The hidden observer: a straw horse, undeservedly flogged

Abstract

The 'hidden observer' experiment by Green, Page, Handley and Rasekhy is criticized on methodological grounds, especially the inadequate screening of subjects and departure from the canonical principles of both Hilgard's 'hidden observer' technique and Orne's real-simulator design. We also highlight some results of the experiment which appear to undercut the investigators' conclusions -especially the fact that reals and simulators differed markedly in their response to the critical Less Aware instruction. Our principal criticism, however, is conceptual: it is the very nature of hypnosis that the hypnotic subject's behaviours and experiences will be influenced by the wording of suggestions and subjects' interpretations of them. Accordingly, evidence that covert reports are influenced by the wording of suggestions is not evidence that the hidden observer is a methodological artifact, or that it is not a reflection of divided consciousness. Copyright

The province of “highs”: The high hypnotizable person in the science of hypnosis and in psychological science.

“…R. Hilgard, 1979, 1991, 1992). It also motivated multiple series of experiments by Hilgard, his collaborators and others, which often focused on the most talented hypnotic subjects (e.g., Laurence, Nadon, Nogrady, & Perry, 1986; Nogrady, McConkey, Laurence, & Perry, 1983), as well as ongoing discussions about the validity of the phenomenon and its implication for understanding hypnosis (e.g., Kihlstrom & Barnier, 2005; Lynn, 2005).…”

“…Although only "a small fraction of the very highly responsive hypnotic subjects" that E. R. Hilgard (1992, p. 77) tested in his laboratory showed the hidden observer phenomenon, his discovery, mapping, and extension of it (especially to hidden observer reports of pain; e.g., E. R. Hilgard, Morgan, & McDonald, 1975) strongly influenced Hilgard's theorizing about the dissociative basis of hypnotic experience (E. R. Hilgard, 1979Hilgard, , 1991Hilgard, , 1992. It also motivated multiple series of experiments by Hilgard, his collaborators and others, which often focused on the most talented hypnotic subjects (e.g., Laurence, Nadon, Nogrady, & Perry, 1986;Nogrady, McConkey, Laurence, & Perry, 1983), as well as ongoing discussions about the validity of the phenomenon and its implication for understanding hypnosis (e.g., Kihlstrom & Barnier, 2005;Lynn, 2005).…”