Hypnosis

History

Common conceptions of hypnotic phenomena

The scientific facts

Hypnosis and hypnosislike states

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Hypnosis is a term frequently used to refer to any trance state and probably equally frequently to any condition in which an unusual degree of suggestibility is found. The term was originally introduced by James Braid in 1841 specifically to denote a sleeplike state presumably brought about in an individual by his intense and protracted visual fixation on a bright spot of light placed in a specific position relative to him. Subsequently the term came to refer to a group of presumably related conditions brought about in an individual by well-specified physical procedures. At a still later date, on the assumption that these various conditions were suggested artifacts, hypnosis once more was applied to a single condition that can best be described as an altered state of awareness characteristically accompanied by increased suggestibility, which is brought about in some individuals, the subjects, through the use of certain procedures by another person, the hypnotist. Characteristically this hypersuggestibility is initially selective, that is, the subject responds only to the hypnotist until told to do otherwise. By and large this has become the most widely accepted popular and scientific meaning of the term “hypnosis” as a concept.

By extension the term with the added qualification of “animal” has been used to denote a variety of conditions of abnormal immobility of varying durations and characteristics which can be brought about in animals by means of a number of physical procedures, including optical fixation. This so-called animal hypnosis covers such conditions as have also been variously termed cataplexy, catalepsy, death feint, hypertonicity, tonic immobility, inhibitory state, and other names, which may or may not all refer to one and the same thing.

The term “hypnosis,” like its associated terms “suggestion” and “trance,” has been greatly abused, overused, and misused by both laymen and professionals and has at times been given such a broad denotation as to render it meaningless. In particular there has been and still is extensive confounding between matters of definition, observation, theory, and plain belief. Because of the impossibility of clearly separating purely hypnotic from purely suggestive phenomena in many instances, it seems best to use the expression “hypno-suggestive” in such cases.

History

“Hypnotism” was the term originally used by James Braid to denote that which he otherwise called “nervous sleep” and which is today known as “hypnosis,” the term hypnotism now having supplanted the term “Braidism” at first employed to denote the study and use of hypnosis. Hypnotism proper then began with Braid in 1841 as a consequence of his attempts to elucidate the true nature of mesmeric phenomena (after Franz Anton Mesmer). It is generally agreed today that mesmeric phenomena most probably were a combination of hypno-suggestive and psychopathological manifestations mistakenly ascribed to the effects of a vital fluid called animal magnetism. It is reasonable to assume that hypno–suggestive phenomena have a wide cultural and temporal distribution; nevertheless, much of what has been written in this regard is a matter of sheer speculation. This is the case, for instance, in regard to claims such as the ones that Moses induced mass hypnotic hallucinations in the Egyptians, that Christ healed, and that witches hexed through the “power” of suggestion, or that the dancing mania of the Middle Ages was the result of mass suggestion or mass hypnosis. Braid’s chief scientific contribution was the isolation from mesmeric phenomena of that component which he named “hypnotism.” About forty years later, Jean Martin Charcot introduced the next important development. He asserted that hypnosis was not a single entity but consisted of a group of three distinct nervous states which he named catalepsy, lethargy, and somnambulism. Each was capable of being separately induced by specific physical means. To these Paul Beémaud added a fourth state, fascination. Two other important claims of Charcot were that these states had a somatic neurological basis and that they could be elicited only in individuals suffering from grande hystérie, of which it was symptomatic, a notion that was to be carried into Pierre Janet’s basic work on hysteria. About 1884, however, Charcot’s position began to be openly and vigorously challenged with increasing success by Hippolyte Bernheim, who had followed up some ideas proposed somewhat earlier by A. A. Liébeault. Bernheim maintained that hypnosis and all of its attendant phenomena were not pathological manifestations and were entirely the result of suggestion. He did not claim, however, as he is often misinterpreted to have done, that hypnosis as a mental state does not exist; but he did firmly believe that it was functional in nature and brought about through the effects of suggestion, as were all other hypnotic manifestations. For the sake of historical accuracy it should also be noted that the idea of suggestion playing a major, if not essential, role in mesmeric and hypnotic phenomena was recognized and pointed out not only by Braid himself but even earlier by Alexandre Bertrand, a leading authority on mesmerism, and quite emphatically by the French royal commission that investigated Mesmer’s claims in 1784. No doubt the experiments performed by Bernheim to support his thesis had some influence in establishing his views, but Braid and the royal commission too had reported clear-cut experiments in support of their views on suggestion. One must suspect that forty years of progress in the development of the scientific method and the temper of the respective times were probably of considerable influence in assuring the success of Bernheim’s suggestion theory. [SeeCharcot.]

Although the notion that hypnotic or suggested phenomena represent a continuum and may be scaled had been discussed earlier by others, our modern scales of hypnotic depth, hypnotic susceptibility, and suggestibility are most directly derived from scales proposed first by Liebeault and later by Bernheim. The years between about 1885 and 1905 represent maximal interest and activity in hypnotism, mainly in France and Germany, not to be equaled again until the 1950s.

By 1910 scientific and medical interest in hypnotism had about completely died down. It has frequently been asserted that Freud and psychoanalysis were responsible for this loss of interest. It has also been said that the decline of interest was caused by the widespread use of hypnotism by charlatans and vaudeville artists. A careful examination of the existing records shows little support for either hypothesis. The increasingly obvious and disappointingly limited success of hypnosis and suggestion as then used was bound to give way to any other more promising psychiatric and medical technique and certainly to lead to a search in other directions. Furthermore, besides the fact that most of the past research had been done by medical men whose interest was then being redirected, the cultural and social forces which were inevitably to lead to behaviorism, operationism, and logical positivism were very likely a strong influence in the temporary abandonment of hypnotism as a topic for research. Then, too, it may well be that after more than half a century of intensive study of its phenomena, culminating in the widespread acceptance of Bernheim’s view, it may have seemed to most investigators that there was little else to be found or said. Be that as it may, sporadic research went on during the next thirty years or so, with a temporary and limited renewal of interest in the psychiatric uses of hypnosis during World War I. The beginning of the next and current widespread interest in hypnotism appears to be in the early 1930s. Under the tutelage of Clark L. Hull a relatively sophisticated scientific and broad attack upon hypnotic phenomena was instigated. It came to an abrupt end following legal complications, but not before sufficient data had been collected to allow the publication of a book that may be considered as opening the way to current research on hypnotism (Hull 1933). In retrospect it cannot be said that the work of Hull, who essentially followed in the footsteps of Bernheim, threw much more light upon what hypnosis is. It did, however, show that hypno-suggestive phenomena are fit material for scientific study and that they can be studied alongside of other psychological phenomena. It also threw considerable light upon the limitations of suggestion. In spite of Hull’s work, active interest in hypnotism remained at a relatively low ebb for the next twelve years or so. Since World War II, however, there has been a renewal of intense research activity in this field, at first primarily in the United States and then in other parts of the world. Here again it is doubtful that the work of any single man, such as Hull, was responsible for the current revival of interest. It appears more likely to be due to the same social forces that once again have made the study of subjective phenomena and the problems of consciousness acceptable topics for scientific investigation. In spite of this upsurge of interest remarkably few advances over those attained as of 1910 have thus far been made toward answering fundamental questions in the field.

Common conceptions of hypnotic phenomena

Typically, an individual, the subject, is asked by another person, the hypnotist, to gaze intensely at a small, bright object held in front of, at some distance from, and somewhat above his eyes. While the subject does this, the hypnotist tells him in a repetitious manner that he is becoming relaxed and drowsy; that his eyes are getting heavy and closing; that he is falling asleep; and, eventually, that he is asleep. An onlooker usually sees, especially if the subject is sitting, clear evidence of increasing relaxation; and eventually the subject does appear to fall asleep. However, in contrast to a person who is normally asleep, the subject seems to be selectively in sensory contact with the hypnotist and with him alone, and in general to be selectively and unusually able and willing to carry out all commands, requests, or suggestions of the hypnotist, no matter how unusual and even outlandish these may be. In consequence the subject is said to be in a selective rapport with and selectively hypersuggestible to the hypnotist. The subject’s behavior most closely resembles that of the sleepwalker or somnambule, hence the alternate designation of artificial or induced somnambulism which has been given to hypnosis as thus conceived. The popular picture of the hypnotized person is one of an individual without volition who will not only believe, experience, and do whatever the hypnotist wishes along these lines but who is also capable of producing on demand behavior and phenomena out of the ordinary and bordering on the miraculous or supranormal. All of his physical and intellectual faculties and capacities are often said to be remarkably enhanced; and new ones such as psi-faculties (extrasensory perception, clairvoyance, etc.) are even said to appear. Spontaneously occurring un-awareness during hypnosis and posthypnotic amnesia are also among the classical symptoms of hypnosis. In the common conception of hypnotic behavior there is no clear-cut distinction between suggestion proper and requests or commands. For all intents and purposes they are one and the same for the hypnotized subject. On the other hand, a clear separation is made between hypnosis and suggestion, hypnosis being considered as a state induced by the procedures outlined above and responsible for a remarkable enhancement of suggestibility, which in turn makes all other phenomena possible. Suggestibility, however, is also seen as existing separately from hypnosis, with the consequence that one distinguishes between hypnotic and waking suggestions, the latter sometimes being associated with a presumed condition inappropriately called walking hypnosis. Modern research (since about 1930) has aimed mainly at determining answers to the following questions: (1) Is there a state of hypnosis distinct from suggestibility and what are its criteria? (2) What procedures and conditions promote and enhance hypnosis and/or suggestibility? (3) What are the properties and nature of hypnosis and/or suggestibility? (4) What kind of effects can be brought about through hypnosis and/or suggestions, and what is their nature? Since, as will be seen in a moment, hypnosis as a state has remained a very illusive entity, research falling in the last three areas has primarily been about suggestion and suggestibility and about effects induced by suggestions.

The scientific facts

Somewhere close to ten thousand articles and about one thousand books have been published to date on the subject matter. In spite of this the sum total of our knowledge about the phenomena in question remains remarkably meager.

Hypnosis versus suggestion

Is there a condition of the individual different from the normal waking state which is associated with and/or responsible for so-called hypnotic phenomena? To date, physiological and psychological tests have been unable to detect any difference between individuals who are in a state of normal wakefulness and those who have been hypnotized and are overtly responding to suggestions. It has also been clearly demonstrated that the suggestion and exhibition of sleeplike characteristics are quite unnecessary for the production of hypnotic behavior. However, since hypnosis is defined as a state associated with the subject’s ability to carry out essentially the same kinds of activities as a normal and fully awake individual, such findings are not particularly surprising and cannot be considered satisfactory evidence that hypnosis as an altered state of awareness does not exist. The bases currently available for believing that there is a condition which may be called hypnosis are the following: (1) After submitting to procedures aimed at producing hypnosis, certain individuals show an appreciable increase in suggestibility. (2) Their behavior and self-report consistently indicate the presence of an altered awareness. (3) Certain labile observable characteristics are frequently and consistently seen immediately following the presumed appearance of hypnosis. Among the more obvious one may list a tonic immobility including a characteristic fixity of stare (“trance stare”); an economy of movement when movement is induced; and a lack of motor, affective, and ideational spontaneity. Admittedly the last two groups of signs could be the result of implicit and unwitting suggestions or of self-suggestions and thus remain equivocal. On the whole the appearance of hyper-suggestibility remains the one and only clear-cut criterion.

Suggestion. In any event, whether or not hypnosis exists as a distinct state of consciousness, it is generally agreed that suggestion and suggestibility, the capacity for responding to suggestions, are the all-important elements in both the production of the presumed state as well as of the associated phenomena. Suggestion itself has been a poorly defined and controversial concept often confounded with suggestibility. A careful examination of the various existing examples of suggestion seems to show one common characteristic: conceptually speaking they can all be described as ideas which produce a response on the part of an individual that does not appear to be initiated or mediated by all or any of the ego processes normally operative in voluntary or intentional behavior. As such the resulting behavior belongs to the class of automatisms. Suggestions (and suggestibility) have been variously categorized based on their linguistic and grammatical features, their source of origin, the nature of the stimulus used, the shape of the distribution curves of the responses to them, the context in which they are given, and on factor analysis. The typical suggestion used in connection with hypnotic phenomena has been variously and accordingly called a “personal,” “direct,” “prestige,” or “primary” suggestion. Response to this type of suggestion is essentially unrelated to response to other types. In particular social suggestion, that is, the indirect influence by a group over an individual, is unrelated to it.

Suggestion has also been classified as hetero-suggestion and autosuggestion (self-suggestion) depending on whether the suggestor is a person other than the suggestee or is the suggestee himself. A hypnotic suggestion given so as to be carried out after the subject is no longer hypnotized is called a posthypnotic suggestion. Finally, suggestions given to a group of people rather than to one individual are called mass (group) suggestions. [SeeSuggestion.]

Suggested phenomena—real or pretended?

