![]() Orne skillfully proves how none of these authors had controlled the influence the hypnotist may have had on the subject prior to hypnosis, which Orne considers a key shortcoming of these studies. Orne points out that, before asserting that by means of hypnosis a person can make someone act against her will, one must prove that, without hypnosis, the individual would not have been predisposed to carry out such an act. But according to Orne (1962), the evidence shown by all of these authors to support their view is inconsistent, if not clearly biased. Nevertheless, Wells (1941), Rowland (1939), Young (1948), Estabrooks (1993), Wolberg (1945 1948), and Weitzenhoffer (1949) have been leading proponents of the view that, provided the hypnotist’s technique is adequate, the subject in hypnosis may be forced to do anything. ![]() The impossibility of getting persons to do anything under hypnosis that they would not do without hypnosis, therefore, has been widely proven. The answer that many have given to these questions is “No” (Capafons, 2001 Lynn and Kirsch, 2006 Orne, 1962). One of the oldest questions in the literature on hypnosis is whether deeply hypnotized individuals can be induced to perform antisocial or self-destructive acts (Orne, 1962), or whether those individuals can be induced to perform acts that are against their core principles and that they would never perform if they were not under hypnosis. Keywords: hypnosis, psychological manipulation, suggestibility, dissociation, integration I introduce the concepts of dissociation and integration for the purpose of increasing readers’ understanding about the twofold route to higher states of suggestibility and the way back from them, and of showing how this way back can be hampered in manipulative contexts. I conclude that the main difference in the case of hypnosis lies in the ease with which one can exit that enhanced state of suggestibility. I compare what occurs during hypnosis to what occurs in the mildly or overly manipulative contexts of seduction and coercion, where suggestibility is also enhanced. My conclusion is that one’s confidence in the process and the hypnotizer plays a major role in any enhanced suggestibility while under hypnosis. I will give some well-established and agreed-upon definitions of hypnosis and explain why one’s suggestibility is enhanced while hypnotized. In this paper I deal with some of the possible causes of that confusion, the main one being that a major characteristic of hypnosis (namely, an increase in suggestibility one experiences while under hypnosis) is also a key characteristic of people in manipulative and abusive environments. ![]() Nevertheless, this widespread vision is essentially false. Traces of that point of view can even taint scientific views at scientific forums. The mass media favor this image, thus making it popular. ![]() Pehuén Institute of Psychology, Barcelona, SpainĪ widespread vision links hypnosis to psychological manipulation. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |