Cognitive simulation along with neural adaptation explain effects of suggestions: a novel theoretical framework

Abstract

Hypnosis is an effective intervention with proven efficacy that is employed in clinical settings and for investigating various cognitive processes. Despite their practical success, no consensus exists regarding the mechanisms underlying well-established hypnotic phenomena. Here, we suggest a new framework called the Simulation-Adaptation Theory of Hypnosis (SATH). SATH expands the predictive coding framework by focusing on (a) redundancy elimination in generative models using intrinsically generated prediction errors, (b) adaptation due to amplified or prolonged neural activity, and (c) using internally generated predictions as a venue for learning new associations. The core of our treatise is that simulating proprioceptive, interoceptive, and exteroceptive signals, along with the top-down attenuation of the precision of sensory prediction errors due to neural adaptation, can explain objective and subjective hypnotic phenomena. Based on these postulations, we offer mechanistic explanations for critical categories of direct verbal suggestions, including (1) direct-ideomotor, (2) challenge-ideomotor, (3) perceptual, and (4) cognitive suggestions. Notably, we argue that besides explaining objective responses, SATH accounts for the subjective effects of suggestions, i.e., the change in the sense of agency and reality. Finally, we discuss individual differences in hypnotizability and how SATH accommodates them. We believe that SATH is exhaustive and parsimonious in its scope, can explain a wide range of hypnotic phenomena without contradiction, and provides a host of testable predictions for future research.

Differential effects of hypnotherapy and cognitive behavioral therapy on the default mode network of depressed patients

“…Further, it is crucial to point out, that hypnosis cannot only be understood as a distinct and separate state of consciousness, as defined by some authors ( Spiegel and Moore, 1997 ). Rather, there are many factors that relate to hypnosis and a person’s response to it ( Jensen et al, 2015 ; Geagea et al, 2024 ) as well as different mechanisms that a person’s response to hypnosis is based on Zahedi et al (2024) . It is very likely that these different mechanisms and factors moderate or mediate the neurophysiological effect of hypnosis and this might also explain (some of) the heterogeneity of results concerning the effect of hypnosis on the DMN (regarding the direction of FC change within the DMN as well as which part of the DMN is involved).…”

“…However, the way they responded to the therapy, the formal trances as well as the informal suggestions, metaphors etc., might have differed greatly. Biological, cognitive, and social factors ( Jensen et al, 2015 ) as well as the underlying mechanisms ( Zahedi et al, 2024 ) might have affected the patient’s response to the therapy and thus the amount and the direction of change of related DMN activity. Klicken oder tippen Sie hier, um Text einzugeben.…”