Bernheim raised the question whether hypnosis as a syndrome existed independently of suggestion. Some modern investigators have gone one step further and asked whether there even is such a thing as suggested behavior in the sense of an automatism. Stated another way, they propose that all hypno-suggestive behavior is voluntary or intentional activity fully initiated and mediated by the ego processes and that basically the subject is knowingly “pretending,” “simulating,” “play acting,” or “role playing (taking).” That some subjects pretend or role play some suggested behavior, and sometimes all, is not to be questioned. That all subjects simulate all suggested behavior is anything but well demonstrated. It is in fact extremely difficult, for one thing, to consider as instances of mere role playing the many well-attested cases of individuals undergoing major surgery under hypno-anesthesia alone. In any case one of the most common arguments for the above view, namely, that all suggested phenomena, including unawareness of pain, can be exhibited by some individuals in the absence of suggestions or hypnosis is anything but conclusive. For not only must one ask whether suggestions can produce phenomena that completely transcend all known human potentialities but also whether suggestions can make it possible for a given individual to behave in a manner or at a level that transcends his own best output when presumably in a nonhypnotic, normal wakeful state. It appears that this last question can be answered positively, although in a much more limited way than was once believed. In any event, those who uphold the notion of role taking as the answer seem blatantly to ignore the fact that the situation surrounding such role playing appears to have an unusual power to selectively elicit role playing of an unusual kind in certain individuals. If role playing it is, it appears to stand out in a particular subcategory all its own among the totality of possible role-playing behaviors. In particular it would still appear true that having role-played becoming hypnotized as a result of submitting to certain procedures, some individuals become able to act as if they were in possession of an often remarkably greater ability to role play, whereas others do not. In the final analysis there does not seem as yet to be much gained, if anything, by substituting “elicited role playing” for “suggested behavior.” To speak of role-taking ability in place of speaking of suggestibility with respect to certain kinds of instruction in no way makes the behavior any more understandable. [SeeRole, article onpsychological aspects.]

Suggestibility and hypnotizability

Who can be hypnotized? What makes a person suggestible? Much time and effort has gone into an attempt to find answers to these questions, with very little success thus far. Various scales purporting to measure suggestibility as well as susceptibility to hypnosis have been devised. They are all based upon sampling a person’s responsiveness to various test suggestions. If the subject is tested without the prior use of a procedure aimed at inducing hypnosis, the scale is considered to measure his suggestibility. If he has submitted to an induction of hypnosis prior to its administration the scale is considered to measure the depth of hypnosis attained. If such a test is considered as a predictive sampling of his behavior with regard to future inductions of hypnosis, it is considered a measure of hypnotic susceptibility or hypnotizability. Since none of these scales possesses an independent criterion for establishing whether or not the induction procedure had any effect at all, there is an obvious confounding of suggestibility with hypnosis. It has, however, been shown that following such an induction procedure some individuals do exhibit a definite increase in suggestibility as measured by these scales. At least such individuals are presumably hypnotized.

Results obtained with these scales and simpler tests indicate that, on the whole, children are more suggestible (and probably more hypnotizable) than adults. Women and girls are probably slightly more suggestible (and hypnotizable) than men and boys. Neurotics, as a whole, are also more suggestible (and hypnotizable) than normal individuals. Contrary to a common belief, psychotics are probably as suggestible (and hypnotizable) as normal individuals, and hysterics are neither more nor less suggestible (and hypnotizable) than other neurotics. Finally, there appears to be a slight positive correlation between suggestibility or hypnotizability and intelligence. Attempts to establish a relationship between suggestibility or hypnotizability and personality factors have generally been unsuccessful. Attitude, motivation, expectation, and emotions can enter as factors but are clearly not essential determinants of suggestibility or hypnotizability. Little is known regarding race and cultural differences. Depressants of the central nervous system, such as the barbiturates, can increase suggestibility (and hypnotizability) provided the subject is already suggestible. Satisfactory data regarding the effects of hallucinogenic drugs and the effects of stimulants are as yet unavailable. In general there does not appear to be any proven drug or device which by itself—that is, entirely through a physical action—can bring about an outstanding state of hypersuggestibility.

It needs to be remarked that the answers to many questions with regard to hypnotizability or hypnotic susceptibility are very much dependent upon (a) the criterion used to establish that a person is hypnotized, and (b) the “degree” or “depth” of hypnosis one has in mind. One of the main weaknesses in all of the studies reported by Hull, for instance, consists in the fact that closing of the eyes following suggestions to this effect is taken by him as a criterion of being hypnotized, this apparently being an all-or-none affair. There are, however, good reasons for questioning just how many subjects thus closing their eyes are really hypnotized—suggestible, yes; but whether hypnotized or not remains a moot question. To say, for instance, that 40 per cent, 2 per cent, and so on of individuals can or cannot be hypnotized is quite meaningless unless these figures are related to a clear criterion of what being hypnotized consists of. According to modern views hypnosis is on a linear continuum assumed to be isomorphic if not identical with a continuum of suggestibility. The questions “how hypnotized” or “how hypnotizable” can therefore be answered only in relation to a specified point on this continuum. A great many writers, particularly medical men, are willing to consider any sign of suggestibility, no matter how small, as a sign of hypnotizability. By this token just about everyone is hypnotizable. Others, like Braid and Charcot, insist on a full-scale manifestation of suggestibility before they consider a person hypnotizable. By this criterion only a very small percentage of individuals are susceptible to hypnosis. The majority of investigators, like Bernheim, prefer, however, to think of individuals as falling within ranges or intervals on the suggestibility continuum and speak of individuals as being insusceptible (5-30 per cent), light (33-50 per cent), medium (12-35 per cent), and deep or somnambulistic (5-29 per cent) subjects. Whether any of these are, however, actually hypnotized at the time they are ranked remains a difficult question to answer.

The effectiveness of suggestions

If it exists as a state, whatever other properties hypnosis may have were long ago pushed far into the background by the presumed hypersuggestibility that accompanies its presence. Although there may be some question whether exactly the same processes underlie the action of both waking and hypnotic suggestions, in their outward manifestations both seem to lie on the same continuum, there simply being more or less suggestibility. On the basis of the observed behavior and the reports of subjects, suggestions are apparently extremely effective in the cognitive domain. The most outstanding of these effects are hallucinations, delusions, anesthesias, paresthesias, amnesias, and paramnesias. These are functional effects that can be said to have the same kind of reality as similar functional manifestations associated with various psychopathologies. Suggestions appear to be able to bring about appreciable affective changes, particularly when these are indirectly brought about in association with hallucinations and delusions. On the other hand the power of suggestions to bring about improved sensory, motor, and intellectual performance is quite limited. Such enhanced performance as is usually observed appears to be most readily obtained as side effects of other suggested effects. The same is true of suggestions aimed at affecting the vegetative functions. Excluding improved performance, suggestions appear to be able to affect appreciably and directly all voluntary behavior, particularly at the motor level. On the whole, suggestions appear to be much more limited in their effectiveness than is commonly believed.

Regression and somatic effects. One of the more widely advertised suggested phenomena is hypnotic regression, whereby an individual is presumably caused to re-experience past events vividly, especially those of his childhood, and in the process is made to produce appropriate behavioral and even somatic manifestations. Individuals have been said by reliable sources to have thus “returned” to the first weeks of life. The matter remains controversial. Unquestionably in many cases much role playing is present, and in many instances one is dealing at best with some hypermnesia often mixed with confabulation. However, there do appear to be cases that seem to indicate the reliving of past experiences in a much more complete sense than that of a hypermnesia. By and large the matter remains unsettled.

Can somatic tissue changes, such as heat blisters, be brought about by suggestion? There are indications that this is probably possible but not readily so and perhaps only in individuals with special diatheses. The question of control of bleeding and removal of warts by suggestion remains on the whole unsettled.

