The Hypnotic Induction in the Broad Scheme of Hypnosis: A Sociocognitive Perspective

References

• Accardi, M., Cleere, C., Lynn, S. J., & Kirsch, I. (2013). Placebo versus “standard” hypnosis rationale: Attitudes, expectancies, hypnotic responsiveness, and experiences. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 56, 103–114. doi:10.1080/00029157.2013.769087
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bányai, E. I., & Hilgard, E. R. (1976). A comparison of active-alert hypnotic induction with traditional relaxation induction. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 85, 218–224. doi:10.1037/0021-843X.85.2.218
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barber, T. X. (1985). Hypnosuggestive procedures as catalysts for psychotherapies. In S. J. Lynn & J. P. Garske (Eds.), Contemporary psychotherapies: Models and methods (pp. 333–376). Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.
   Google Scholar
• Barber, T. X., & Calverley, D. S. (1964). An experimental study of “hypnotic” (auditory and visual) hallucinations. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 68(1), 13–20. doi:10.1037/h0042175
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barber, T. X., Spanos, N. P., & Chaves, J. F. (1974). Hypnosis, imagination, and human potentialities (Vol. 46). Oxford, UK: Pergamon.
   Google Scholar
• Bandler, R., & Grinder, J. (1975). Patterns of hypnotic techniques of Milton H. Erickson, M.D. (vol.1., p. 194). Cupertino, CA: Meta Communications.
   Google Scholar
• Bentler, P. M., & Hilgard, E. R. (1963). A comparison of group and individual induction of hypnosis with self-scoring and observer-scoring. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 11, 49–54. doi:10.1080/00207146308409227
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cangas, A. J., & Pérez, M. (1998). The effect of two procedures on hypnotic susceptibility modification. Contemporary Hypnosis & Integrative Therapy, 15(4), 212–218. doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1557-0711
   Google Scholar
• Cardeña, E. (2005). The phenomenology of deep hypnosis: Quiescent and physically active. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 53, 37–59. doi:10.1080/00207140490914234
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardeña, E., Alarcon, A., Capafons, A., & Bayot, A. (1998). Effects on suggestibility of a new method of active-alert hypnosis: Alert hand. International Journal of Clinical & Experimental Hypnosis, 46(3), 280–294. doi:10.1080/00207149808410008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chiasson, S. (1973). Chiasson’s method. Syllabus on hypnosis and a handbook of therapeutic suggestions. Bloomingdale, IL: American Society of Clinical Hypnosis Education and Research Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Coe, W. C., Kobayashi, K., & Howard, M. L. (1973). Experimental and ethical problems of evaluating the influence of hypnosis in antisocial conduct. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 82(3), 476–482. doi:10.1037/h0035365
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coe, W. C., Peterson, P., & Gwynn, M. (1995). Expectations and sequelae to hypnosis: Initial findings. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 38(1), 3–12.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Council, J. R., Kirsch, I., & Grant, D. L. (1996). Hypnosis and imagination (pp. 41–65). R. Kunzendorf, N. Spanos, & B. Wallace (Eds.). Amityville, NY: Baywood Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Du Maurier, G. (1984/2009). Trilby. UK: London, Osgood, Mcilvaine & Company.
   Google Scholar
• Elkins, G. R., Barabasz, A. F., Council, J. R., & Spiegel, D. (2015). Advancing research and practice: The revised APA Division 30 definition of hypnosis. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 57, 378–385. doi:10.1080/00029157.2015.1011465
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fassler, O., Lynn, S. J., & Knox, J. (2008). Is hypnotic suggestibility a stable trait? Consciousness and Cognition, 17, 240–253. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2007.05.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fellows, B. J., & Ragg, L. (1992). The carleton skills training program: A preliminary British trial. Contemporary Hypnosis, 9(3), 169–174.
