Conscious intelligence is overrated: The normative unconscious and hypnosis

References

• Anderson, M. L. (2010). Neural reuse: A fundamental organizational principle of the brain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(4), 245–266. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X10000853
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, M. L. (2014). After phrenology: Neural reuse and the interactive brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bar-Anan, Y., Wilson, T. D., & Hassin, R. R. (2010). Inaccurate self-knowledge formation as a result of automatic behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(6), 884–894. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2010.07.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnier, A. J., Cox, R. E., & McConkey, K. M. (2014). The province of “highs”: The high hypnotizable person in the science of hypnosis and in psychological science. Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice, 1(2), 168–183. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/cns0000018
   Google Scholar
• Barnier, A. J., Dienes, Z., & Mitchell, C. J. (2008). How hypnosis happens: New cognitive theories of hypnotic responding. In M. R. Nash & A. J. Barnier (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of hypnosis: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 141–177). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Barnier, A. J., & Mitchell, C. J. (2005). Looking for the fundamental effects of hypnosis. In Paper presented at the Invited address at the 35th annual congress of the Australian Society of Hypnosis (scientific program). Sydney, Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Bisiach, E., Vallar, G., Perani, D., Papagno, C., & Berti, A. (1986). Unawareness of disease following lesions of the right hemisphere: Anosognosia for hemiplegia and anosognosia for hemianopia. Neuropsychologia, 24(4), 471–482. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0028-3932(86)90092-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bornstein, R. F., & D’Agostino, P. R. (1994). The attribution and discounting of perceptual fluency: Preliminary tests of a perceptual fluency/attributional model of the mere exposure effect. Social Cognition, 12(2), 103–128. doi:https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.1994.12.2.103
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowers, K. S. (1990). Unconscious influences and hypnosis. In J. L. Singer (Ed.), Repression and dissociation: Implications for personality theory, psychopathology, and health (pp. 143–179). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cardeña, E. (2014). Hypnos and psyche: How hypnosis has contributed to the study of consciousness. Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice, 1(2), 123–138. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/cns0000017
   Google Scholar
• Cardeña, E., Jönsson, P., Terhune, D. B., & Marcusson-Clavertz, D. (2013). The neurophenomenology of neutral hypnosis. Cortex, 49(2), 375–385. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2012.04.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carruthers, P. (2006). The architecture of the mind. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Carruthers, P. (2009). How we know our own minds: The relationship between mindreading and metacognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32(2), 121–138. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X09000545
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chabris, C., & Simons, D. (2010). The invisible gorilla: And other ways our intuitions deceive us. New York, NY: Crown Publishers/Random House.
   Google Scholar
• Cleeremans, A. (2014). Connecting conscious and unconscious processing. Cognitive Science, 38(6), 1286–1315. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12149
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Council, J. R., Kirsch, I., & Grant, D. L. (1996). Imagination, expectancy, and hypnotic responding. In R. G. Kunzendorf, N. P. Spanos, & B. Wallace (Eds.), Hypnosis and imagination (pp. 41–65). Amityville, NY: Baywood Publishing Company, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Crawford, H. J., & Allen, S. N. (1982). Group Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C. Unpublished manual, University of Wyoming, Laramie.
   Google Scholar
• Császár, N., Scholkmann, F., Kapócs, G., & Bókkon, I. (2016). The “hidden observer” as the cognitive unconscious during hypnosis. Activitas Nervosa Superior, 58(3–4), 51–61. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03379735
   Google Scholar
• Cusimano, C., & Goodwin, G. P. (2020). People judge others to have more voluntary control over beliefs than they themselves do. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 119(5), 999–1029. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000198
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cusimano, C., & Goodwin, G. (2021). Why do people criticize others for suffering irrationally? In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 43.
   Google Scholar
• Dehaene, S., & Cohen, L. (2007). Cultural recycling of cortical maps. Neuron, 56(2), 384–398. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2007.10.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dennett, D. C. (1991). Consciousness explained. New York, NY: Little, Brown and Company.