Hypnosis and volition. Two perennial questions with regard to hypnosis are whether an individual can be hypnotized against his will and whether a hypnotized person can be made to act in certain ways against his will. No one can give an absolute negative answer to either question. In a general way the answer is negative, and if these effects are at all possible, they would be so only under rather unusual circumstances. It must be clearly understood that this assertion is made on the assumption that the subject is fully aware that efforts are being made to hypnotize him or that the act is one he cannot abide. There is evidence that if the situation in question can be so structured as to prevent the subject from being aware of the true nature of the acts involved, a person who otherwise would not want to be hypnotized can be hypnotized, and a hypnotized person who otherwise would not agree to perform a certain act will perform it. Thus in this sense it would appear possible, in a manner of speaking, to bring about through hypno-suggestive procedures effects that are against the will of the person. It might be added that for rather obvious ethical reasons, if for no others, a decisive experimental test of the matter is not likely to be done.

Moreover, and contrary to popular misconception, a hypnotized individual usually is not unconscious or bereft of all intellectual faculties. On the contrary, he is capable of perceiving, evaluating, reasoning, deciding, and carrying out his decisions; but he does appear to be limited in these respects by the nature of the suggestions he has been given.

Hypnosis and hypnosislike states

Whether or not it has a reality of its own, hypnosis as it has been popularly and scientifically conceived is a presumed state that appears to fall into a much larger class of altered states of awareness best subsumed under the heading trance states. The term “hypnosis” is best reserved to denote only those trance states that are associated with an initially selective hypersuggestibility and that are intentionally brought about in one individual by means of specific psychological and physical procedures and agents used by another individual. Such a definition appears overrestrictive to some writers for it tends to exclude from the class of hypnotic phenomena such occurrences as have been called “animal hypnosis,” “spontaneous (or accidental) hypnosis,” and “self-hypnosis.” The facts, however, are that, at best, known cases of animal hypnosis could probably be identified with Charcot’s induced human catalepsy when brought about by sudden stimulation. They have never been shown to have any but a very limited resemblance to the most generally accepted conception of heterohypnosis with which, incidentally, of Charcot’s three syndromes, only his “somnambulism” can be identified. Additionally, there is some evidence that animal hypnosis, better referred to as an induced state of immobilization, is physiologically distinguishable from the usual form taken by hypnosis in humans. Finally, a study of the literature shows that the coining of the expression “animal hypnosis” has come entirely out of an unwarranted generalization of the term “hypnosis” under the influence of theoretical speculations. The same is largely true of “spontaneous (accidental) hypnosis,” a phenomenon largely theorized but never clearly demonstrated to exist. The most recent abuse of the term “hypnosis” along this line is to be found in so-called “highway hypnosis,” a highly speculative notion behind which there exists but the vaguest of factual evidence. As for “self-hypnosis,” its existence has been obfuscated by the fact that “self” can be used in this case to refer to a number of different processes. The two most common and only practical so-called techniques of self-hypnosis are basically cases of heterohypnosis. In one the subject listens to a recording specially prepared by a hypnotist, and in the other he makes use of posthypnotic suggestions given to him at a previous time by a hypnotist. As for hypnosis induced without such aids by an individual acting as both hypnotist and subject and using solely a recognized technique equivalent to one used for the induction of heterohypnosis, no clear-cut cases of it have been reported. Such reported cases as those presumably seen among Tibetan monks, Hindu yogis, and Bal-inese dancers, to name only a few, have not been satisfactorily demonstrated to meet all the essential criteria of hypnosis previously mentioned. Considerable evidence exists showing that even in these instances the reported condition is brought about only after the individual involved has gone through specific and often intensive training with at least one teacher; hence there is a serious question of how free of hetero-influences these situations really are. Thus the exclusion of such rather nebulous and largely speculative entities by the definition that has been given does not present any real problem. This is not to say that some individuals probably do not spontaneously enter states of altered awareness under various conditions, as, for instance, when concentrating intensely upon a problem. It is essentially a foregone conclusion that they do. But is it hypnosis? It is clearly so only if one essentially defines hypnosis as any state of altered awareness. If, however, one retains the historical and popular meaning of the term, there does not as yet appear to be any justification for calling such conditions “spontaneous (accidental) hypnosis” or, even less, “self-hypnosis.”

AndrÉ M. Weitzenhoffer

[Directly related are the entriesPersuasionand Suggestion. Other relevant material may be found inAttention; Attitudes, article onattitude change; Pain; Role, article onpsychological aspects; Sleep; and in the biographies ofHulland Mes-mer.]

BIBLIOGRAPHY

American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis. → Published since 1958.

Beaunis, Henri 1896 Le somnambulisme provoqué. Paris: Baillière.

Beenheim, Hippolyte 1891 Hypnotisme; suggestion; psycho-thérapie. Paris: Octave Doin.

Binet, Alfred; and FÉrÉ, charles (1887) 1892 Animal Magnetism. New York: Appleton. → First published in French.

Braid, James (1843) 1899 Neurypnology: Or the Rationale of Nervous Sleep, Considered in Relation With Animal Magnetism. 2d ed. London: Redway.

Bramwell, John M. (1903) 1956 Hypnotism: Its History, Practice and Theory. New York: Julian Press.

Bulletin de l’École de Psychologie et de la Société de Psy-chothérapie. → Published since 1887. First published as Revue de l’hypnotisme..

Crocq, Jean (1896) 1900 L’hypnotisme scientifique. 2d ed. Paris: Société d’Éditions Scientifiques.

Despine, Prosper 1880 Étude scientifique sur le somnambulisme. Paris: Savy.

Hull, Clark L. 1933 Hypnosis and Suggestibility: An Experimental Approach. New York: Appleton.

Janet, Pierre 1889 L’ automatisme psychologique. Paris: Alcan.

Journal für Psychologie und Neurologic → Published since 1892. First published as Zeitschrift für Hypnotismus.

Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis. → Published since 1953.

Moll, Albert (1889) 1909 Hypnotism. New York: Scribner. → First published in German.

Richer, Paul (1885) 1891 La grande hystérie. 2d ed. Paris: Delahaye & Lecrosnier.

Schneck, Jerome M. (1953) 1963 Hypnosis in Modern Medicine. 3d ed. Springfield, III.: Thomas.

Stoll, Otto (1894) 1904 Suggestion und Hypnotismus in der Völkerpsychologie. 2d ed. Leipzig: Veit.

VÖlgyesi, Franz 1938 Menschen und Tierhypnose. Zurich: Fiissli.

Weitzenhoffer, Andre M. (1953) 1963 Hypnotism: An Objective Study in Suggestibility. New York: Wiley.

Hypnosis

A temporary narrowing of conscious awareness.

Practiced since ancient times, hypnosis or hypnotism remains difficult to define accurately and completely. Although the word hypnosis comes from the Greek word hypnos, for sleep , hypnosis is actually an intense state of concentration.

