Multiple hypnotizabilities: Differentiating the building blocks of hypnotic response

Psychological Assessment

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 200-211

  Woody, Erik Z ^a   Barnier, Amanda J ^b   McConkey, Kevin M ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

Author keywords

Factor analysis; Hypnosis; Hypnotizability; Hypnotizability scales; Multidimensionality

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AMNESIA; ARTICLE; COGNITION; COLLEGE STUDENT; EYE MOVEMENT; FACTORIAL ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HAND MOVEMENT; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; HYPNOSIS; MALE; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; NORMAL HUMAN; PERCEPTION; PREDICTION; PSYCHOMETRY; RATING SCALE;

ADULT; APTITUDE; COGNITION; FACTOR ANALYSIS, STATISTICAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; HYPNOSIS; MALE; QUESTIONNAIRES; SUGGESTION;

EID: 22544479979     PISSN: 10403590     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/1040-3590.17.2.200     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Arbuckle, J. L., & Wothke, W. (1999). Amos 4.0 user's guide. Chicago: SmallWaters.
2. Balthazard, C. G. (1993). The Hypnosis Scales at their centenary: Some fundamental issues still unresolved. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 41, 47-73.
3. Balthazard, C. G., & Woody, E. Z. (1985). The "stuff of hypnotic performance: A review of psychometric approaches. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 283-296.
4. Barber, J. (1991). The locksmith model: Accessing hypnotic responsiveness. In S. J. Lynn & J. W. Rhue (Eds.), Theories of hypnosis: Current models and perspectives (pp. 241-274). New York: Guilford Press.
5. Barnier, A. J. (2002). Posthypnotic amnesia for autobiographical episodes: A laboratory model of functional amnesia? Psychological Science, 13, 232-237.
6. Barnier, A. J., & McConkey, K. M. (1996). Action and desire in posthypnotic responding. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 44, 120-139.
7. Barnier, A. J., & McConkey, K. M. (1998a). Posthypnotic responding away from the hypnotic setting. Psychological Science, 9, 256-262.
8. Barnier, A. J., & McConkey, K. M. (1998b). Posthypnotic responding: Knowing when to stop helps to keep it going. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 46, 204-219.
9. Barnier, A. J., & McConkey, K. M. (1999a). Hypnotic and posthypnotic suggestion: Finding meaning in the message of the hypnotist. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 47, 192-208.
10. Barnier, A. J., & McConkey, K. M. (1999b). Posthypnotic suggestion, response complexity, and amnesia. Australian Journal of Psychology, 51, 1-5.
11. Barnier, A. J., & McConkey, K. M. (2004). Defining and identifying the highly hypnotisable person. In M. Heap, R. Brown, & D. Oakley (Eds.), High hypnotisability: Theoretical, experimental and clinical issues (pp. 30-60). London: Brunner-Routledge.
12. Barnier, A. J., Wright, J., & McConkey, K. M. (2004). Posthypnotic amnesia for autobiographical episodes: Influencing memory accessibility and quality. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 52, 260-279.
13. Bock, R. D., & Aitkin, M. (1981). Marginal maximum likelihood estimation of item parameters: Application of an EM algorithm. Psychometrika, 46, 443-459.
14. Bock, R. D., Gibbons, R. D., & Muraki, E. (1988). Full-information factor analysis. Applied Psychological Measurement, 12, 261-280.
15. Brown, D. P. (1992). Clinical hypnosis research since 1986. In E. Fromm & M. R. Nash (Eds.), Contemporary hypnosis research (pp. 427-458). New York: Guilford Press.
16. Cox, R., & Barnier, A. J. (2003). Posthypnotic amnesia for a first romantic relationship: Forgetting the entire relationship versus forgetting selected events. Memory, 11, 307-318.
17. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
18. Gardner, H., Kornhaber, M. L., & Wake, W. K. (1996). Intelligence: Multiple perspectives. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace College.
19. Gorsuch, R. L. (1983). Factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
20. Gottfredson, L. S. (1998). The general intelligence factor. Scientific American Presents-Exploring Intelligence, 9, 24-29.
21. Hendrickson, A. E., & White, P. O. (1966). A method for the rotation of higher-order factors. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 19, 97-103.
22. Hilgard, E. R. (1965). Hypnotic susceptibility. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.
23. Hilgard, E. R., Crawford, H. J., Bowers, P. G., & Kihlstrom, J. F. (1979). A tailored SHSS:C, permitting user modification for special purposes. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 27, 125-133.
24. Hull, C. L. (1933). Hypnosis and suggestibility: An experimental approach. New York: Appleton-Century.
25. Kihlstrom, J. F. (2001, August). Foxes and hedgehogs and hypnosis, oh my! Address presented at the 109th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, San Francisco.
