Significant dates in the history of forensic hypnosis.

Important dates in the history of forensic hypnosis are identified and their significance is briefly described. Trends regarding the use of forensic hypnosis are highlighted, as well as criticisms of various positions. The authors recommend that professionals who practice forensic hypnosis be thoroughly familiar with the significant precedents, problems, and pitfalls that have arisen concerning the use of hypnosis with memory in forensic settings.

Kenneth S. Bowers, interactionism and hypnosis.

Like most seminal thinkers in hypnosis, Kenneth Bowers' interests and contributions have ranged beyond that particular domain. The list of his published works is impressive by anyone's standards, and includes important contributions in the areas of health, psychotherapy, and hypnosis. This paper will focus on his major contribution to personality theory, Situationism in Psychology: An Analysis and Critique, published in 1973 in the Psychological Review.

Predictors of smoking abstinence following a single-session restructuring intervention with self-hypnosis.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the relation of smoking and medical history, social support, and hypnotizability to outcome of a smoking cessation program. METHOD: A consecutive series of 226 smokers referred for the smoking cessation program were treated with a single-session habit restructuring intervention involving self-hypnosis. They were then followed up for 2 years. Total abstinence from smoking after the intervention was the criterion for successful outcome. RESULTS: Fifty-two percent of the study group achieved complete smoking abstinence 1 week after the intervention; 23% maintained their abstinence for 2 years. Hypnotizability and having been previously able to quit smoking for at least a month significantly predicted the initiation of abstinence. Hypnotizability and living with a significant other person predicted 2-year maintenance of treatment response. CONCLUSIONS: These results, while modest, are superior to those of spontaneous efforts to stop smoking. Furthermore, they suggest that it is possible to predict which patients are most likely and which are least likely to respond to such brief smoking cessation interventions.

Psychopathology, hypnotizability, and dissociation.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to replicate and extend previous findings regarding the hypnotizability of different clinical groups. METHOD: The authors compared the differential hypnotizability of four psychiatric groups--patients with dissociative disorders (N = 17), schizophrenia (N = 13), mood disorders (N = 13), and anxiety disorders (N = 14)--and one normal group of college students (N = 63). Hypnotizability was assessed by four different measures: the eye roll sign and the induction score of the Hypnotic Induction Profile, the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C, and two self-ratings of hypnotizability. RESULTS: As predicted, dissociative disorder patients had significantly higher hypnotizability scores on all measures than all other groups. Schizophrenic patients, on the other hand, had significantly lower scores than normal subjects on the eye roll sign and induction score but not on the other measures of hypnotizability. Some other unpredicted between-group differences were also found. Nevertheless, despite the between-group differences, the intercorrelations between the various hypnotizability measures within the normal group were very similar to those observed in the combined patient groups. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that routine hypnotizability assessment may be useful in the differential diagnosis of patients with dissociative disorders.

Construct validity of the Dissociative Experiences Scale: II. Its relationship to hypnotizability.

Undergraduates (n = 311) who volunteered to participate in an experiment on "Hypnotizability and Personality" filled out several personality questionnaires (including the Dissociative Experiences Scale; DES), were administered the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility (HGSHS), and completed a self-rating of hypnotizability. The DES overall score correlated significantly with the HGSHS summary score (r(309) = .12, p < .05, two-tailed) and with subject's self-rating of hypnotizability (r(309) = .13, p < .05, two-tailed). The magnitude of these correlations was similar to that observed in a previous study (.14 & .18) and is also similar in magnitude to the correlations typically observed between the HGSHS and the Tellegen Absorption Scale. The potential clinical implications of these findings are discussed.

Suggested posthypnotic amnesia in psychiatric patients and normals.

The present study examined both quantitative and qualitative hypnotizability differences among four psychiatric patient groups (dissociative disorder (n = 17), schizophrenic (n = 13), mood disorder (n = 14), and anxiety disorder (n = 14) patients), and normals (college students (n = 63). Dissociative disorder patients earned significantly higher corrected total scores on the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C (mean = 7.94), than all other groups. Likewise, dissociative disorder patients initially recalled significantly fewer items when the posthypnotic amnesia suggestion was in effect (mean = .41) and reversed significantly more items when the suggestion was canceled (mean = 3.82) than all other groups. In contrast, schizophrenic patients recalled significantly fewer items when the amnesia suggestion was in effect (mean = 1.85) and reversed significantly fewer items when it was canceled (mean = .77) than the remaining groups. This qualitative difference between schizophrenic patients and the other groups on the suggested posthypnotic amnesia item was observed even though there were no significant quantitative differences between groups in overall hypnotic responsivity.

Hypnotizability and psychopathology.

The authors compared the hypnotic responsivity of 115 chronically ill psychiatric patients with that of 83 nonpatient volunteers. The Hypnotic Induction Profile was administered to all subjects, and diagnoses were established for the patients according to Research Diagnostic Criteria. All of the diagnosed patients (those with thought disorder, affective disorder, generalized anxiety, and miscellaneous disorders) were significantly less hypnotizable than the nonpatient comparison group. This effect was unrelated to age or medication differences. The authors discuss the implication of these findings in relation to a new model of hypnotic responsivity that takes into account the moderating effects of severe psychopathology.