There are three degrees of hypnosis. Under light hypnosis, the subject becomes sleepy and follows simple directions; under deep hypnosis, the person experiences dulling of sensory perception , similar to that of anesthesia. Under deep hypnosis, the subject can move about, open his or her eyes, and can even undergo medical procedures with no additional anesthetic. Magicians and illusionists use deep hypnosis to make a subject behave in unusual ways, such as to suspend the subject's body between two chairs in a posture that is completely stiff. The magician suggests that the subject's body become stiff and rigid, and the result is muscle tension powerful enough to support the body completely. Many researchers contend that the key factor in hypnosis is the subject's willingness to cooperate with the hypnotist, combined with the subject's belief that hypnosis works. People who are easily hypnotized are described as "suggestible"; in fact, if the subject expects to be successfully hypnotized, it is much more likely that he or she will.

Hypnotic induction is the process by which hypnosis is accomplished. In most situations, an individual performs the induction on a willing subject. Classical hypnotic induction involves a series of steps. First, sensory input to the subject is restricted, and the subject is instructed to stop moving. Second, the subject's focus of attention is narrowed. This may be accomplished by asking him or her to focus on a specific point of light or a spot on the wall. Finally, the hypnotist begins a pattern of monotonous repetition. The hypnotist may repeatedly tell the subject to relax, to breathe slowly and deeply, and to focus attention on a fixed point. It is estimated that about 70 percent of all people can be hypnotized at some level. Within that group, an estimated 30 percent are in the low range, 60 percent in the middle, and 10 percent are highly hypnotizable using the classical approach to hypnotic induction. The claim that a person could be hypnotized against his or her will is controversial in the scientific community. Many scientists feel that an unwilling subject would be difficult to hypnotize, and most scientists raise ethical questions about any attempts to do so.

While in an hypnotic trance, some subjects are able to recall forgotten experiences. This can be useful in treating amnesia or milder forms of memory loss. Interestingly,

many subjects do not recall anything that happened while they were in the hypnotic trance; the hypnotist may direct the person to perform some act or engage in a specific behavior after the trance state has ended. This is termed post-hypnotic trance or post-hypnotic suggestion, and it is successful in only a small percentage of people who are able to be hypnotized. The post-hypnotic suggestion only works for behaviors that the subject is willing and able to perform; an unscrupulous hypnotist could not enlist an unwilling subject in criminal activity, for example, by post-hypnotic suggestion. Ending the trance is usually accomplished by a preset signal given by the hypnotist. On occasion, the subject may wake from the trance without the signal being given. It is unusual for a hypnotist to have difficulty ending the induced trance. Some people are able to hypnotize themselves in a process called autohypnosis or self-hypnosis.

Doctors also employ hypnosis as a method of pain management for chronic headaches, backaches, severe burns, and during childbirth. In cancer treatment, hypnosis is used to control the side effects of chemotherapy and as a self-healing adjunct to chemotherapy. Hypnosis is also used for autoimmune diseases, sleep disorders , and skin ailments, including warts and rashes. Some surgeons use hypnosis in the operating room, not only to reduce the amount of anesthesia patients need, but also to lessen anxiety and postoperative swelling and bleeding. A patient in an hypnotic trance can remain immobile for extended periods of time, avoiding aggravation of the injury. Victims under a state of shock are also more responsive to hypnotic induction. Dentists use hypnosis to complete dental work on a relaxed patient without the need for anesthesia. Some psychotherapists employ hypnotic induction to treat phobias, sexual dysfunction , stress , eating disorders , selfdestructive habits (such as smoking and other addictions) and to improve progress on positive behavioral changes. Hypnosis is a primary tool to gain access to memories, a controversial issue in the mental health field. In working with children, psychotherapists use hypnosis for enuresis, thumb-sucking, behavioral problems and improving academic performance, among others. Psychiatrists and psychologists may also use hypnosis to learn more about the human mind, and to help patients understand their own emotional and personality development. This application of hypnosis is termed hypnotherapy. In law enforcement, victims of and witnesses to crimes are sometimes hypnotized to help them remember important clues.

Patients who are responsive to being hypnotized must, first of all, be willing participants in the hypnosis process. One psychiatrist, Dr. Herbert Spiegel, developed the Hypnotic Induction Profile (HIP) to determine whether an individual is a good prospect for hypnosis. When the subject rolls his or her eyes back into the head, Dr. Spiegel suggests that person is likely to be successfully hypnotized if a great deal of white is visible on the eyeball. Other qualities included in Dr. Spiegel's profile include a trusting personality, preference for emotional rather than rational thinking, high empathy for others, and an intense capacity for concentration. Other researchers have studied the hypnotic situation and theorize that creating a setting where the subject is more likely to believe that hypnosis will work is a key to successful hypnosis. These scientists contend that the situation, combined with the subject's motivation, has greater influence than any personality trait or physical characteristic.

A number of professional organizations offer training and advanced training in hypnosis. Among these are the American Society of Clinical Hypnosis, the American Board of Medical Hypnosis, the American Board of Psychological Hypnosis, the American Board of Hypnosis in Dentistry and the American Hypnosis Board for Clinical Social Work. The American Psychiatric Association , the American Psychological Association , and the American Dental Association have all endorsed the technique. Mental health professionals have used hypnosis to treat sexual dysfunction, eating disorders, smoking and other addictions, enuresis and thumb-sucking.

Further Reading

Hammond, D. Corydon. Hypnotic Suggestions and Metaphors. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1990.

Manfred, Erica. "The New Uses of Hypnosis." Cosmopolitan (February 1996): 104+.

Rossi, E. L. The Psychobiology of Mind-Body Healing: New Concepts of Therapeutic Hypnosis. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1993.

Further Information

American Society of Clinical Hypnosis. 2200 East Devon Avenue, Suite 291, Des Plaines, Illinois 60018, (847) 297–3317.

Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis. 3905 Vincennes Road, Suite 304, Indianapolis, Indiana 46268,(800) 214–1738.

hypnosis as commonly conceived, is a sleep-like state, induced by monotonous stimulation and repetitive suggestions, in which the subject becomes abnormally responsive to suggestions (including therapeutic ones), and may display novel or enhanced abilities. The concept evolved from the ‘animal magnetic’ or ‘mesmeric’ movement of the period 1780–1850. Franz Anton Mesmer (1734–1815), a Viennese physician, studied the supposed healing properties of magnets, but eventually concluded that the healing effects could be equally well induced by application of the operator's hands. He developed a theory that maintenance of healthy function requires the circulation round the body, particularly the nerves, of a quasi-magnetic fluid, ‘animal magnetism’. Any disturbance to this circulation is harmful, and causes disease, but can be corrected if a healthy operator ‘magnetizes’ the patient by making ‘passes’ with the hands over his body. Having fallen out with the Vienna medical faculty, Mesmer came to Paris in 1778 and established a highly successful clinic, where he treated all kinds of ailments (not just ‘mental’ ones).

