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.
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.
