HOME QUESTIONS The ADVANCED: Q9

Q9. State two major theories of hypnosis. Outline and briefly discuss. Using the Harvard citation method detail how you discovered this information. Learning outcomes: 2.1, 3.3

2. Theory and its application

2.1 Knowledge of the various theories on the nature of hypnosis.

3. Academic thinking and argumentation

3.3 An ability to reference other authors' work properly, e.g. in 'Harvard' and 'footnote' formats.

EXAMPLE ANSWER AND ASSISTANCE

Q9

Note length of required answer and learning outcome

State 2 theories, outline & briefly discuss (therefore shorter answer required)

Give appropriate citation reference

Example Answer from student, “The “Neodissociation theory” (Hilgard,1974) and the “Socio-cognitive theory” (Spanos, 1986) are two competing theories regarding the phenomena of hypnosis.

Neodissociation is a “State” theory, that is to say that the hypnotized person is thus in an altered state of mind. The hypnotists’ suggestions act upon the dissociated part of the “Executive Control System” which is shielded from the rest of the mind by an “amnesic barrier”. Therefore the subject can be aware of the results of the given suggestions, but remain unaware as to how they were achieved. Hilgards theory arose from his experiments into the “hidden observer” phenomenon whereby a “hidden” part of the mind can be accessed to report on experiences that the subject is not aware of. This concept of conscious and unconscious executive control systems exhibited in hypnosis is controversial. (e.g Heap et al , 2004: Kirsch & Lynn, 1998)

Spanos’ “Socio-cognitive” theory would appear to be the polar opposite of dissociation, in that it is a “Non-state” theory. It argues that subjects actively participate in the process, and that any phenomena of involuntary experience is actually the result of normal psychological processes such as beliefs, expectancies and motivation. (Spanos et al , 1980) That is not to say that the client is deliberately deceiving the hypnotist, or pretending to be affected when they are not. Rather, their acceptance of a phenomena or particular result actually causes said results to be manifested.”

Q9. Correct, You have read the question well and I like the way you compared the two models that you have chosen. You have a good understanding of these models and have presented them clearly and succinctly. The only point to be aware of in future is that of a full stop in certain of the citations, where necessary, the following format applies et al., as in Heap et al., rather than Heap et al , 2004.  

Example Student Answer:  Simplifying the definition of hypnosis into a single sentence: ‘A relaxed state of focussed concentration’ may be enough to appease a nervous client who fears being made to behave like the stereotypical chicken under some kind of magic spell, does not simplify the actual theorists who have done their best to explain the phenomenon of hypnosis.

There are a few camps that one could be a part of in defining hypnosis and I have chosen to concentrate on ‘state’ and ‘non-state’ theories.

Perhaps the grand master of state theories is Hilgard himself, with his ‘Neodissociation theory’ (Hilgard, 1977, 1986, 1994). According to this theory, the human being is existing with ‘multiple cognitive systems or cognitive structures which exist in hierarchical arrangement under some kind of control by an executive ego’ (Steven Jay Lynn , Irving Kirsch, 2005). This controller oversees the various functioning parts of the system and makes decisions, plans and controls the functions of the personality. Therefore, during hypnosis the relevant parts or ‘subsystems’ are temporarily dissociated and relinquish control whilst the hypnotherapist offers suggestions and directly activates these subsystems to behave or think in a different way.

This is explained by Hilgard as the ‘Hidden Observer’, a metaphor that Hilgard explains as a part of the consciousness that absorbs, processes and stores information without the subject being aware of it. Through experimentation with pain and analgesia, Hilgard was able to access this ‘hidden observer’ who could ‘remember’ pain even though the part of the person who was responsible for feeling the pain was ‘switched off’ through hypnosis. In this same way, Hilgard suggested that hypnotic blindness, deafness and hypnotic hallucinations can be penetrated by this hidden observer. Therefore a suggestion of deafness to a certain sound can be activated and the client would not ‘hear’ the sound after the suggestion by the hypnotist, but the hidden observer could be accessed and would be able to hear it. This idea of a controller, or hidden observer is controversial and directly opposed by Spanos et al, who are in favour of the sociocognitive perspective which rejects the idea that the hidden observer simply ‘exists’ in favour of the theory that the hidden observer is dependent on cues and suggestions given by the hypnotist, either implicitly or explicitly, and is therefore no different to any other suggested hypnotic phenomenon which are shaped and created by what the client believes they are ‘supposed’ to be experiencing- demand characteristics: the clients experience being a result of what the client expects to experience in line with what the therapist expects to dictate.

