Occurrence of posthypnotic behavior outside the experimental setting.

Abstract

17 excellent hypnotic Ss were asked to participate in a 2-day experiment which would involve many personality tests. On the 1st day Ss were given the suggestion that for the next 48 hr. they were to respond by touching their forehead each time they heard the word "experiment." The E tested the suggestion in the experimental setting, but unbeknownst to the Ss the critical test came in the waiting room: the secretary-receptionist tested Ss as they were leaving the building on the 1st day and again as they arrived on the following day. A quasi-control group simulating hypnosis was used to evaluate whether E may have unwittingly cued the Ss to respond outside of the experimental setting. The E was blind as to which Ss were excellent hypnotic Ss and which were essentially unhypnotizable simulators. Results showed that $ hypnotic Ss responded consistently away from E; no simulating S showed comparable posthypnotic behavior (Fisher exact test, p < .OS). Consistent posthypnotic response outside of the experimental setting was related to the level of hypnosis S achieved at the time the posthypnotic suggestion was administered.

A methodological analysis of the simulating technique

“…It has been well documented that simulators respond to their perception of the nature of experimental conditions and the behavior that those conditions imply. For example, in a study of posthypnotic behavior (Orne, Sheehan, & Evans, 1968), simulators responded significantly more often than hypnotic Ss to an informal test of a posthypnotic suggestion. Little evidence, however, bears on the assertion that simulators are sensitive to contextual features such as the order of testing.…”

A study of the effects of demand characteristics on college students' study behavior

“…Those similarities include observer blinds, control groups that differ from the experimental only on some form of demand The data of this project seem to agree in general with the results of Orne's (1959Orne's ( , 1968and Orne & Evans, 1965) (Nixon, 1965) utilizing an appropriate control group fails to provide evidence for the efficacy of conditioning or modeling and conditioning techniques to improve study behavior.…”

“…Orne (1959Orne ( , 1968 and Orne and Evans (1965) (1966,1968). That study, reviewed above, suggests that such variables might be well utilized in applied settings to modify behavior.…”

Hypnosis Research: A Methodological Critique of Experiments Generated by Two Alternative Paradigms

“…I n more recent experiments, Orne and his associates (Orne & Evans, 1966 Sheehan, & Evans, 1968;Sheehan, 1969) have been concerned with further differences between the performance of hypnotic and simulating subjects. These experiments have carefully specified dependent measures and experimental contingencies.…”

“…The most important experimental work carried out by Orne and his associates (Evans & Thorn, 1966;Orne, 1959;Orne & Evans, 1966;Orne, Sheehan & Evans, 1968;Sheehan, 1969) has attempted to delineate the essential characteristics of the trance state. These investigators contend that behavioral changes observed subsequent to hypnotic induction procedures are a function not only of the trance state, but also of the "demand characteristics" associated with the hypnotic situation.…”