Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A

Shor, Ronald E.; Orne, Emily Carota

doi:10.1037/t02246-000

Cited by 481 publications

(597 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

586

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is noteworthy that suggestions comparable to those in the AG profile are not represented on the HGSHS:A (Shor & Orne, 1962), SHSS:C (Weitzenhoffer & Hilgard, 1962), or WSGC (Bowers, 1993; see also Moran, Kurtz, & Strube, 2002), the most commonly used measures of hypnotic suggestibility, whereas the latter two scales include two items that are equivalent to suggestions on the DR profile, which was here shown to lack discriminant validity. In addition to reinforcing the claim that the standard scales of hypnotic suggestibility are poorly suited to the task of delineating individual differences in high hypnotic suggestibility (Terhune, et al, 2011b;Terhune & Cohen Kadosh, 2012), these results further suggest that greater representation of agnosia and inhibitory cognitive suggestions in future measures of hypnotic suggestibility will optimize the measurement of response variegation in this population.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

Discrete response patterns in the upper range of hypnotic suggestibility: A latent profile analysis

Terhune

2015

Consciousness and Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

Discrete response patterns in the upper range of hypnotic suggestibility: A latent profile analysis

Terhune

2015

Consciousness and Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Thirty volunteers from the introductory psychology classes at Cleveland State University served as subjects. Prior to experimental participation, all subjects had participated in a masstesting session where the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A (Shor & Orne, 1962)was administered. Twenty subjects scored high (9-12) on the test, while IO subjects scored low (0-3).…”

Section: Experiments 1 Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Proprioception and the production of adaptation and intermanual transfer to prismatic displacement

Wallace

Fisher

1979

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Proprioceptive adaptation to prismatic displacement and resultant intermanual transfer were investigated in two experiments. In Experiment 1, magnitude of adaptation and transfer were assessed as a result of the reduction of felt sensation via hypnotic anesthesia in an adapting limb. Such anesthesia reduced the magnitude of adaptation in that limb and resultant transfer in the nonadapting limb to a nonsignificant level. Such was not the case when the adapting limb was nonanesthetic. In Experiment 2, adaptation and transfer magnitude were assessed as the result of anesthetic induction in a nonadapting limb. When this was the case, adaptation was produced in the adapting limb but not in the anesthetized, nonadapting limb. The results of the two experiments generally point to proprioception as being the major source of input to the production of intermanual transfer in a prismatic adaptation task. 113When subjects adapt to a prismatically displaced environment, a portion of the adaptation magnitude is represented by a component responsible for felt limb location or orientation (

show abstract

“…Participants were students at Macquarie University (in Sydney, Australia) and voluntarily participated in exchange for research credit. The students had been preselected on the basis of their scores on the 12-item Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A (HGSHS:A; Shor & Orne, 1962), and on a 10-item version of the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C (SHSS:C; Weitzenhoffer & Hilgard, 1962). Virtuosos scored 10-12 on the HGSHS:A (M = 10.78, SD = 0.73) and a perfect 10 on the SHSS: C; high-hypnotizable students scored 10-11 on the HGSHS:A (M = 10.39, SD = 0.50) and 8-9 on the SHSS:C (M = 8.67, SD = 0.49); and low-hypnotizable, simulating students scored 0-3 on the HGSHS:A (A/=2.22,S£> = 0.90)andO-3ontheSHSS:C(A/= 1.53, SD= 1.00).…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hypnotic sex change: Creating and challenging a delusion in the laboratory.

Noble¹,

McConkey²

1995

Journal of Abnormal Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The authors suggested a change of sex to virtuoso, high-hypnotizable, and low-hypnotizable simulating participants in an application of the real-simulating paradigm of hypnosis. The experiences of sex change that participants reported during hypnosis were challenged through procedures of contradiction and confrontation. Behavioral and self-report data indicated that virtuosos experienced a transient delusion about their sex that was compelling and resistant to challenge. Implications are discussed for investigations of delusion through the use of hypnosis in the laboratory and for understanding delusion in the clinical setting.

show abstract

Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A

Cited by 481 publications

References 0 publications

Discrete response patterns in the upper range of hypnotic suggestibility: A latent profile analysis

Discrete response patterns in the upper range of hypnotic suggestibility: A latent profile analysis

Proprioception and the production of adaptation and intermanual transfer to prismatic displacement

Hypnotic sex change: Creating and challenging a delusion in the laboratory.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About