The ‘mesmeric passes’ sometimes had side-effects, for instance convulsions or sleep. One of Mesmer's pupils, the Marquis de Puységur (1751–1825) discovered that certain subjects would pass through a sleep-like state into a state of ‘somnambulism’ (later called ‘trance’ or ‘sleep-waking’). ‘Somnambulic’ subjects might converse with the operator; diagnose and prescribe for their own ailments or those of others; have visions of distant persons, places, and scenes; show enhanced powers of memory; and carry out prescribed actions, including postdated ones. Afterwards they would remember nothing of this until again put into the somnambulic state.

There were thus two therapeutic methods at the animal magnetists' disposal: the ‘mesmeric passes’, and the diagnoses and recommendations offered by magnetic somnambules. In the early nineteenth century these practices, and the associated theory of ‘animal magnetism’, spread widely across Europe, and by the 1840s they had established themselves in Britain and the US. The movement reached its peak in the late 1840s when public attention was caught by numerous reports of major surgical operations carried out painlessly on patients put into a sleep-like state by mesmeric procedures.

Magnetic practitioners were mostly well-intentioned individuals, and sometimes medically qualified (though the medical profession was generally hostile). But there also appeared numerous public demonstrators who would put on mesmeric shows for the entertainment of large audiences. These popular demonstrators played a significant part in transforming the ‘mesmeric’ movement of the first half of the nineteenth century into the more respectable ‘hypnotic’ movement of the second. For a scientist or medical man might sometimes attend a public demonstration, and realize that, however implausible the fluidic theory, the phenomena required investigation and explanation. Among persons whose interest was thus aroused were James Braid (1795–1860), a Manchester physician, who introduced the word ‘hypnotism’, and Charles Richet (1850–1935), the French physiologist and Nobel Prize winner. Both influenced the hypnotic school which developed in the late 1870s at the Salpêtrière in Paris, under the leadership of J. M. Charcot (1825–93), the neurologist. Charcot held that fully-fledged hypnosis is a pathological state with physiologically definable stages initiated by specific physical stimuli. This view was undermined in the middle 1880s by the ‘Nancy School’ of hypnotists under A. A. Liébeault (1823–1904) and H. Bernheim (1840–1919), whose work brought about a widespread, though incomplete, convergence of opinion among interested scientists and medical men. The key term was ‘suggestion’. Hypnosis is a state of partial sleep induced by repetitive sleep suggestions. Mesmeric passes in their setting constituted such suggestions, but sleep and other suggestions can more conveniently be given verbally. Part of the otherwise sleeping brain remains alert to the voice and commands of the hypnotist. Through this channel, ideas instilled by the hypnotist can take root and may develop with great rapidity and force owing to the quiescence of potentially competing brain systems. Hence ‘good’ subjects may be made to hallucinate, to obey commands automatically, to playact or regress to childhood, to remember some things and forget others, to block out pain, and to display transiently enhanced mental or even physiological powers. Neurotic disorders, which arise from self-suggestions, can be treated by countervailing suggestions, and sometimes physical disorders can be indirectly helped.

Views of these kinds, with their roots mainly in clinical observation and practice, held sway with many variations and some dissentients well into the twentieth century. But thereafter non-clinical influences became increasingly prominent. Experimental psychologists emphasized methodological problems. Many have questioned whether there is any ‘special state’ of hypnosis. No generally agreed objective markers of such a state (such as a certain EEG pattern) have been uncovered, and ‘hypnotic’ phenomena, it is claimed, can often be obtained with unhypnotized subjects when their motivational level and degree of ‘imaginative involvement’ are appropriately manipulated. Dispute continues. Methodological questions have also been raised over the supposed benefits of hypnotherapy. Few studies of the outcome of such therapy have utilized matched control groups or have correlated therapeutic success with patients' ratings on scales of hypnotic susceptibility. Thus, even when hypnotherapy is apparently successful, it often remains unclear what part has been played by the hypnotic procedures as such, though it does seem that they may particularly benefit certain psychosomatic disorders.

The methodological arguments have been linked to a multiplication of theoretical positions. The ‘neodissociationist’ view of Ernest Hilgard (b. 1904), which explains hypnotic phenomena in terms of the partly autonomous functioning of ‘cognitive control systems’ in the brain, has some dedicated followers, as does the ‘socio-cognitive’ school of Nicholas Spanos (1942–94), which holds that ‘hypnotized’ subjects use ‘cognitive strategies’ to enact the social role of ‘good hypnotic subject’. However, many theorists present not so much a unitary theory of hypnosis as a multipronged approach to the phenomena traditionally labelled ‘hypnotic’.

Meanwhile many hypnotherapists adhere to older paradigms (which patients can easily grasp), and continue to practice with little regard to recent methodological and theoretical arguments; but in this respect hypnotherapy is perhaps little different from other forms of psychotherapy.

A. Gauld

Bibliography

Forrest, D. (1999). The Evolution of Hypnotism. Black Ace Books, Forfar.
Gauld, A. (1992). A History of Hypnotism. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

HYPNOSIS

Hypnosis is the altered state of consciousness brought on by a hypnotist using various techniques (staring at an object, verbal commands, etc.). The English physician James Braid, in his Neurhypnology (1843), popularized, or may even have coined, the word "hypnotism." "Hypnosis" appears to have come into use later.

Braid sought to replace unscientific ideas and practices with a scientific conception of a "peculiar state of the nervous system induced by a fixed and abstracted attention of the mental and visual eye." He also hoped to do away with what magnetizers called "rapport." In the mid-nineteenth century, the English physiologist William Carpenter provided scientific support for "Braidism" by making hypnosis the paradigm of the reflexive and automatic activity that he called "unconscious cerebration." Introduced to the topic by the young physiologist Charles Richet, Jean Martin Charcot experimented with hypnosis on hysterical patients in his clinic starting in 1878, basing himself on Braid's and especially Carpenter's neurological approach. In 1882, in an article that was noted by the Académie des Sciences, he identified a pathology unique to hysterics, the "grand hypnotism" characterized by three specific nervous states (catalepsy, lethargy, and somnambulism).

Starting in 1860 in Nancy, where he had set up a "clinic," Ambroise Liebeault also made use of hypnotism, employing methods established by J.-P. Durand de Gros, one of the proponents of Braidism in France. He paid special attention to Braid's experiments with suggestion, using hypnotic suggestion for therapeutic purposes, unlike Charcot, whose practice was almost purely experimental. Hippolyte Bernheim went even further and treated hypnosis as a particular type of suggestion. He also popularized the term "psychotherapy," which he borrowed from the Briton Hack Tuke, and practiced psychotherapy by means of suggestion with and without hypnotism. After 1884 two opposing schools of hypnosis developed around Charcot and Bernheim. In Paris, the emphasis was on the idea of a pathological nervous state; in Nancy, on that of a link or psychological influence that was not necessarily pathological.

Nonetheless, although they often took their cue from a particular school, some practitioners and researchers tried to look beyond prevailing theoretical and therapeutic dogmas. The psychotherapist could thus refuse merely to issue commands, and attempt through hypnosis, to discover memories forgotten during waking life that could be at the root of neurotic symptoms (see the case of Pierre Marie in L'Automatisme psychologique by Pierre Janet, 1889). Several stories of cures associated with the return of forgotten memories were published at the end of the nineteenth century.

