Norms on the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A

Shor, Ronald E.; Orne, Emily Carota

doi:10.1080/00207146308409226

Cited by 225 publications

(107 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A total of 160 psychology students (102 female, 58 male) volunteered to have their hypnotizability measured using a Danish translation of the Har vard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A [26]. The mean score for this group was 7.75, com pared to the mean score of 7.39 reported by Shor and Orne [27], Fifteen high hypnotizable (5 male, 10 female) and low hypnotizable subjects (4 male, 11 female) were randomly assigned to (1) a guided image ry group; (2) a relaxation group, and (3) a control group. The bias in number of females versus males occurred due to the larger number of female volunteers and the higher priority given to hypnotic susceptibility than gender as selection criterion.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 82%

Changes in Cellular Immune Function after Immune Specific Guided Imagery and Relaxation in High and Low Hypnotizable Healthy Subjects

Zachariae

Hansen

Andersen

et al. 1994

Psychother Psychosom

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents the results of two investigations, each measuring cellular immune function on 3 investigation days 1 week apart in 15 high and 15 low hypnotizable healthy subjects randomly selected for three groups: (1) a guided imagery group receiving instructions to enhance cellular immune function: (2) a relaxation group which did not receive instructions regarding the immune system, and (3) a control group. Study 1 investigated changes in monocyte chemotaxis (MC) and lymphocyte proliferative response (LPR) to three mitogens, while natural killer cell activity (NKCA) was measured in study 2. The results show similar patterns of brief decreases in LPR and NKCA immediately after intervention on all investigation days in both the imagery and relaxation groups. Increases in MC were found in both intervention groups on day 1. On a follow-up investigation day in study 2, a brief stress task yielded a slight increase in NKCA. In study 2, the control group showed decreases in NKCA similar to those observed in the two intervention groups. In general there were no significant changes in preintervention immune function throughout the investigation period. When comparing the effects in high and low hypnotizable subjects, we found that high hypnotizables showed greater decreases in LPR and NKCA than low hypnotizables. There are several inconsistencies between the results of the limited number of investigations studying the effects of guided imagery and relaxation on immune function. These differences may in part be explained by differences in methodology, time intervals between blood sampling, and subject characteristics such as age, health status and hypnotizability. The inconsistent results make it premature to make inferences about possible benefits of the application of these techniques in the treatment of immune related diseases, and further investigations are needed.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 82%

Changes in Cellular Immune Function after Immune Specific Guided Imagery and Relaxation in High and Low Hypnotizable Healthy Subjects

Zachariae

Hansen

Andersen

et al. 1994

Psychother Psychosom

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since the HGSHS has been developed from the SHSS, both scales are very similar (Shor and Orne, 1963). Nevertheless, we had to modify the HGSHS:A as well: item numbers 5 and 7 of the original version, consisting of a finger lock and hands moving were removed because they were not feasible due to the derivation of physiological parameters; the hallucination of a flying mosquito was changed into the hallucination of a fly for our degrees of latitude and the eye catalepsy preceded this item.…”

Section: Measuring Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An investigation of the factor structure of the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A (HGSHS:A)

Piesbergen

Peter²

2006

Contemporary Hypnosis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to investigate the effects of the hypnotic state a standardized hypnosis session was conducted with 144 subjects in a controlled laboratory study. The induction of a hypnotic trance in the German version of the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility (HGSHS:A by Shor and Orne, 1962) was tape-recorded and used as the treatment. The HGSHS:A seems to be a reliable measure of suggestibility and hypnotizability. This is underlined by the consistent results of a factor analysis on the depths of hypnosis that is in agreement with former studies. Descriptive data analyses with a sufficient number of subjects of high and low suggestibility suggest that our hypnosis induction by tape is an effective method of producing a hypnotic trance. Analyses of within-subjects variables did not reveal any valid predictors of hypnotizability, thereby confirming the need of screening instruments such as the HGSHS.

show abstract

“…Original norms were set in the United States (Shor & Orne, 1963), followed by normative data of the Hungarian (published hitherto only in Hungarian, by Greguss, Bányai, Mészáros, Csókay, & Gerber, 1975), Australian (Sheehan & McConkey, 1979), Canadian (Montréal; Laurence & Perry, 1982), German (Bongartz, 1985), Spanish (Lamas, del Valle-Inclan, Blanco, & Diaz, 1989), Danish (Zachariae, Sommerlund, & Molay, 1996), Finnish (Kallio & Ihamuotila, 1999), Italian (De Pascalis, Russo, & Marucci, 2000), Romanian (David, Montgomery, & Holdevici, 2003), Swedish (Bergman, Trenter, & Kallio, 2003), Israeli (Lichtenberg, 2008), Polish (Siuta, 2010), and Portuguese (Carvalho, 2013) versions. In spite of the apparent cultural differences, normative data are quite similar in their psychometric properties.…”

Section: Please Scroll Down For Articlementioning

confidence: 99%