|
|||||||
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|||||||
This is a summary of some of the scientific evidence on the subject of hypnosis. It has been compiled by Lewis Jones from a number of sources, details of which are listed at the end.
General
There is no objective physiological difference between subjects who are "hypnotised" and subjects who are wide awake (EEG, pulse, skin resistance, etc).
After the experiment, subjects' answers depend on the wording of the question. When asked "Did you feel you could not resist the suggestions?" 83 per cent agreed they could not resist. When asked "Did you feel you could resist the suggestions?" 78 per cent agreed they could resist.
It makes no difference whether the subject's eyes remain open or closed.
Response rates depend on how the experiment is presented. When a hypnotic session was presented as a test of imagination, 41 per cent showed suggestibility. When the session was presented as a test of gullibility, 6 per cent showed suggestibility.
Reports of an "unusual experience" have been found to depend on the eyes being closed.
Requests to simply "Place yourself In hypnosis" are just as effective as going through an elaborate induction procedure.
Both "hypnotised" and control subjects respond with faster breathing and heart beat when told that their heart is beating faster.
No hypnotist is able to distinguish between "hypnotised" subjects and simulators.
Pain
In the past 25 years, there has not been a single report of hypnoanalgesia.
Between 9 and 24 per cent of women have a relatively painless childbirth without any intervention.
Reduction of cancer pain is largely untested.
Taste
When subjects are told to imagine that water tastes sour, there is a small increase in saliva. And when they are told that a sour solution is tasteless, there is a small decrease in saliva. But the same results are obtained without hypnosis.
Hearing
When a subject is fed a different tone into each ear, and told that he is deaf In one ear, he still hears the difference tone that is only audible by those who can hear both tones.
"Hypnotised" subjects still show the blink reaction to sounds.
When control subjects read aloud, and a delayed feedback of their voice is simultaneously fed into their ears, their reading slurs and they develop stammering and stumbling. The same thing happens with "hypnotised" subjects who claim to be deaf.
When "hypnotised" subjects are told to hallucinate delayed auditory feedback, they don't display stammering or slurring.
When a dichotic tape presents different words to each ear of a "hypnotised" subject who claims to be deaf in one ear, he cannot discriminate between words presented to each ear.
When subjects are told, "You are now deaf... Can you hear me?" some reply "No, I cannot hear you." When later told, "You can now hear," they respond to this command.
Sight
When subjects are told they are colour-blind for red or green, they are caught out when tested with the patterns of the Isihara malingering card, and claim they can't see what can in fact be seen by both colour blind and normal-sighted people.
When subjects are told they are blind, their pupils still contract in response to light. On the other hand, when told to hallucinate light, their pupils do not contract.
When subjects are told they cannot see the distorting elements in an optical illusion, they are still affected by the illusion.
After being told to hallucinate colours, subjects do not show the effect of negative after-images.
In the matter of reacting to illusions, there is no difference between "hypnotised" subjects and those who are task-motivated.
Skin effects
24-28 per cent of children lose their warts within 6 months without intervention. Warts remit after various treatments (placing the hand in a fake "electric" machine, painting on dyes, saline injections, suggestion, fake "X-ray" machines, etc). For people in general, warts normally remit in 2 to 3 years.
"Hypnotised" subjects don't respond differently to controls.
Blisters can't be produced. Wheals and marks are sometimes produced when the skin is touched or stroked: this is true of a small percentage of the normal population, without intervention or "hypnosis."
When touched with chestnut leaves and told that these were allergy-producing, all subjects (both "hypnotised" and controls) showed some dermatitis. Most of both groups showed no reaction when stroked with genuine allergy-producing leaves and told that these were non-allergy-producing chestnut leaves.
Age regression
Subjects learned a list of nonsense syllables, and two months later they were "hypnotised" and told they had regressed two months. Their knowledge of the learnt words was no better than that of the controls.
Subjects were regressed to the age of three, then given the Stanford-Binet IQ test. They responded in the way they imagined a three-year-old might respond, but this was as if they were 5-6 years old.
Subjects regressed to infancy show a normal adult EEG.
Subjects regressed to childhood often claim to know the day of the week. In a test with actual 4 year-olds, not a single one knew what day it was.
Dangerous acts
When told to perform some dangerous or criminal act, controls performed in the same way as "hypnotised" subjects. All are aware that they are in an academic test situation, and that safety precautions must have been taken by the experimenters.
Amnesia
There is no difference between "hypnotised" subjects and controls. All subjects produce the "forgotten" material as soon as they are given permission.
When subjects learn two word lists, one of which interferes with the learning of the other, and told to forget the interfering list, the interference effects remain in operation.
Even though the memory of certain words is denied, Galvanic Skin Reflex responses show that the subject is still reacting to them.
Nearly 100 per cent of "amnesiacs" admitted suppressing reports of words that they had not really forgotten. Most amnesiacs breach under pressure.
Subjects are told that the mind has "two hidden parts", and that only one of these becomes amnesic. The subject produces the"forgotten" material when the experimenter addresses the "non-amnesic" part.
Subjects are told a baseball story or a cave story, then told to forget the story. When given a test of word associations, each group produces words associated with the story told.
When subjects are given practice sessions and then told to forget these sessions, they nevertheless show evidence of the practice when tested later.
Post-hypnotic suggestions
Responses to a cue-word stop when the experimenter turns aside to talk to a colleague, and begin again when he signals that the experiment is still in operation.
Responses are not given when the cue-word is spoken by an accomplice who is met in the corridor outside the experiment room.
Sources:
Original em http://www.hutch.demon.co.uk/hypnosum.htm