   Google Scholar
• Dienes, Z., & Perner, J. (2007). Executive control without conscious awareness: The cold control theory of hypnosis. In G. A. Jamieson (Ed.), Hypnosis and conscious states: The cognitive neuroscience perspective (pp. 293–314). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ellenberger, H. F. (1970). The discovery of the unconscious: The history and evolution of dynamic psychiatry. New York, NY: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Engelbert, M., & Carruthers, P. (2010). Introspection. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews. Cognitive Science, 1(2), 245–253. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erickson, M. H., Hershman, S., & Secter, I. I. (1990). The practical application of medical and dental hypnosis. New York, NY: Brunner/Mazel, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Gallese, V., & Lakoff, G. (2005). The brain’s concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in conceptual knowledge. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 22(3–4), 455–479. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/02643290442000310
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gazzaniga, M. S. (1998). The mind’s past. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gazzaniga, M. S. (1999). The interpreter within: The glue of conscious experience. Cerebrum: The Dana Forum on Brain Science, 1, 68–78.
   Google Scholar
• Gazzaniga, M. S. (2009). The fictional self. In D. J. H. Mathews, H. Bok, & P. V. Rabins (Eds.), Personal identity and fractured selves: Perspectives from philosophy, ethics, and neuroscience (pp. 174–185). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hilgard, E. R. (1992). Dissociation and theories of hypnosis. In E. Fromm & M. R. Nash (Eds.), Contemporary hypnosis research (pp. 69–101). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jacoby, L. L., Woloshyn, V., & Kelley, C. (1989). Becoming famous without being recognized: Unconscious influences of memory produced by dividing attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 118(2), 115–125. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.118.2.115
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James, W. (1890). The perception of reality. Principles of Psychology, 2, 283–324.
   Google Scholar
• Kihlstrom, J. F. (2008). The domain of hypnosis, revisited. In M. R. Nash & A. J. Barnier (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of hypnosis: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 21–52). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kihlstrom, J. F. (2014). Hypnosis and cognition. Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice, 1(2), 139–152. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/cns0000014
   Google Scholar
• Kirsch, I., & Lynn, S. J. (1997). Hypnotic involuntariness and the automaticity of everyday life. The American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 40(1), 329–348. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/00029157.1997.10403402
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirsch, I., & Lynn, S. J. (1998). Dissociation theories of hypnosis. Psychological Bulletin, 123(1), 100–115. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.123.1.100
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krass, M. L. (1996). The river is within us, the sea is all about us: A study of creativity and oneness motivation ( Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Proquest Dissertations & Theses Global. (Order No. 964092)
   Google Scholar
• Kurzban, R., & Aktipis, C. A. (2007). Modularity and the social mind: Are psychologists too self-ish? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11(2), 131–149. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868306294906
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynn, S. J., Green, J. P., Polizzi, C. P., Ellenberg, S., Gautam, A., & Aksen, D. (2019). Hypnosis,hypnotic phenomena, and hypnotic responsiveness: Clinical and research foundations—A 40-year perspective. The International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 67(4), 475–511. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/00207144.2019.1649541
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynn, S. J., Kirsch, I., & Hallquist, M. N. (2008). Social cognitive theories of hypnosis. In M. R. Nash & A. J. Barnier (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of hypnosis: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 111–139). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lynn, S. J., Kirsch, I., Terhune, D. B., & Green, J. P. (2020). Myths and misconceptions about hypnosis and suggestion: Separating fact and fiction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 34(6), 1253–1264. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3730
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynn, S. J., Polizzi, C., Merckelbach, H., Chiu, C.-D., Maxwell, R., van Heugten, D., & Lilienfeld, S. O. (in press). Dissociation and dissociative disorders reconsidered: Beyond sociocognitive and trauma models toward a transtheoretical framework. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McClelland, D. C. (1987). Human motivation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (Eds.). (1986). Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the macrostructure of cognition (Vol. 1). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Milgram, S. (1974). The Dilemma of Obedience. The Phi Delta Kappan, 55(9), 603–606. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20297701