In discussions of hypnotic suggestion the question of "rapport" was again raised. Joseph Delboeuf introduced the idea of reciprocal suggestion. Pierre Janet and Alfred Binet spoke of "electivity," of "somnambulant passion" and "experimental love." Additionally, there was interest in the psychology of hypnotic states of consciousness. These were described in terms of dissociation (Janet) or hypnoid states (Sigmund Freud and Josef Breuer). Finally, contrary to the dominant medical view at the time, the idea arose that the unconscious was not only reflexological but psychological. Experiments with post-hypnotic suggestion, in which a subject, while awake, obeys an order given during a hypnosis that he has apparently forgotten, seemed to the philosopher Henri Bergson to prove the existence of unconscious ideas and a psychological unconscious. Freud the psychoanalyst undoubtedly emerged from this plethora of research and debate: 1885-1886 (Paris), 1889 (Nancy), and 1895 (publication of the Studies on Hysteria ).

Hypnosis refers both to a state of consciousness (or unconsciousness) and to a relationship. True to the legacy of Charcot and Bernheim, present-day proponents of hypnology are still divided into "statists" and "relationists." Some points of view, especially within the relationist school, draw on psychoanalysis, while others seek to reinstate hypnotism as part of an anti-psychoanalytic tendency. For hypnosis, like animal magnetism before it, does not refer only to a state or to a relationship. Since the nineteenth century it has become a magical word with strong negative or positive connotations and as many staunch advocates as militant opponents—a tireless vector of fascination and stigma.

The practice, phenomenology, and theory of hypnosis have evolved, of course, since the time of James Braid, and hypnosis can now be seen as a largely cultural phenomenon. All the same, some questions, contradictory and probably unanswerable, seem to remain after more than a century. Is the hypnotic state akin to sleep and dreaming, or to wakefulness and lucidity? Does it imply an unconscious dispossession, or is it a form of playacting? And is "hypnosis" a functional concept that can explain certain phenomenon, or a word that precipitates the very state it is supposed to account for?

Jacqueline Carroy

See also: Alienation; Anna O., case of; Autosuggestion; Bernheim, Hippolyte; Cäcilie M., case of; Cathartic method; Charcot, Jean Martin; Chertok, Léon (Tchertok, Lejb); Cinema and psychoanalysis; "Confusion of Tongues between Adults and the Child"; Congrès international de l'hypnotisme expérimental et scientifique, Premier; Cure; Delboeuf, Joseph Rémi Léopold; Emmy von N., case of; Five Lectures on Psycho-Analysis ; Freud's Self-analysis; Freud, the Secret Passion ; Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego ; Hypnoid states; Janet Pierre; Liebault Ambroise Auguste; "Lines of Advance in Psycho-Analytic Therapy"; Look, gaze; Masochism; Negative hallucination; Psychoanalytic treatment; Psychotherapy; Relaxation psychotherapy; Repression, lifting of; Resistance; Self-consciousness; Studies on Hysteria ; Suggestion; Trance; Qu'est-ce que la suggestion? (What is suggestion?).

Bibliography

Carroy, Jacqueline. (1991). Hypnose, Suggestion et Psychologie: l'invention de sujets. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

Chertok, Léon, and Stengers, Isabelle. (1992). A critique of psychoanalytic reason: Hypnosis as a scientific problem from Lavoisier to Lacan (Martha Noel Evans in collaboration with the authors, Trans.). Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press. (Original work published 1989)

Ellenberger, Henri F. (1970). The discovery of the unconscious: The history and evolution of dynamic psychiatry. New York: Basic Books.

Freud, Sigmund. (1921c). Group psychology and the analysis of the ego. SE, 18: 65-143.

hypnotism [Gr.,=putting to sleep], to induce an altered state of consciousness characterized by deep relaxation and heightened suggestibility. The term was originally coined by James Braid in 1842 to describe a phenomenon previously known as animal magnetism or mesmerism (see Mesmer , Friedrich Anton). Superficially resembling sleep, it is generally induced by the monotonous repetition of words and gestures while the subject is completely relaxed. Although almost everyone can be hypnotized, individuals vary greatly in susceptibility. The hypnotic state is characterized by heightened suggestibility and represents an altered state of consciousness as recent research has shown electrical changes occur in brain activity when a person is hypnotized. Ernest Hilgard's neodissociation theory (1977) has been influential in the explanation of hypnosis. Hilgard's theory asserts that several distinct states of consciousness can be present during hypnosis, such that certain actions may become dissociated from the conscious mind. In the late 19th cent., it was used by a number of medical practitioners, who found that individuals susceptible to hysteria are highly suggestible and can be put into deep hypnosis, sometimes leading to a cure. Sigmund Freud used the method in psychoanalysis. In recent years, hypnosis has been widely used by practitioners as an aid in medical practice and psychotherapy. Hypnosis is also used in some criminal investigations, to help defendants to recall events they might otherwise not remember.

Bibliography: See E. Hilgard and J. Hilgard, Hypnosis in the Relief of Pain (1984); D. Waxman et al., ed., Modern Trends in Hypnosis (1984).

215. Hypnosis

See also 334. PSYCHOLOGY .

autohypnotism, autohypnosis

1. the process of hypnotizing oneself.

2. the resulting state.

biomagnetism

1. animal magnetism, or the power that enables some people to induce a hypnotic state in others.

2. physical attraction between members of opposite sexes. —biomagnetic , adj.

hypnoanalysis

psychoanalysis of a patiënt while he is under hypnosis. —hypnoanalytic, hypnoanalytical , adj.

hypnogenesis

the process of inducing a state of hypnosis. —hypnogenetic , adj.

hypnotherapy

psychotherapy employing hypnosis. —hypnotherapeutic , adj.

hypnotism

the science that studies hypnosis and the process of inducing a hypnotic state. —hypnotist , n.

Mesmerism

1. hypnosis as induced by Dr. F. A. Mesmer through “animal magnetism,” a 19th-century therapy.

2. hypnotism.

3. a compelling attraction; fascination. —mesmerization , n. —mesmerist, mesmerizer , n.

mesmeromania

an obsession with hypnosis.

monoideism

the focusing of the attention on a single thing, especially as a result of hypnosis.

narcohypnosis

hypnosis with the aid of drugs.

odylism

the theory of od, a hypothetical force formerly held to pervade all nature and to reveal itself in magnetism, mesmerism, chemical action, etc. —odylic , adj.

psycheism

Rare. the state of being in a hypnotic trance.

somnipathy

a state of sleep induced by hypnosis or mesmerism. —somnipathist , n.

Hypnosis

Hypnosis as Entertainment

Hypnosis as a Form of Therapy

Hypnosis is a passive, relaxed state during which a person’s memory and perception are altered and the person is more responsive than usual to suggestion. A hypnotic state typically is caused by the monotonous repetition of words and gestures by the hypnotist.