   Google Scholar
• Gfeller, J., & Gorassini, D. R. (2010). Enhancing hypnotizability and treatment response. In S. J. Lynn, J. W. Rhue, & I. Kirsch (Eds.), Handbook of clinical hypnosis (pp. 339–356). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Gfeller, J., Lynn, S. J., & Pribble, W. (1987). Enhancing hypnotic susceptibility: Interpersonal and rapport factors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 586–595. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.3.586
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibbons, D. E., & Lynn, S. J. (2010). Hypnotic inductions: A primer. In Handbook of clinical hypnosis (2 nd ed., pp. 267–293). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Gollwitzer, P. M. (1999). Implementation intentions: Strong effects of simple plans. American Psychologist, 54(7), 493–503. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.54.7.493
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorassini, D. R., & Spanos, N. P. (1986). A social-cognitive skills approach to the successful modification of hypnotic susceptibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(5), 1004–1012. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.50.5.1004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorassini, D. R., & Spanos, N. P. (1999). The carleton skill training program for modifying hypnotic suggestibility: Original version and variations. In I. Kirsch, A. Capafons, E. Cardeña-Buelna, & S. Amigó (Eds.), Clinical hypnosis and self-regulation: Cognitive-behavioral perspectives (pp. 141–177). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Green, J. P., Barabasz, A. F., Barrett, D., & Montgomery, G. H. (2005). Forging ahead: The 2003 APA Division 30 definition of hypnosis. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 53, 259–264. doi:10.1080/00207140590961321
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green, J. P., Page, R. A., Rasekhy, R., Johnson, L. K., & Bernhardt, S. E. (2006). Cultural views and attitudes about hypnosis: A survey of college students across four countries. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 54, 263–280. doi:10.1080/00207140600689439
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Groth-Marnat, G., & Mitchell, K. (1998). Responsiveness to direct versus indirect hypnotic procedures: The role of resistance as a predictor variable. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 46, 324–333. doi:10.1080/00207149808410012
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammond, D. C., Haskins-Bartsch, C., Grant, C. W., & McGhee, M. (1988). Comparison of self-directed and tape-assisted self-hypnosis. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 31, 129–137. doi:10.1080/00029157.1988.10402879
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hawkins, P. J., Liossi, C., Ewart, B. W., Hatira, P., & Kosmidis, V. H. (1998). Hypnosis in the alleviation of procedure related pain and distress in paediatric oncology patients. Contemporary Hypnosis, 15(4), 199–207. doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1557-0711
   Google Scholar
• Kirsch, I. (1990). Changing expectations: A key to effective psychotherapy. Pacific Grove, CA: Thomson Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.
   Google Scholar
• Kirsch, I. (1994). Defining hypnosis for the public. Contemporary Hypnosis, 11(3), 142–143.
   Google Scholar
• Kirsch, I., & Lynn, S. J. (1998). Dissociation theories of hypnosis. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 100–115. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.123.1.100
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirsch, I., & Lynn, S. J. (1999). Automaticity in clinical psychology. American Psychologist, 54(7), 504–515. doi:037/0003-066X.54.7.504
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klinger, B. I. (1970). Effect of peer model reponsiveness and length of induction procedure on hypnotic responsiveness. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 75, 15–18. doi:10.1037/h0028683
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynn, S. J. (2004). Enhancing hypnotizability: The effects of compliance versus imagery. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 47, 117–128. doi:10.1080/00029157.2004.10403630
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynn, S. J., & Green, J. P. (2011). The sociocognitive and dissociation theories of hypnosis: Toward a rapprochement. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 59, 277–293. doi:10.1080/00207144.2011.570652
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynn, S. J., Green, J. P., Jaquith, L., & Gasior, D. (2003). Hypnosis and performance standards. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 51(1), 51–65. doi:10.1076/iceh.51.1.51.14062
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynn, S. J., Green, J. P., Kirsch, I., Capafons, A., Lilienfeld, S. O., Laurence, J.-R., & Montgomery, G. H. (2015). Grounding hypnosis in science: The “new” APA Division 30 definition of hypnosis as a step backwards. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 57(4), 390–401. doi:10.1080/00029157.2015.1011472
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynn, S. J., Kirsch, I., Knox, J., & Lilienfeld, S. (2006). Hypnosis and neuroscience: Implications for the altered state debate. In G. Jamieson (Ed.), Hypnosis and conscious states: The cognitive-neuroscience perspective. New York/UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lynn, S. J., Laurence, J.-R., & Kirsch, I. (2015). Hypnosis, suggestion, and suggestibility: An integrative model. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 57(3), 314–329. doi:10.1080/00029157.2014.976783
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynn, S. J., Nash, M. R., Rhue, J., Frauman, D., & Sweeney, C. (1984). Nonvolition, expectancies, and hypnotic rapport. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 93, 295–303. doi:10.1037/0021-843X.93.3.295
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynn, S. J., Neufeld, V. R., & Mare, C. (1993). Direct versus indirect suggestions: A conceptual and methodological review. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 41, 124–152. doi:10.1080/00207149308414543
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynn, S. J., Neufeld, V. R., & Matyi, C. L. (1987). Inductions versus suggestions: Effects of direct and indirect wording on hypnotic responding and experience. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 96, 76–79. doi:10.1037/0021-843X.96.1.76
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynn, S. J., Rhue, J. W., & Kirsch, I. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of clinical hypnosis (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Lynn, S. J., & Sherman, S. J. (2000). The clinical importance of sociocognitive models of hypnosis: Response set theory and Erickson’s strategic interventions. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 42, 294–315. doi:10.1080/00029157.2000.10734363
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynn, S. J., Vanderhoff, H., Shindler, K., & Stafford, J. (2002). Defining hypnosis as a trance vs. cooperation: Hypnotic inductions, suggestibility, and performance standards. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 44, 231–240. doi:10.1080/00029157.2002.10403483
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynn, S. J., Weekes, J., Brentar, J., Neufeld, V., Zivney, O., & Weiss, F. (1991). Interpersonal climate and hypnotizability level: Effects on hypnotic performance, rapport, and archaic involvement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 739–743. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.60.5.739
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynn, S. J., Weekes, J. R., Matyi, C. L., & Neufeld, V. (1988). Direct versus indirect suggestions, archaic involvement, and hypnotic experience. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 97, 296–301. doi:10.1037/0021-843X.97.3.296
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malott, J. M. (1984). Active-alert hypnosis: Replication and extension of previous research. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 93, 246–249. doi:10.1037/0021-843X.93.2.246
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, D., & Lynn, S. J. (1996). The successful discrimination of hypnotizable and simulating participants: The hypnotic simulation index. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 44, 338–353. doi:10.1080/00207149608416097
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matheson, G., & Shue, K. L. (1987, March). “Hypnotic language”: A study of the experience of direct vs. indirect suggestions. Paper presented to the Fourth European Congress of Hypnosis in Psychotherapy and Psychosomatic Medicine, Oxford, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Matthews, W. J., Bennett, H., Gallagher, M., & Bean, W. (1985). Indirect versus direct hypnotic suggestions—An initial investigation: A brief communication. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 33, 219–223. doi:10.1080/00207148508406650
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matthews, W. J., Kirsch, I., & Mosher, D. (1985). Double hypnotic induction: An initial empirical test. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 94, 92–95. doi:10.1037/0021-843X.94.1.92
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matthews, W. J., Lankton, S., & Lankton, C. (1993). An Ericksonian model of hypnotherapy. In J. W. Rhue, S. J. Lynn, & I. Kirsch (Eds.), Handbook of clinical hypnosis (pp. 187–214). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Matthews, W. J., & Mosher, D. L. (1988). Direct and indirect hypnotic suggestion in a laboratory setting. British Journal of Experimental & Clinical Hypnosis, 5(2), 63–71.
   Google Scholar
• Maurer, C., Santangelo, M., & Claiborn, C. D. (1993). The effects of direct versus indirect hypnotic suggestion on pain in a cold pressor task. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 41, 305–316. doi:10.1080/00207149308414560
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer, E., & Lynn, S. J. (2011). Responding to hypnotic and nonhypnotic suggestions: Performance standards, imaginative suggestibility, and response expectancies. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 59(3), 327–349. doi:10.1080/00207144.2011.570660
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, M. F., Barabasz, A. F., & Barabasz, M. (1991). Effects of active alert and relaxation hypnotic inductions on cold pressor pain. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 100, 223–226. doi:10.1037/0021-843X.100.2.223
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgan, A. H., & Hilgard, J. R. (1978). The Stanford hypnotic clinical scale for adults. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 21(2–3), 134–147. doi:10.1080/00029157.1978.10403968
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niedzwienska, A. (2000). Goal-directed fantasy does not explain the training effect of the Carleton skills training package. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 48, 404–417.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Hanlon, W. H. (1987). Taproots: Underlying principles of Milton Erickson’s therapy and hypnosis. New York, NY: WW Norton & Co.
   Google Scholar
• Page, R. A., & Handley, G. W. (1991). A comparison of the effects of standardized Chiasson and eye-closure inductions on susceptibility scores. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 34, 46–50. doi:10.1080/00029157.1991.10402959
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Page, R. A., & Handley, G. W. (1996). In search of predictors of hypnotic sequelae. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 39(2), 93–96. doi:10.1080/00029157.1996.10403371
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pintar, J., & Lynn, S. J. (2008). A brief history of hypnosis. New York, NY: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Pitsch, E., Sapp, M., & McNeely, R. L. (2001). Effects of locus of control, hypnotizability, transcript type, and gender on vividness of imagination, hypnotic depth, and inner subjective experiences of automaticity. Australian Journal of Clinical Hypnotherapy and Hypnosis, 22(1), 1–10.
   Google Scholar
• Sheehan, P. W., & Perry, C. W. (1976). Methodologies of hypnosis (psychology revivals): A critical appraisal of contemporary paradigms of hypnosis. London, England: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Shor, R. E., & Orne, E. C. (1962). Harvard group scale of hypnotic susceptibility. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Spanos, N. P. (1986). Hypnotic behavior: A social-psychological interpretation of amnesia, analgesia, and “trance logic.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 9(03), 449–467. doi:10.1017/S0140525X00046537
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spanos, N. P. (1991). A sociocognitive approach to hypnosis. In S. J. Lynn & J. W. Rhue (Eds.), Theories of hypnosis (pp. 324–361). New York, NY: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Spanos, N. P., Cross, W. F., Menary, E., & Smith, J. (1988). Long term effects of cognitive-skill training for the enhancement of hypnotic susceptibility. British Journal of Experimental & Clinical Hypnosis, 5(2), 73–78.
   Google Scholar
• Spanos, N. P., Radtke, H. L., Hodgins, D. C., Stam, H. J., & Bertrand, L. D. (1983). The Carleton University responsiveness to suggestion scale: Normative data and psychometric properties. Psychological Reports, 53(2), 523–535. doi:10.2466/pr0.1983.53.2.523
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spanos, N. P., Rivers, S. M., & Ross, S. (1977). Experienced involuntariness and response to hypnotic suggestions. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 296(1), 208–221.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Spinhoven, D., Baak, D., Van Dyck, R., & Vermeulen, P. (1988). The effectiveness of an authoritative versus permissive style of hypnotic communication. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 36, 182–191. doi:10.1080/00207148808410507
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone, J. A., & Lundy, R. M. (1985). Behavioral compliance with direct and indirect body movement suggestions. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 94(3), 256–263. doi:10.1037/0021-843X.94.3.256
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szabó, C. (1993). The phenomenology of the experiences and the depth of hypnosis: Comparison of direct and indirect induction techniques. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 41(3), 225–233. doi:10.1080/00207149308414552
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Der Does, A. J. W., Van Dyck, R., Spinhoven, P., & Kloosman, A. (1989). The effectiveness of standardized versus individualized hypnotic suggestions: A brief communication. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 37, 1–5. doi:10.1080/00207148908410528
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vickery, A. R., Kirsch, I., Council, J. R., & Sirkin, M. I. (1985). Cognitive skill and traditional trance hypnotic inductions: A within-subjects comparison. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 53(1), 131–133. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.53.1.131
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wark, D. M. (2006). Alert hypnosis: A review and case report. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 48(4), 291–300. doi:10.1080/00029157.2006.10401536
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weekes, J. R., & Lynn, S. J. (1990). Hypnosis suggestion type, and subjective experience—The order-effects hypothesis revisited: A brief communication. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 38, 95–100. doi:10.1080/00207149008414504
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weitzenhoffer, A. M., & Hilgard, E. R. (1959). Stanford hypnotic susceptibility scale, forms A and B. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weitzenhoffer, A. M., & Hilgard, E. R. (1962). Stanford hypnotic susceptibility scale, form C (Vol. 27). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
   Google Scholar
• Yapko, M. D. (2012). Trancework: An introduction to the practice of clinical hypnosis (4th ed.). London, England: Routledge.
   Google Scholar