Sarbin and Coe’s theory challenges the typical concept of hypnosis being a special ‘state’, instead suggesting that the client therapist relationship is a series of unvoiced ‘scripts’ (Sarbin, 1997) and a role play between the therapist and the client, acting out what is expected of them in that situation. Within this role play, the client is guided by what they know and learn about what is expected of them and the therapeutic outcome is constructed through dramatization and imaginings dependent on how the client perceives their role in the relationship. Spanos and his colleagues (1986, 1991, Spanos and Chaves 1989) have researched this theory and have expressed the importance of the psychological processes; expectancies, attributions and interpretations of the hypnotist/client relationship (Steven Jay Lynn , Irving Kirsch, 2005). Spanos describes the involuntariness of the reaction to hypnotic suggestion as a “goal directed fantasy” (GDF) or “imagined situations which, if they were to occur would be expected to lead to the involuntary occurrence of the motor response” (Spanos, Rivers and Ross, 1997) for example, the levitation of an arm or closing of eyelids, or movement of finger in response to a question or suggestion.

Both of these theories have their merits and either or both could be accurate. Whilst state theory suggests that the client is not in conscious control and the suggestions of the hypnotist are directly internalised and involuntarily recreated, Spanos et al and their non-state theory are not suggesting that the client is deceiving or misleading the therapist by acting ‘as if’ it were ‘real’, rather that there are certain roles that are undertaken in every situation including that relationship between a client and a hypnotist. Either way the desired outcome can be achieved.

Correct. A comprehensive answer clearly defining the different models, giving proper citations as required, thank you. 

Example Student Answer:  The big debate in the field of hypnosis is ‘state’ vs ‘non-state’. There are many differences in the theories, which make up the debate. State theorists believe that hypnosis is an altered state of consciousness, maybe a mystical state which the hypnotist ‘does’ to the person. On the flip side, non-state theorists believe that normal human psychological processes are capable of responding to suggestion within normal human functions, therefore, the results experienced in hypnosis can be achieved without the ‘hypnotic trance’. (Eason, A. 2009).

Kirsch’s Response Expectancy Theory (Kirsch, 1985) is a non-state theory, based upon the belief that we produce an expected outcome through our behaviour. It can be described as a ‘placebo effect’ where the person believes that the suggestions given to them during hypnosis will bring changes in their behaviour to reach the desired outcome. Kirsch and Lynn (1977) argue that during the hypnosis setting, the person believes in the hypnotist’s suggestions and accepts that they will involuntarily change their behaviours, following the hypnotist’s instructions, as a result, reaching the desired outcome. They believe that as our expectation of experience greatly affects our actual experience, the subjects went on to change their behaviour in ways, which achieved the desired outcome. Although the subjects would experience these as being involuntary, and are likely to believe that the changes were as a result of the hypnosis, Kirsch argues that instead, the changes would have been initiated by the same means as voluntary responses but experienced in a different way.

Hilgard’s Neodissociation Theory (Hilgard, 1979,1986) is a classic state theory. Neodissociation is based upon the belief that the ‘hypnotic trance’ is a result of a dissociation within the executive control system, part of which is said to function normally but an ‘amnesic barrier’ means that it is unable to present itself in conscious awareness, therefore, the subject is experiencing an altered state of mind. According to this theory, the subject has an awareness of their present reality during the hypnosis situation, whilst also believing in the reality of the hypnotic suggestions being offered to them by the hypnotist.

Hilgard’s theory emerged from his experiments with the ‘hidden observer’. He found that during the ‘hypnotic trance’, a hidden part of the mind could be accessed, with information being obtained regarding experiences, which the subject is not consciously aware of.

State theorists will working the way [find a way?] of ensuring that the subject is ‘in an hypnotic’ trance, or state, so they will be checking for formal levels of trance, probably in a traditional setting, such as the client sitting in a chair or lying down.

Non-state theorists may work differently in that they believe that hypnotherapy doesn’t require a specific ‘state’ to be achieved for hypnosis to take place. For example, they may work with a client who is concentrating on something, or in deep thought about something. They will then begin to use suggestions as the client is relaxed, yet focussed.

References: Eason, A. 2009. Adam Eason School of Hypnotherapy and Hypnosis [Online]. Available at: www.adam-eason.com/2009/10/14/the-big-hypnosis-debate-state-or-nonstate/ [Accessed:27^th April 2015]

Correct. This is a very clear answer with good comparisons between Kirsch and Hilgard. A comprehensive answer clearly defining the different models, giving proper citations as required, thank you.