate stimulus-response connections, (d) Hypnotic performances consume attentional resources in a manner comparable with nonhypnotic performances, (e) Hypnotic subjects' cognitive activities clearly demonstrate their active attempts to fulfill the requirements of hypnotic suggestions, which include experiencing suggestion-related effects as involuntary.

show abstract

Section: Situational Representationsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Hypnotic involuntariness: A social cognitive analysis.

Lynn¹,

Rhue²,

Weekes³

1990

Psychological Review

Self Cite

142

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, certain characteristics of an experimenter or clinician might enable them to be more effective in administering suggestions, such as the ability to present oneself as a convincing authority (Woody & Szechtman, 2007), or the ability to develop rapport with a participant (Lynn, Snodgrass, Rhue, Nash, & Frauman, 1987). Still, these skills do not require extensive training.…”

Section: Myths and Misconceptions About Inducing Hypnosismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is occasionally anecdotally reported either that women or men are more effective hypnotists, although data indicate that hypnotic suggestibility is not related to a hypnotist's gender (Coe, 1976; Nash & Spinler, 1989). Nevertheless, certain characteristics of an experimenter or clinician might enable them to be more effective in administering suggestions, such as the ability to present oneself as a convincing authority (Woody & Szechtman, 2007), or the ability to develop rapport with a participant (Lynn, Snodgrass, Rhue, Nash, & Frauman, 1987). Still, these skills do not require extensive training.…”

Section: Myths and Misconceptions About Inducing Hypnosismentioning

confidence: 99%

Myths and misconceptions about hypnosis and suggestion: Separating fact and fiction

Lynn

Kirsch

Terhune

et al. 2020

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present 21 prominent myths and misconceptions about hypnosis in order to promulgate accurate information and to highlight questions for future research. We argue that these myths and misconceptions have (a) fostered a skewed and stereotyped view of hypnosis among the lay public, (b) discouraged participant involvement in potentially helpful hypnotic interventions, and (c) impeded the exploration and application of hypnosis in scientific and practitioner communities. Myths reviewed span the view that hypnosis produces a trance or special state of consciousness and allied myths on topics related to hypnotic interventions; hypnotic responsiveness and the modification of hypnotic suggestibility; inducing hypnosis; and hypnosis and memory, awareness, and the experience of nonvolition. By demarcating myth from mystery and fact from fiction, and by highlighting what is known as well as what remains to be discovered, the science and practice of hypnosis can be advanced and grounded on a firmer empirical footing.

show abstract

“…Furthermore several studies indicate that hypnotist/subject rapport influences hypnotic responding [18][19][20][21]. For instance, it was found in one study [6] that the degree of hypnotizability gain that followed CSTP administration was positively correlated with the degree of rapport reported by subjects toward their trainers.…”

mentioning

confidence: 93%

Rapport and Cognitive Skill Training in the Enhancement of Hypnotizability

Spaños

Flynn

Niles

1990

Imagination, Cognition and Personality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The role of interpersonal rapport in facilitating the enhancements in hypnotizability produced by cognitive skill training was examined in two experiments. In Experiment 1 low hypnotizable subjects either received skill training or passively oriented training that was designed to facilitate rapport with the trainer without teaching subjects how to generate the responses called for by test suggestions. Subjects in the two treatments reported equivalently high levels of rapport with their trainer, but only those given skill training attained large gains on two hypnotizability posttests. Subjects given passive training did not differ from untreated controls at posttesting. In Experiment 2 subjects received skill training under conditions designed to either heighten or minimize rapport with the trainer. Those in the high rapport condition showed large hypnotizability gains on both posttests, whereas those in the low rapport condition failed to differ from no treatment controls in this regard. Our findings indicate that high rapport is not sufficient for producing training-induced enhancements in hypnotizability. However, the absence of such rapport may interfere with subjects' learning and applying skills that can enhance hypnotizability.Hypnotizability test scores usually remain relatively stable even after long retest intervals, when no systematic attempts have been made to alter subjects hypnotic responsiveness [1] . Relatedly, numerous studies which attempted to enhance hypnotizability by training subjects in relaxation, meditation, or other procedures designed to alter consciousness usually produced only small and often nonsignificant increments in hypnotizability [see 2 for a review] . Taken together, these fmdings have led some investigators to conceptualize *

show abstract

Attributions, Involuntariness, and Hypnotic Rapport

Cited by 17 publications

References 20 publications

Hypnotic involuntariness: A social cognitive analysis.

Hypnotic involuntariness: A social cognitive analysis.

Myths and misconceptions about hypnosis and suggestion: Separating fact and fiction

Rapport and Cognitive Skill Training in the Enhancement of Hypnotizability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About