A Tribute to the Life and Work of Steven Jay Lynn (1946–2024): In Memoriam

Professor Steven Jay Lynn died in his home on March 29, 2024, after suffering from cancer. He is survived by his wife, Fern Pritikin Lynn; daughters Jessica Lynn Chao and Nicole Pritikin; and grandchildren Julian Lynn Chao, Tyler Thibodeau, and Angelaure Pierre. He is fondly remembered by countless students, numerous colleagues, and many friends.

Steve was born in Chicago, Illinois in 1946. He described his childhood in idyllic terms, experiencing unconditional love, warmth, and support from his family. Throughout his formative years, he was encouraged to study, work hard, be kind, and develop his talents to the best of his ability. His upbringing left an indelible stamp on his personality and helped forge his achievement orientation. Steve was amiable, considerate, compassionate, and loving. He possessed an insatiable desire to learn and discover new things. He was a prolific writer and world-class researcher. Critical thinking, empirical evidence, and logical analysis were foundational to his approach. He grounded his work in reasoned thought supported by empirical evidence. He tackled pseudoscience head on and challenged popular, yet unsupported claims. As detailed later, his list of publications and scholarly contributions is nothing short of incredible. In spite of his remarkable record, Steve was a humble man and generous with his time. He mentored, taught, and nurtured the careers of others. Steve was also a skilled clinician. He worked as a clinical psychologist and continued to see clients throughout his academic career. In sum, Steve positively impacted the lives of those around him, including his family, friends, colleagues, clients, and the numerous students that were privileged to study with and learn from him.

Steve earned his undergraduate degree from the University of Michigan in 1967, majoring in psychology with a minor in economics. Prior to earning his PhD in clinical psychology from Indiana University in 1976, Steve completed a predoctoral internship with Alameda County Mental Health Services in Oakland California and worked as a National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Postdoctoral Clinical Fellow at the Lafayette Clinic in Detroit, Michigan. Steve was an Adjunct Assistant Professor for one year at Wayne State University in Detroit as well.

He began his tenure track career in 1977 as an assistant professor at Ohio University in Athens, Ohio. He was tenured and promoted to full professor in 1986. Ten years later, Steve continued his professorship at Binghamton University (BU) where he worked until his death. At BU, Steve served as Director of Clinical Training and Director of the Psychological Clinic. Overlapping with his tenure at BU, Steve served for nearly two decades as a member of the faculty of the International Institute for the Advanced Studies of Psychotherapy and Applied Mental Health, Babes-Bolyai University, in Cluj-Napoca, Transylvania-Romania. Steve also served as a Visiting Professor at Maastricht University in the Netherlands in 2010. That same year, Steve was named a Distinguished Professor at BU, an accolade reserved for individuals with an extraordinary record of scholarship, distinguished reputation, and international prominence.

Steve’s list of honors and awards is extensive. The few examples listed below illustrate his international reach, impact across multiple professional societies, and breadth of knowledge.

• 2020 Richard C. Atkinson Lifetime Achievement Award, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University.

• 2022 Winner of the Australia Educational Publishing Award for teaching and learning resource: Digital Update—Psychology: From Inquiry to Understanding (Lilienfeld et al., 2022).

• ranked 49^th on a list of Top Producers of Scholarly Publications in Clinical Psychology Ph.D. Programs across the 5-year period of 2000–2004 (Stewart et al., 2007).

• Oxford Scholastica Academy (2024) ranked his coauthored book 50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology: Shattering widespread misconceptions about human behavior (Lilienfeld et al., 2010) #4 on their list of Top 10 Psychology Books Everyone Should Read.

• Earned multiple Arthur Shapiro Awards for the Best Books in Hypnosis from the Society of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis: Theories of Hypnosis: Current Models and Perspectives (S. J. Lynn & Rhue, 1991a); Handbook of Clinical Hypnosis (Rhue et al., 1993) [title was also selected as a top health science book by Doody’s Annual Review (Doody, 1994]); Dissociation: Clinical and theoretical perspectives (S. J. Lynn & Rhue, 1994); Casebook of Clinical Hypnosis (S. J. Lynn et al., 1996); Cognitive-behavioral Therapy, Mindfulness, and Hypnosis for Smoking Cessation: A Scientifically Informed Intervention (Green & Lynn, 2019).

• 2019 Award for an Important Contribution to Scientific and Professional Psychology, Babes-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca.

• Received the Distinguished Contributions to Scientific Hypnosis (2002) and the Distinguished Contributions to Professional Hypnosis (2007) awards from the American Psychological Association, Division 30 (Society of Psychological Hypnosis).

• 2003 Chancellor’s Award of the State University of New York, and University Award for Excellence in Scholarship and Creative Activities.

• Milton H. Erickson Award for Scientific Excellence (1995) and Clark L. Hull Award (2014) for scientific excellence in writing on experimental hypnosis (American Society of Clinical Hypnosis).

Steve was a Fellow of the American Psychological Association (APA); American Association for Applied and Preventive Psychology; American Academy of Forensic Psychology; Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis; and the American Academy of Clinical Psychology. He was a Charter Fellow of the American Psychological Society and a honorary member of the Association for the Advancement of Experimental and Applied Hypnosis, Spain.

From 1989–1990, Steve served as president of the APA, Division 30 (Society of Psychological Hypnosis). He held diplomate status in clinical psychology, forensic psychology, and psychological hypnosis from the American Board of Professional Psychology (ABBP) and the American Board of Psychological Hypnosis (ABPH). He was the founding editor of Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice (PC:TRP), serving as editor from 2013 until 2020. He served on various editorial boards of scientific journals, including: American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis (AJCH); Behavioral and Brain Sciences; Clinical Psychological Science; Contemporary Hypnosis and Integrative Medicine (CHIM); Current Thinking and Research in Brief Therapy: Solutions, Strategies, and Narratives; Imagination, Cognition and Personality; International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis (IJCEH); Journal of Abnormal Psychology; Journal of Anomalous Experience and Cognition; Journal of Cultic Studies: Psychological Manipulation and Society; Journal of Evidence-Based Psychotherapies; Journal of Mind-Behavior Regulation; Journal of Threat Assessment; Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice; Open Access Journal of Forensic Psychology; and, Sleep and Hypnosis: A Journal of Clinical Neuroscience and Psychopathology. In addition, he served as a consultant to Consumer Reports: On Health (from 2004 until 2009), and served as guest editor for a number of special issues in the IJCEH, AJCH, CHIM, PC:TRP, Clinical Psychological Science, Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Science, and Current Directions in Psychological Science. He also was a book series editor for APA and Wiley Blackwell.

Steve’s expertise on hypnosis and memory unfurled into the forensic area and he served as an expert witness within the judicial system (e.g., S. J. Lynn, Lemons, et al., 2015; J. Lynn et al., 2001). He was a consultant on an amicus brief to the Supreme Court of the United States, warning the court about the dangers of hypnotically elicited testimony and addressing procedural guidelines pertaining to the use of hypnosis by police departments and investigators. His efforts were instrumental in the State of New Jersey overturning an earlier decision permitting hypnotically elicited testimony, resulting in the state instituting a per se ban on such testimony. Relatedly, his expertise was foundational to the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision to ban hypnotically elicited testimony.

Steve published over 450 articles, 22 books, 25 encyclopedia entries, and scores of chapters. He had four books under contract at the time of his death. According to Google Scholar, Steve’s work was cited over 24K times and he achieved an “h index” of 78, meaning that he published 78 articles with at least 78 citations. His Research Interest Score ranked at the 99^th percentile among members of ResearchGate.

Steve was a giant within the field of hypnosis and human consciousness. His Theories of Hypnosis text (S. J. Lynn & Rhue, 1991a), the first and second editions of his handbooks (S. J. Lynn et al., 2010; Rhue et al., 1993), his casebook on clinical hypnosis (S. J. Lynn et al., 1996), along with his Essentials of Clinical Hypnosis: An Evidence Based Approach (S. J. Lynn & Kirsch, 2006) remain must reads within the field.