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review, 84(3), 231–259. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.3.231
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palfi, B., Parris, B. A., McLatchie, N., Kekecs, Z., & Dienes, Z. (2021). Can unconscious intentions be more effective than conscious intentions? Test of the role of metacognition in hypnotic response. Cortex, 135, 219–239. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2020.11.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinker, S. (2005). So how does the mind work? Mind & Language, 20(1), 1–24. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0268-1064.2005.00274.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogers, T. T., & McClelland, J. L. (2014). Parallel distributed processing at 25: Further explorations in the microstructure of cognition. Cognitive Science, 38(6), 1024–1077. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12148
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryle, G. (1949). The concept of mind. Watford, England: The Mayflower Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sadler, P., & Woody, E. (2010). Dissociation in hypnosis: Theoretical frameworks and psychotherapeutic implications. In S. J. Lynn, J. W. Rhue, & I. Kirsch (Eds.), Handbook of clinical hypnosis (pp. 151–178). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1chs5qj.10
   Google Scholar
• Searle, J. (1997). The mystery of consciousness. New York: New York Review.
   Google Scholar
• Shor, R. E., & Orne, E. C. (1962). Harvard group scale of hypnotic susceptibility, form A. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
   Google Scholar
• Siegel, P., & Weinberger, J. (1998). Capturing the “mommy and I are one” merger fantasy: The oneness motive. In R. F. Bornstein & J. M. Masling (Eds.), Empirical perspectives on the psychoanalytic unconscious (pp. 71–97). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/10256-003
   Google Scholar
• Tart, C. T. (1970). Self-report scales of hypnotic depth. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 18(2), 105–125. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/00207147008415909
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tellegen, A. (1982). Content categories: Absorption items (Revised). Unpublished manuscript, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
   Google Scholar
• Trevouledes, D. M. (2003). The relationship between hypnotic susceptibility and oneness Motivation ( Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (Order No. 3089071)
   Google Scholar
• Wegner, D. M. (2002). The illusion of conscious will. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weinberger, J. (1992). Validating and demystifying subliminal psychodynamic activation. In R. F. Bornstein & T. S. Pittman (Eds.), Perception without awareness: Cognitive, clinical, and social perspectives (pp. 170–188). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weinberger, J. (2014). Common factors are not so common and specific factors are not so specified: Toward an inclusive integration of psychotherapy research. Psychotherapy, 51(4), 514–518. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037092
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinberger, J., & McClelland, D. C. (1990). Cognitive versus traditional motivational models: Irreconcilable or complementary? In E. T. Higgins & R. M. Sorrentino (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior (Vol. 2, pp. 562–597). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weinberger, J., Siefert, C., & Haggerty, G. (2010). Implicit processes in social and clinical psychology. In J. E. Maddux & J. P. Tangney (Eds.), Social psychological foundations of clinical psychology (pp. 461–475). New York, NY: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Weinberger, J., & Smith, B. (2011). Investigating merger: Subliminal psychodynamic activation and oneness motivation research. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 59(3), 553–570. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0003065111411481
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinberger, J., & Stoycheva, V. (2020). The unconscious: Theory, research, and clinical implications. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weiner, B. (2000). Attributional thoughts about consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(3), 382–387. doi:https://doi.org/10.1086/317592
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woody, E. Z., & Bowers, K. S. (1994). A frontal assault on dissociated control. In S. J. Lynn & J. W. Rhue (Eds.), Dissociation: Clinical and theoretical perspectives (pp. 52–79). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Woody, E., & Sadler, P. (1998). On reintegrating dissociated theories: Comment on Kirsch and Lynn (1998). Psychological Bulletin, 123(2), 192–197. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.123.2.192
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar