Hypnosis is beyond a doubt one of
the most powerful methods of creating change in a person.
Although each of us responds to hypnosis at various rates
(from instantly to perhaps taking several sessions) even
the slowest response to hypnotic suggestion is much quicker
than conventional therapy approaches.
There are many theories
of exactly what hypnosis is, however so far there is no clear
cut agreed explanation. BUT the 'experience' of hypnosis
and the scientific validity of the results gained while using
hypnosis do have a definable quality.
To see why Mindfit's session's are some of
the best you can get, and how to use it
|
So
what does hypnosis feel like? |
Hypnosis is a state of relaxation. Some earlier methods
of hypnotic induction focused on gradual physical relaxation,
as the feeling of hypnosis is a deep sense of relaxation.
(NB: The hypnotic sessions on this site do not use the gradual
relaxation approach as it can take 30 minutes and is therefore
time consuming).The relaxed physical and mental state of
hypnosis causes either a dulled awareness or at times a
super focused awareness. The mind just finds it too
much effort to really be bothered thinking or noticing too
much, rather it is easier to simply focused or think about
what is being said during the hypnotic session.
So hypnosis feels very
comfortable to us, in fact we go into a state of hypnosis
all the time. Examples include:
..... Reading,
turning the page and forgetting what you have just read
..... Driving
and arriving somewhere having forgotten the trip
..... Talking
out loud when concentrating
..... Day-dreaming
A hypnotic session does is to create this state, deepen it
and use the phoemenon available (while in hypnosis) to bring
about the desired changes through either straight suggestion
or actual therapy.
When in a hypnotic state
one of the things that occurs is an increase in the suggestibility
of a person. There are many theories to explain why
this (and other hypnotic phenomenon occur) - however despite
all the theory's, the results of effective change is the same.
When in this state of mind, the subconscious mind (the part
of us that creates automatic behavior) moves closer to the
front of our perception and tends to accept the suggestions
that are given. In addition the subconscious is considered
the place where your imagination and emotions are experienced.
Therefore you experience the suggestions given to you more
intensely - which in turn makes them more believable and allows
the subconscious mind to begin creating your reality based
on the suggestions.
It is often said that
the subconscious is like a computer. It does not know
right or wrong, good or bad - it just runs programs.
The programs (behaviors/beliefs/attitudes) come from many
sources but perhaps the most common source is by what you
'think'. It is generally accepted by Subconscious Mind therapists
that subconscious wants to give you what you want. It knows
what you want by the kinds and types of thoughts you have.
HOWEVER, most of the time our thoughts are random and negative,
often we think about what we don't want - rather than what
we do want. The subconscious then goes about creating our
thoughts, feelings, beliefs and attitudes, based on our automatic
and often unconscious thinking. (Remember you are thinking
ALL the time, but we seldom pay attention to what we are thinking)
Hypnosis allows for quick
change by focusing our minds on what we want, and communicating
that to the subconscious in a way that it understands AND
in a way that is accessible to the unconscious mind. Thinking
of your subconscious like a computer again. The mind will
only run the programs that you have. You may want to adopt
a different belief attitude or behavior but until you actually
install a new program you will often fail. It is exactly like
you wanting to use the computer to create a database, but
you only have software for a word processor. You have great
intentions, you know what you want, but the computer won't
do it for you. Hypnosis is alot like installing new programs
that you want to have rather than the ones that have been
put in there but accident, society, experience or other people.
Hypnosis by its very nature
is an elusive and problematic construct in current psychological
circles. Difficulties defining exactly what hypnosis
is, how it works, and its overall effectiveness, have plagued
scientists since its application was first demonstrated by
the founder of hypnosis, Anton Mesmer. Rossi (1986)
stated "since the inception of hypnosis some 200 years ago,
it has been impossible to find general agreement among professionals
on just exactly what hypnosis is" (p.3). This
feeling is echoed among many researchers, among them, Hall
(1989) who has commented that hypnosis is a "collection of
techniques in need of a unifying theory". Krenz (1984),
as do most paraprofessionals and the majority of practicing
clinicians using hypnosis, defines it as is "an altered state
of consciousness" (pg. 210); yet even this simple explanation
is open to debate. The only real agreement on definitions
of hypnosis by scientists are those that do not attempt to
explain what it is or how it works, rather what appears to
happen to subjects in hypnosis. As such Erickson's definition
of hypnosis as an "inner state of absorption" (Erickson, Rossi,
and Rossi, 1976), tends to be widely accepted despite its
lack of descriptive qualities.
| The
State Vs Non state Argument |
Hypnotic literature's
most widely disputed issue is whether hypnosis is either 'an
altered state of consciousness' or a combination of common
conscious psychological functioning processes. Is hypnosis
a state of consciousness (trance), induced via myriad's of
induction techniques as Neodissasociation theory proposes?
Certainly the majority of practicing clinicians who work with
hypnosis, work within the disassociation model (Oakley, Alden,
and Mather; 1996) think so. However, the social cognitive
school will say, if the hypnotic condition is a 'state of
mind' why then, is there so much variation in:-
1 Differing
subjects ability to obtain that state, and
2 Response to suggestion,
by subjects within this state.
These points are supported
by the various attempts to increase suggestibility of hypnotic
subjects that have failed to show conclusive results.
Although the non state theorists dispute the creation of a
unique state (via the hypnotic induction) they do not dispute
the subjective reality or the experience of subjects who claim
to be hypnotized; or believe that responses are faked or the
result of compliance.
Kirsch, Mobayed, Council
and Kenny (1991) presented a summery supporting the non-state
theorist that can be defined by the following:-
1) No unique physiological
markers of the hypnotised state have been identified
2) All phenomena produced by suggestion following a
hypnotic induction can also be produced without the hypnotic
induction.
3) Increases in suggestibility following induction can
be duplicated and exceeded by a variety of other techniques
(including:- task motivational instructions, placebo pills
and imagination training) cited in Lynn and Rhue, pg. 602
For example, Barber (1996),
found in all of his experiments, which compared the hypnotic
condition with persons given task motivational instructions,
that the obtained results were not significantly different
from each other. That is, both conditions provided similar
results. Barber concludes that his studies provided evidence
that hypnosis is not a "state" but rather can be explained
via peoples motivations, attitudes and expectancies.
Barber and many other researchers have focused on comparing
the hypnotic condition to other psychological processes that
produce non-hypnotic behavior
In the author's opinion
here lies the crucial difference between hypnotic techniques
used in the applied setting, and the scientific reductionist
experiments. While it may be crucial for the continuing
understanding of psychological processes to adopt this reductionist
experimental approach unfortunately, it has not been constructive
in providing findings that representative of, or able to be
generalized to the applied setting. Hypnosis is simply
not used in the applied setting as an single process, rather,
it is combined with other techniques (task motivation instructions,
imagery, mental rehearsal etc.) to produced the desired effects.
Despite the general disagreement
among researchers as to which construct best defines hypnosis
(see theories of hypnosis below), the majority of practicing
clinicians work within the Disassociation model (Oakley
et al, 1996). This factor is not reflected in research
as the majority of researchers examine the construct of hypnosis
within the social cognitive model. Often, past researchers
either lacked an understanding of the hypnotic process, or
in an attempt to work within a theoretical construct, controlled
for too many variables - adversely effecting the potential
for results. This reductionist approach although important
for establishing the essential components of the hypnotic
process, adds to the body of literature a negative bias on
the effectiveness hypnotic intervention has in the applied
setting..
| Major
Theories of Hypnosis |
There are three classifications
of accepted scientific theories of the hypnotic mechanisms
used primarily for research. These are the Neodissasociation,
Sociocognitive and the Phenomenological theories of hypnosis.
In addition to these theories which are applied in the scientific
community, most paraprofessionals using hypnosis use a different
construct definition, which this author has labeled the 'Paraprofessional
Account'.
Neodissasociation
Theory: (Hilgard; 1986)
Hilgard developed this
theory based on earlier work of the French Psychiatrist Pierre
Janet (1856-1947). Neodissasociation theory proposes
a hierarchy of cognitive systems, each dissociated from each
other, but under the control of an 'executive ego'.
Hilgard (1991) suggests that the cognitive systems are similar
to "schema" as described by Bartlett (1932) in his theories
of memory encoding and retrieval. The facilitation of
a 'hypnotic trance state' can influence and change the executive
functions (via suggestion) and alter the hierarchical arrangements
of the substructures. Hilgard believes that this is
what takes place when motor controls, perceptions and memory
are changed. Under hypnotic influence, the hypnotist
can repress normally available conscious experience and make
normally repressed processes more accessible. This effect
has been demonstrated experimentally by Hilgard, with what
is known as the 'hidden observer effect'. Hilgard's
theory supports the state theory construct in the state Vs.
non-state argument, ie. hypnosis is a different state
of consciousness from our normal waking state, and one that
is induced via the hypnotic induction process.
Social Cognitive
Perspective: (Coe and Sarbin, Spanos, Wagstaff)
The social cognitive perspective
does not view hypnosis as an altered state or as a single
process; rather hypnosis is a response due to the social
and situational aspects of the hypnotic context, along with
the subject's attitudes, expectations and beliefs about hypnosis.
Social cognitivists are skeptical of hypnotic behavior, claiming
that such behaviours can be observed without hypnosis by simply
motivating and instructing subjects. Coe and Sarbin,
and Spanos contend that hypnotic behaviour is a role governed
social behaviour in which one participant plays the role of
hypnotist while another plays the role of (being a) subject.
The subject uses ordinary cognitive strategies such as imagery,
fantasy, and selective attention to create subjective experiences
he or she then report being 'hypnotised'. While Coe
and Sarbin place an emphasis on the subject merely playing
the hypnotic role, Spanos contends that the behaviour is directed
by personal goals, perceptions, attribution's of the social
task and private experience. Wagstaff maintains that
different hypnotic behaviour and displays by subjects will
require different explanations, and are usually a combination
of concepts such as; conformity, compliance, belief, attitudes,
expectations, attention, concentration, relaxation, distraction,
role enactment and imagination.
Interactive-Phenomenological
Theories (McConkey; Sheehan)
These Interactive-Phenomenological
theories place importance on the interaction of multiple variables
during hypnosis, which are dependent upon the understandings
of the subjects experience (Lynn and Rhue, pg. 11).
Parallels exist between this and the Sociocognitive
perspective on the importance of the multitude of interactive
cognitive and situational determinants (attitudes, beliefs,
expectancies etc.); however this approach places more importance
to the interactive process and differences between hypnotic
and waking behaviour. In addition the subjects
personality traits have a prominent role in shaping the hypnotic
experience.
Although among psychologists,
there seems to be no firm definition as to what hypnosis is
and how it works; this appears not to be the case among hypnotherapist's
without psychological training. Indeed, paraprofessionals
using hypnosis generally have a consensus as to how they define
the construct of hypnosis and its role in producing change.
The explanation although simple and perhaps naive, provides,
when described to the client, a working metaphor that facilitates
high expectancy for change. Previous reviews of hypnotic studies
have failed to consider the lay approach, perhaps due to its
simplistic, naive nature and lack of empirical evidence.
However it is important to take it into account for two reasons.
First, the majority of persons who engage in hypnosis for
sporting performance enhancement (or therapy), do so via paraprofessionals
rather than trained psychologists or researchers. Second,
the majority of exceptional claims that spur the research
into the effects of hypnosis come from these non-controlled
subjective accounts, of subsequent improvements.
Paraprofessional
Account
Paraprofessionals have
tended to use the same definition of hypnosis for decades,
although it recently has been paraphrased by Heap (1996) who
suggests that among the myriad of varied processes the two
central components of hypnosis are: Trance and Suggestion
(p. 498). The trance state is viewed as a natural
but distinct state of consciousness that is automatically
entered into by everyone, every day, when participating in
activities such as: day-dreaming, talking to oneself
or being engrossed in concentration. These activities
(as is trance) are usually associated with increases
in alpha brainwave activity, and can be auto-induced via a
multitude of hypnotic induction techniques. The most
common method of inducing the trance state is via suggestions
of relaxation and cognitive disassociation. Heap defines
trance as a "waking state in which the subject's attention
is detached from his or her immediate environment and is absorbed
in an inner experience such as feelings, cognition and imagery"
(p. 498).
The trance state facilitates
communication with the subconscious mind, (the part
beyond consciousness that carries out automatic operations;
including beliefs, attitudes, behaviours, motor programmes
and almost anything that is "done without conscious effort").
The trance state allows for, communication with the subconscious
mind, by direct suggestions and guided imagery, which in turn
creates changes in an individual's automatic programming.
Conversely communication can occur from the subconscious
mind to the conscious mind (Hilgard's hidden observer),
providing insight, recall of memories and an ability to created
a suggested subjective experience (by the hypnotist) without
the hypnotised subject's conscious effort.
Paraprofessionals tend
to view the subconscious as a individual entity capable of
independent communication and reprogrammable behaviour.
The function of the subconscious mind is to serve the day
to day functioning of an individual by taking care of their
automatic needs. Some lay hypnotists also contend that
the subconscious stores memories in perfect details which
are able to be accessed with hypnosis and recalled in perfect
detail. Many of the constructs used by paraprofessional
explanations and definitions of hypnosis have obviously not
stood up to scientific investigation, for example Bartlett's
(1932) explanation of the role of schema in memories, clearly
demonstrates that memory encoding and recall is based on individual
schema and not the actual event itself. Currently the
debate over false memories, that are often elicited via hypnosis
and suggestion, demonstrates that the clarity of a memory
does not reflect its accuracy.
What is Hypnosis?.. There
is no clear answer, but any one using hypnosis correctly knows
that it is a very powerful method of creating changes in attitudes,
beliefs and behaviours . often without too much conscious
effort. It is safe, quick and a remarkable vehicle to
the power of ones own mind.