26. Kihlstrom, J. F., & Register, P. A. (1984). Optimal scoring of amnesia on the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 32, 51-57.
27. Mallard, D., & Bryant, R. A. (2001). Hypnotic color blindness and performance on the Stroop Test. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 49, 330-338.
28. Marsh, H. W. (1996). Positive and negative global self-esteem: A substantively meaningful distinction or artifactors? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 810-819.
29. McConkey, K. M., & Barnier, A. J. (2004). The highly hypnotisable person: Unity and diversity in behaviour and experience. In M. Heap, R. Brown, & D. Oakley (Eds.), High hypnotisability: Theoretical, experimental and clinical issues (pp. 61-84). London: Brunner-Routledge.
30. McConkey, K. M., Glisky, M. L., & Kihlstrom, J. F. (1989). Individual differences among hypnotic virtuosos: A case comparison. Australian Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 17, 131-140.
31. Muthén, B. (1978). Contributions to factor analysis of dichotomized variables. Psychometrika, 43, 551-560.
32. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
33. O'Connell, D. N., Orne, M. T., & Shor, R. E. (1966). A comparison of hypnotic susceptibility as assessed by diagnostic ratings and initial standardized test scores. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 14, 324-332.
34. Perry, C., Nadon, R., & Button, J. (1992). The measurement of hypnotic ability. In E. Fromm & M. R. Nash (Eds.), Contemporary hypnosis research (pp. 459-490). New York: Guilford Press.
35. Sadler, P., & Woody, E. (2004). Four decades of group hypnosis scales: What does item response theory tell us about what we've been measuring? International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 52, 132-158.
36. Sheehan, P. W., & McConkey, K. M. (1982). Hypnosis and experience: The exploration of phenomena and process. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
37. Shor, R. E., & Orne, E. C. (1962). Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility. Palo Alto. CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
38. Shye, S., Elizur, D., & Hoffman, M. (1994). Introduction to facet theory: Content design and intrinsic data analysis in behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
39. Sutcliffe, J. P. (1960). "Credulous" and "skeptical" views of hypnotic phenomena: A review of certain evidence and methodology. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 8, 73-101.
40. Sutcliffe, J. P. (1961). "Credulous" and "skeptical" views of hypnotic phenomena: Experiments on esthesia, hallucination, and delusion. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62, 189-200.
41. Szechtman, H., Woody, E., Bowers, K. S., & Nahmias, C. (1998). Where the imaginal appears real: A positron emission tomography study of auditory hallucinations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 95, 1956-1960.
42. Tellegen, A. (1978/1979). On measures and conceptions of hypnosis. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 21, 219-237.
43. Tellegen, A., & Atkinson, G. (1976). Complexity and measurement of hypnotic susceptibility: A comment on Coe and Sarbin's alternative interpretation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 142-148.
44. Thissen, D. (1988). MULTILOG: Multiple, categorical item analysis and test scoring using item response theory. Chicago: Scientific Software.
45. Wainer, H. (1976). Estimating coefficients in linear models: It don't make no nevermind. Psychological Bulletin, 83, 213-217.
46. Waller, N. G., Tellegen, A., McDonald, R. P., & Lykken, D. T. (1996). Exploring nonlinear models in personality assessment: Development and preliminary validation of a negative emotionality scale. Journal of Personality, 64, 545-576.
47. Weitzenhoffer, A. M. (1997). Hypnotic susceptibility: A personal and historical note regarding the development and naming of the Stanford scales. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 45, 126-143.
48. Weitzenhoffer, A. M., & Hilgard, E. R. (1962). Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
49. Weitzenhoffer, A. M., & Hilgard, E. R. (1963). Stanford Profile Scales Hypnotic Susceptibility Scales: Forms I and II. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
50. Weitzenhoffer, A. M., & Hilgard, E. R. (1967). Revised Stanford Profile Scales Hypnotic Susceptibility Scales: Forms I and II. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
51. Wilson, D. T., Wood, R., & Gibbons, R. (1991). TESTFACT: Test scoring, item statistics, and item factor analysis. Chicago: Scientific Software International.
52. Woody, E. Z., & McConkey, K. M. (2003). What we don't know about the brain and hypnosis, but need to: A view from the Buckhorn Inn. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 51, 309-338.
53. Woody, E., & Sadler, P. (1998). On reintegrating dissociated theories: Comment on Kirsch and Lynn (1998). Psychological Bulletin, 123, 192-197.
54. Woody, E., & Szechtman, H. (2000). Hypnotic hallucinations: Toward a biology of epistemology. Contemporary Hypnosis, 17, 4-14.