Keywords

for searching the Internet and other reference sources

Hypnotherapy

Hypnosis as Entertainment

“Look deep into my eyes,” said the hypnotist to his newest subject, 15-year-old Juan. “You are feeling very relaxed,” he repeated over and over again in a low, calming voice. It was Spirit Week at Juan’s high school, and this assembly was one of the highlights. Much to the delight of his classmates, Juan really did appear to be hypnotized after a couple minutes of listening to the hypnotist’s voice. When the hypnotist suggested that Juan recall an event from his childhood, Juan acted as if he were blowing out the candles at his fifth birthday party and then playing with one of his gifts, a fire truck. When asked to think about his favorite kind of music, Juan acted as if he were playing the drums. And when the hypnotist suggested to Juan that he was caught in a snowstorm, he started shivering uncontrollably. Juan’s friends roared with laughter as they watched him respond to the hypnotist’s suggestions.

Was Juan really hypnotized? Probably not, if we define hypnosis as a state in which a person is unaware of what he or she is doing. More likely, Juan was feeling relaxed and open to suggestions from the hypnotist, and he knew that he was part of the show. So behavior that might have seemed strange in other contexts was perfectly acceptable in this setting. When his friends asked him later if he remembered what had happened, he said that he did.

Hypnosis as a Form of Therapy

Many people think that hypnotism is something done just for fun, but actually it often is used as a way of helping people deal with various behavioral and emotional problems. Experts disagree about how valuable this technique is, and no one has been able to explain exactly how it works. Nevertheless, there is evidence to suggest that hypnosis might be quite helpful in some cases for the treatment of pain, depression, anxiety, stress, sleep disturbances, eating disorders, and many other problems.

Hypnotherapists

Health care professionals who use hypnosis, sometimes called “hypnotherapists,” are very different from the “stage hypnotists” who put on entertaining shows at theaters and schools. Typically hypnotherapists are licensed physicians, psychologists (sy-KOL-o-jists), or social workers who have received considerable training in the uses of hypnosis. Unlike entertainers, their goal is not to persuade a person to act strangely or be silly, but instead to produce feelings of relaxation, calmness, and well-being. Usually, they will begin the session by suggesting these states of mind and instructing the person to imagine or think about pleasant experiences. Some people are more easily hypnotized than others, but most people who experience hypnosis report changes in the way they feel, think, or behave. They may feel as if they have entered a different level of consciousness (inner awareness), or they may simply feel more focused, attentive, relaxed, and therefore better able to concentrate on their inner thoughts and feelings without being distracted.

Getting “Mesmerized” In The Eighteenth And Nineteenth Centuries

Today we use the term “mesmerize” to mean “fascinate” or “amaze.” For example, we might say, “The child was mesmerized by the colorful new toy,” or “I am mesmerized by your smile.” This modern word is derived from the name of Franz Anton Mesmer, an Austrian physician who introduced the “healing art” of mesmerism in the late 1700s. Mesmer claimed that certain people (including himself) had special powers over the “invisible fluid” he believed was contained within the human body. Mesmer thought that disease was the result of blockages in the flow of this fluid through the body and that he and other special people could use the power of their touch and their gaze to restore healthy flow of this fluid in sick people.

Mesmer used his so-called powers to produce a trancelike state in his patients, who often experienced convulsions (intense shaking) or delirium (confusion and an overly excited state) by the end of the healing session. Many people claimed to have been healed by Mesmer, but the authorities in France, where he was living at the time, soon called his practice into question. In fact, the American statesman Benjamin Franklin was a member of a committee of physicians and scientists appointed by the king of France, Louis XVI, to investigate Mesmer in the 1780s. Nevertheless, mesmerism spread to England, France, and other European countries in the 1800s and became quite popular. While Mesmer’s methods may seem questionable to us today, he is credited for his role in the eventual development of hypnotism as a practice that can help some people deal with physical and psychological conditions.

Suggestion and Choice

Contrary to popular belief, people who are hypnotized do not lose control over what they are doing. While they may be more likely to respond to the therapist’s suggestions, they can choose whether to follow these instructions. People remain aware of what they are doing and are likely to remember everything after the session is over. Hypnosis is not the same as the sleeplike trance that often is portrayed in movies and television shows, and it does not have the magical powers that sometimes are associated with it. Within limits, hypnosis can make a person much more likely to believe in or cooperate with another person (the hypnotist) and do what he or she asks. In other words, it seems that hypnosis is all about the power of suggestion.

See also

Consciousness

Relaxation

Therapy

hyp·no·sis / hipˈnōsis/ • n. the induction of a state of consciousness in which a person apparently loses the power of voluntary action and is highly responsive to suggestion or direction. Its use in therapy, typically to recover suppressed memories or to allow modification of behavior by suggestion, has been revived but is still controversial. ∎  this state of consciousness.

hypnosis Artificially induced, sleep-like state during which suggestions are readily obeyed. Hynosis was first described more than two centuries ago. It is physiologically different from sleep and closer to a state of relaxed wakefulness. Psychoanalysis often exploits its reduction of critical faculties and effects on memory.

hypnosis (hip-noh-sis) n. a sleeplike state, artificially induced by a hypnotist, in which the mind is more than usually receptive to suggestion. Hypnotic suggestion has been used for a variety of purposes in medicine, for example as a cure for addiction and in other forms of psychotherapy.

hyp·no·tism / ˈhipnəˌtizəm/ • n. the study or practice of hypnosis. DERIVATIVES: hyp·no·tist n.

hypnotism (hip-nŏ-tizm) n. the induction of hypnosis.

hypnosis •glacis, Onassis •abscess •anaphylaxis, axis, praxis, taxis •Chalcis • Jancis • synapsis • catharsis •Frances, Francis •thesis • Alexis • amanuensis •prolepsis, sepsis, syllepsis •basis, oasis, stasis •amniocentesis, anamnesis, ascesis, catechesis, exegesis, mimesis, prosthesis, psychokinesis, telekinesis •ellipsis, paralipsis •Lachesis •analysis, catalysis, dialysis, paralysis, psychoanalysis •electrolysis • nemesis •genesis, parthenogenesis, pathogenesis •diaeresis (US dieresis) • metathesis •parenthesis •photosynthesis, synthesis •hypothesis, prothesis •crisis, Isis •proboscis • synopsis •apotheosis, chlorosis, cirrhosis, diagnosis, halitosis, hypnosis, kenosis, meiosis, metempsychosis, misdiagnosis, mononucleosis, myxomatosis, necrosis, neurosis, osmosis, osteoporosis, prognosis, psittacosis, psychosis, sclerosis, symbiosis, thrombosis, toxoplasmosis, trichinosis, tuberculosis •archdiocese, diocese, elephantiasis, psoriasis •anabasis • apodosis •emphasis, underemphasis •anamorphosis, metamorphosis •periphrasis • entasis • protasis •hypostasis, iconostasis