Hypnotizability, Absorption, and Individual Differences in Phenomenological Experience

Kumar, V. K.; Pekala, Ronald J.

doi:10.1080/00207148808409332

Cited by 66 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Jean & Robertson, 1986). However, the nature of the absorption-hypnosis relationship is problematic (Council, Kirsch, & Hafner, 1986;Glisky, Tataryn, Tobias, Kihlstrom, & McConkey, 1991;Kumar & Pekala, 1988;Monteiro, Macdonald, & Hilgard, 1980;Nadon, Hoyt, Register, & Kihlstrom, 1991). Furthermore, a recent study looking at hypnotic underestimation of duration in terms of attentional allocation (St. Jean et al, 1994), while supporting the cognitive-timer model, has failed to show a distinction between hypnotic and nonhypnotic contextual effects on apparent duration.…”

Section: Attentional Deployment and Absorptionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Temporal Cognition and the Phenomenology of Time: A Multiplicative Function for Apparent Duration

Glicksohn

2001

Consciousness and Cognition

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Attentional Deployment and Absorptionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Temporal Cognition and the Phenomenology of Time: A Multiplicative Function for Apparent Duration

Glicksohn

2001

Consciousness and Cognition

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For instance, HS individuals reliably report greater magnitude alterations in a variety of experiential dimensions than their medium and low suggestible counterparts (Kumar & Pekala, 1988;. However, some studies have observed marked differences in this population (e.g., Barrett, 1996;Pekala & Kumar, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differential patterns of spontaneous experiential response to a hypnotic induction: A latent profile analysis

Terhune

Cardeña

2010

Consciousness and Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A hypnotic induction produces different patterns of spontaneous experiences across individuals. The magnitude and characteristics of these responses covary moderately with hypnotic suggestibility, but also differ within levels of hypnotic suggestibility. This study sought to identify discrete phenomenological profiles in response to a hypnotic induction and assess whether experiential variability among highly suggestible individuals matches the phenomenological profiles predicted by dissociative typological models of high hypnotic suggestibility. Phenomenological state scores indexed in reference to a resting epoch during hypnosis were submitted to a latent profile analysis. The profiles in the derived four-class solution differed in multiple experiential dimensions and hypnotic suggestibility. Highly suggestible individuals were distributed across two classes that exhibited response patterns suggesting an inward attention subtype and a dissociative subtype. These results provide support for dissociative typological models of high hypnotic suggestibility and indicate that highly suggestible individuals do not display a uniform response to a hypnotic induction.

show abstract

“…Kumar and Pekala (1988) reported that a hypnotic induction augmented initial phenomenological differences across groups, especially for those high in absorption and hypnotizability, showing a trait (absorption and hypnotizability) by procedure (hypnotic induction) interaction (see also Cardeña, 2011;Cardeña et al, 2013).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Hypnotizability, personality traits, and the propensity to experience alterations of consciousness.

Cardeña¹,

Terhune²

2014

Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How hypnotizability relates to personality traits other than absorption has received scant attention even though hypnotizability exhibits clear and stable individual differences. Two personality constructs particularly germane to hypnotizability are mental boundaries and self-transcendence, since they seem to index the propensity to experience alterations in consciousness. We conducted two studies to evaluate their relations with behavioral and experiential measures of hypnotizability, and absorption. In study 1 (N = 112 US participants), experiential, but not behavioral, measures of hypnotizability, correlated with the personal (e.g., porosity in interpersonal relations or in states of consciousness), but not the world (e.g., opinions of others), subscale of boundary thinness and with absorption. In Study 2 (N = 84 Swedish participants), self-transcendence as a whole, as well as two of its three subscales (self-forgetfulness and transpersonal identification) related to hypnotizability, especially as measured experientially.Absorption correlated with an index of experiential hypnotizability in both studies, but was not reliably related to behavioral hypnotizability. The results suggest that experiential hypnotizability is related to the propensity to experience alterations in consciousness characterized by boundarylessness, self-transcendence, and absorption. They also highlight the importance of supplementing behavioral indices of hypnotizability with experiential measures.

show abstract

Hypnotizability, Absorption, and Individual Differences in Phenomenological Experience

Cited by 66 publications

References 10 publications

Temporal Cognition and the Phenomenology of Time: A Multiplicative Function for Apparent Duration

Temporal Cognition and the Phenomenology of Time: A Multiplicative Function for Apparent Duration

Differential patterns of spontaneous experiential response to a hypnotic induction: A latent profile analysis

Hypnotizability, personality traits, and the propensity to experience alterations of consciousness.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About