Whereas the complexity of Steve’s view of hypnosis evolved over time, he focused on social, psychological, and cognitive variables to explain hypnotic behavior and related experiences. Perhaps more so than other socio-cognitive theorists, Steve emphasized the importance of affect, rapport, relational factors, performance standards, and unconscious motives as part of the panoply of variables dynamically influencing hypnotic responding (Green & Lynn, 2011; S. J. Lynn & Green, 2011; S. J. Lynn et al., 2003, 2017). He, along with colleagues Irving Kirsch and Judith Rhue, wrote about the role of dissociation within hypnosis and attempted to reconcile various theories of dissociation with social-cognitive models of hypnotic behavior (Kirsch & Lynn, 1998a, 1998b; S. J. Lynn & Green, 2011; S. J. Lynn & Rhue, 1994). Lynn and Kirsch jointly advanced Response Set Theory, which asserts that much of human behavior unfolds in an unplanned and automatic way (Kirsch & Lynn, 1997, 1999; S. J. Lynn, Laurence, et al., 2015; S. J. Lynn et al., 2008). In a recent work expanding upon the Integrative Model of Hypnosis and bridging it with Response Set Theory, Steve explained that “responsive individuals are capable of imaginal investment in suggestions and discern subtle implications of suggestions to calibrate and create responses by integrating information from situational, personal, and interpersonal sources, even though they may lack cognizance of doing so” (S. J. Lynn et al., 2023, p. 198).

Dr. Lynn was masterful at appreciating consistencies and inconsistencies across various theories of hypnosis. He was a voracious reader and could deftly connect the latest findings from mainstream psychological science and cognitive-neuroscience with the hypnotic phenomena that so intrigued him. He eschewed defining hypnosis as a product of an altered or special state of consciousness (see S. J. Lynn, Green, et al., 2015; S. J. Lynn, Kirsch, et al., 2020). In contrast, he contended that consciousness “ranges along a spectrum from alert-wakefuleness to mind wandering, sleep, and deep anesthesia” and that hypnotic suggestions “provide an efficient means of perturbing and moving attention and awareness along this continuum by virtue of the pliability of consciousness in individuals motivated to mentally immerse themselves in suggested events in the particular context of hypnosis” (S. J. Lynn et al., 2023, p. 199).

Steve was intrigued by reports of involuntariness and deeply pondered the meaning of such reports. Early in his career, he and Judith Rhue (S. J. Lynn & Rhue, 1991b) dissected the idea that there were at least three considerations of the term “involuntary” (see also S. J. Lynn et al., 1990). One possibility – leftover from the mid to late 1800s – was that actions deemed involuntary are not controllable and are engaged in without resistance or the possibility of acting otherwise. Steve, along with most contemporary theorists and thinkers, clearly rejected this “extreme” view of involuntariness and the associated portrayal of the hypnotized subject as a passive automaton blinding following the orders of the hypnotist.

A second possible understanding is that hypnotic suggestions may trigger actions that occur automatically, in spite of the ability of the person to not act in accordance with the suggestion or even act otherwise. Steve elaborated on how various theories embraced, rejected, or simply tolerated the claim that hypnotic behaviors are strategic enactments designed to achieve certain experiences within the hypnotic context. He centralized the role of cognitive strategies within his approach; conceptualized the hypnotized individual as a creative, problem-solving agent (S. J. Lynn & Sivec, 1992); and understood actions during hypnosis and related reports of involuntariness to reflect cognitive, goal-directed, imaginative, and attentional processes: “The use of specific cognitive strategies, in combination with prehypnotic expectancies and contextual factors (e.g., suggestion wording) that prime the use of these strategies … are intimately associated with hypnotized subjects’ evolving self-narrative” (S. J. Lynn & Rhue, 1991b, p. 608). Still, Steve conceded that the debate regarding the role of cognitive strategies in hypnotic phenomena was “far from settled” and that the extent to which “cognitive strategies mediate suggested responses and involuntariness reports awaits more definitive research” (S. J. Lynn & Rhue, 1991b, p. 610).

A third construction of the term “involuntary” focuses squarely on the subjective experience of the subject. Hypnotized individuals may interpret their hypnotic behavior as being involuntary if their behavior is felt or seems to occur without volitional effort. Coupling behavioral enactments during hypnosis with the subjective experience of them occurring involuntarily distinguishes genuine hypnotic responses from mere compliance with instructions (Kirsch & Lynn, 1999; S. J. Lynn, Kirsch, et al., 2020). Interested readers might also consult the work of Terhune and Oakley (2020), who distinguish between voluntary and involuntary goal-directed imagery and how the use of imagery outside of conscious awareness might facilitate hypnotic responses and experiences, and that of Weinberger et al. (2022) on the “normative unconscious and hypnosis.”

Later in his career, Steve’s formulation of hypnosis emphasized the role of response sets, intentions, and expectancies. He believed that such factors explained not only a certain readiness to respond to hypnotic communications among those interested in being hypnotized but also illuminated reports of involuntariness (e.g., S. J. Lynn & Hallquist, 2004; Meyer & Lynn, 2011). Building on his work with Irving Kirsch, Steve explained that response sets “prepare actions for automatic activation, increasing readiness to respond in particular ways, to particular stimuli, under particular conditions. In the case of hypnosis, a highly hypnotizable participant would expect to respond like an excellent subject (i.e., respond in a particular way) following a hypnotic induction (i.e., particular stimuli), in a situation defined as hypnosis (i.e., particular circumstances)” (S. J. Lynn & Green, 2011, p. 282). Response Set Theory incorporates the idea that actions may be initiated and pursued without conscious awareness of the end goal and they functionally “prepare cognitive and behavioral schemas; personal narratives, roles, and scripts for automatic (or least highly efficient) activation at the time they are triggered” (S. J. Lynn et al., 2023, p. 195). Furthermore, conscious awareness of goals and motivations may surface only after an action has been initiated and an explicit request to describe such behavior is made (Kirsch & Lynn, 1999; see also Custers & Aarts, 2010). Given the strength of cultural and popular beliefs associating hypnosis with automatic behavior and profound shifts in consciousness (e.g., Capafons et al., 2008; Green, 2003; Green et al., 2006), it should not be surprising that individuals frame their hypnotic experience in a manner consistent with such beliefs and expectations. Response set strategies “that people adopt during hypnosis are shaped and primed by suggestions … [and] may operate outside of people’s awareness yet still motivate and guide their behavior” (S. J. Lynn & Green, 2011, p. 283).

Over the course of more than three decades, Steve revised and updated the Integrative Model of Hypnosis (e.g., S. J. Lynn, Laurence, et al., 2015; S. J. Lynn et al., 2023). About a decade ago, Steve explained that the model “integrates social, cultural, cognitive, and neurophysiological variables at play both in and out of hypnosis and considers their dynamic interaction as determinants of the multifaceted experience of hypnosis” (S. J. Lynn, Laurence, et al., 2015, p. 314). In a more recent iteration, he and colleagues incorporated findings from predictive coding modeling (PCM; Clark, 2013; Friston, 2010) and elaborated how PCM “provides useful insights into hypnotic responsiveness and opens the door to a multifactorial, integrative model of hypnosis” (S. J. Lynn et al., 2023, p. 196). The model considers multiple and diverse determinants of hypnotic behavior, including individual difference “ability” variables and situational and cognitive mechanisms, and stresses the importance of intention and readiness to respond (S. J. Lynn et al., 2023). Included within the model are roles for positive attitudes and beliefs about hypnosis, motivation, and rapport.

He and colleagues proposed a “readiness response set” (RSS) as a potential individual ability factor that could increase the likelihood of responding to suggestions. Individuals displaying a RRS focus on suggestion-related behavioral enactments and alterations in subjective experiences during hypnosis, fail to critically observe or fully analyze precursors of behavior, bypass metacognitive awareness of their performance and experiences, and adopt the “language of hypnosis” by attributing their actions and experiences to the performance to the hypnotist or the process of hypnosis (S. J. Lynn et al., 2023). Intentions also play a key role within the model. Along with expectancies about being a good subject and behaving in a manner deemed consistent with the role of a good subject, the intention to attend to suggestions and to actively engage in suggestion-related imaginings may differentiate highly responsive individuals from those less so. Related to this line of reasoning, he noted that efforts to modify hypnotizability (e.g., Gorassini & Spanos, 1986; Wickless & Kirsch, 1989) regularly attempt to instill positive intention response sets.

Beyond theory and basic research, Steve advanced the practice of clinical hypnosis. He was a strong advocate for the utility of incorporating hypnosis and suggestion-based techniques into psychotherapy, mindfulness, and behavioral health protocols (S. J. Lynn & Green, 2023; S. J. Lynn et al., 2006, 2019, 2022). Indeed, many of his encyclopedia entries and other works tout how hypnosis can be used to advantage to alleviate suffering, promote emotional self-regulation, and elevate well-being (e.g., S. J. Lynn, O’Donohue, et al., 2015, Lynn, Lemons, et al., 2015; S. J. Lynn, Polizzi, et al., 2020; S. J. Lynn et al., 2023). He skillfully weaved suggestions for self-compassion and self-acceptance into his hypnotic scripts and encouraged clinicians to incorporate implementation instructions (e.g., the use of if-then statements) into hypnotic (as well as non-hypnotic) suggestions to break down larger goals into more manageable steps, promote self-efficacy, engender a positive response set, and heighten optimism toward therapy (e.g., Green & Lynn, 2017, 2019).

Steve wrote extensively about how hypnosis can be united with loving-kindness meditation, how it complements mindfulness practice, and how collectively these practices can enhance self-regulation (e.g., Green et al., 2014; S. J. Lynn et al., 2012, 2016; Williams et al., 2010). Steve asserted that hypnosis could be paired with mindfulness to “create adaptive response sets and deautomatize maladaptive response sets” (S. J. Lynn et al., 2006, p. 143). Steve issued a clarion call for researchers and clinicians to address the “extent hypnosis can catalyze mindfulness or other contemplative practices” (S. J. Lynn et al., 2019, p. 479). Steve arduously worked to promote the clinical utility of hypnosis while simultaneously disentangling myths and misconceptions about hypnosis (S. J. Lynn, Kirsch, et al., 2020). A few years ago, Steve published a “40 year perspective” of his clinical experiences and research findings related to hypnosis which nicely highlights many of his findings, observations, and insights (S. J. Lynn et al., 2019).

Whereas Steve’s impact and popularity within the field of hypnosis is undeniable, many may be unaware of his broad-based knowledge and expertise outside of hypnosis. His books and writings addressed a wide range of topics within mainstream clinical science, human consciousness, and neuropsychology, including: evidence-based psychotherapy and the science of clinical psychology; addressing fears and anxieties in everyday life; curbing rumination in depression; appreciating the pitfalls of human memory; discerning rational from irrational beliefs; understanding anomalous experiences; and applying psychological science to promote health, happiness, and well-being in everyday life. His introductory psychology coauthored textbook, Psychology: From Inquiry to Understanding (Lilienfeld et al., 2022) highlights the importance of scientific thinking in everyday life and is currently in its fifth edition. Attesting to his luminary status, Steve had an international audience with many of his works translated into multiple languages. Most notably, he and his colleagues’ “50 Great Myths” book was translated into 20 languages around the world.

Concluding Thoughts

In this work, I set out to pay tribute to the life and work of Dr. Steven Jay Lynn. While appreciating that my assignment was to provide a relatively brief summary of his extraordinary legacy, I fear my attempt has failed to fully capture the magnitude of his talents, abilities, and zest for learning or the prodigious contributions he made to the fields of hypnosis, psychology, and clinical science more broadly. Steve was my guiding star, both professionally and personally. I will miss his intellect and wisdom. I will miss his kindness, peace-filled spirit, and love of life, even more. Farewell my friend.

Acknowledgments

Special thanks to Fern Pritikin Lynn and Irving Kirsch for their helpful comments on an early draft of this tribute.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).