I would have to agree with Shrink. Seems like you guys are arguing about defnitions and semantics. No matter what you want to call it, the ability to communicate with others' subconcious mind is real. With proper training, you can definitely tell when someone is "under" and when they are faking it.

Don't like it....

Howard

If only people read through past threads...

http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewt......forum=15

Nice link! Thanks!

Um folks, it seems that hypnosis has recently been defined as a discreet brainwave state. Health magazine reported it in a recent issue (within the last several months) and the research has been duplicated at several universities and hospitals, so, it would seem that Randi (who has a bet up that hypnosis does not exist) has to pay someone.

Just a note from a very busy stage hypnotist...

;)

Lee Darrow, C.H.

[quote]On 2005-02-08 06:26, RickSilmser wrote:
The state of "hypnosis" as we know it...does not exist. All it is...an altered state...


It actually comes from; The Greek God of Sleep & Master of Dreams: 'Hypnos'.
It's founder was one of my ancestors, James Braid, from 'The Kingdom of Fife' in Scotland. By the time he realised his mistake (1847) it was too late. The whole of the European hypno-medical world had adopted the word.
For what it's worth he tried to change it to 'Monoideism', but no one took any notice; 'Hypnosis' had stuck.

Yors aye,
From 'The Enlightener';
Bobser.

Hi Guys
If you are trying to make someone do somthing they don't want to do, you are kind of missing the point. Hypnosis is about making someone want to do what you want them to do, rather than making them do something against their will.

Hypno

Partizan. Kennedy.

Don't you just love it when you can make a reference to something and the guys "over the pond" have no idea what you are on about. No one has even picked up on it and bothered to ask !


"excuse me do you have a book on Medieval Hypnotism, suitable for 7 to 10
year olds?"

LoL
Howard

There was never a corporate market or college market for hypnosis over here in the UK. There was a University circuit but it wasn't huge either. I did an over the top Hypnosis show at midnight every week in a local theatre on and off for years. I was making 10 times more than other performers in my area. Plus I was being approached by all the Universities so I guess it depends on where you are.

.... and Hypnotherapy is about 'helping' someone do what 'they' want to do.
Ok guys. I think we now have everything covered.

How can you tell? What exactly do you look for to determine whether someone is really under or faking it?

If I may repeat myself...

http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewt......forum=15

That thread is about hypnotherapy. Are hypnotism and hypnotherapy synonymous?

Unfortunately, for most people, yes. I did post a brief summary of why hypnosis is different from consciousness in that thread, which is very relevant to your previous post.

The faking/real paradigm has been used much in research. There are certain qualities that hypnotized people exhibit that are not seen in those who are faking (or those who are not hypnotized). A really good example is the Kenneth Bianci (sp?) court case years ago. After three very experienced and highly qualified hypnotists certified Bianci insane, Orne came in and showed that Bianci was actually faking hypnosis.

The clues he used were practically invisible to the untrained eye (all sessions were videotaped), but when Orne pointed them out, they were clear as day.

Granted, Orne pioneered much of the research looking at differences between people who are hypnotized and people who are faking hypnosis. At the time, he was the only person who really knew the difference.

Lastly, a less practical--but compelling--way to see if someone is truly hypnotized is to use fMRI (actually, if you used the new Magic Angle technology, it would be extremely convincing) and/or PET scans to show areas of activation in the brain not normally seen in consciousness. It's very compelling proof, since you can't activate those parts any other way.

(As a side note, my own research has been exploring the relationship between Amygdala size and volatility in suggestibilty; I believe a shrinkage of the Amygdala results in greater suggestibilty and a propensity to "believe weird things." I'm writing a grant for the study as you read this...)

What do you all think of Wikipedia's entry on hypnois?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypnosis

Jimtron, it's excellent. There are a few things I'd qualify, since they're not totally correct, but otherwise, it's outstanding.

1. "This suggestibility has led some psychologists to believe that hypnosis does not actually correspond to any underlying mechanism of the human mind, but is merely a social construct so well-known that strong social expectations are played out by the person who believes that they are in a state of hypnosis, with people behaving in a way that they think a hypnotized person would behave, placing the phenomenon in a purely social aspect."

There are a lot of psychologists that believe hypnosis is a form of social influence--and they're right; however, that's also the problem: hypnosis is (simultaneously) also more than simply social influence. For instance, you can erradicate warts with hypnosis; you cannot replicate that with peer pressure (and peer pressure is regarded as a stronger social influencer than hypnosis).

2. "Furthermore, as with most forms of therapy, there is always the risk of the Hawthorne Effect, the desire for a client to please the therapist or justify the expense of therapy, or hopeful thinking."

The Hawthorne Effect is a term used almost exclusively in I/O psych. Most research psychologists would call this a demand effect. Moreover, all therapies are successful 2/3rds of the time--irrespective of whether the technique used actually works (yes, this is an empirically-based claim). Thus, I think this statement is a bit misleading.

3. "However, one controlled scientific experiment postulates that hypnosis may change conscious experience in a way not possible when people are not 'hypnotized', at least in "highly hypnotizable" people. In this experiment, color perception was changed by hypnosis in "highly hypnotizable" people as determined by positron emission tomography (PET) scans (Kosslyn et al., 2000). Nonetheless, this research does not compare the effects of hypnosis on less hypnotizable people and could therefore show little causal effect due to the lack of a control group."

This was a very beautiful study. From a pure research standpoint, the writer makes a good point. A psychologist, however, would probably disagree with the objection made here. In the study, Kosslyn used people who weren't hypnotized as well as people who were asked to use imagery. In both cases, color perception was not changed. The only time a dual-hemisphere response was elicited in the brain was in the hypnosis condition. Kosslyn was very thorough here. This is good, replicable research.

Yes, he could've used a larger number of subjects. Yes, he could've analyzed suggestibility as a co-variate. But neither were the point of the study. All Kosslyn wanted to do was show that it was possible to consciously alter unconscious cognitive processes--and he did that. If anything, the study was published in a very well-respected peer-reviewed journal; something impossible to do if the writer's objection was something significant.

Hi Jimtron,

Here are ways to identify a trance state:

1. Noticeable muscle relaxation

2. Easy, rhythmic breathing

3. Bloodshot eyes

4. Increase in Body Temperature

5. Eyes rolling to the back of head

6. Irregular blinking


These are just a few of the signs to look for when someone is in trance state. Hope this helps.

Not in total disagreement, since you're right, but all of these indentifiers you've mentioned can be faked.

Hi procyonrising,

I agree all of these identifiers can be faked. That being said, having performed many stage hypnosis shows I have learned how to accurately identify those that are faking and those that are truly deep in trance for that is my job. The whole show is dependant upon participants in trance. Many times a person may exhibit a multitude of those tell tale signs to make trance recognition easier to identify. It is a blast because more times than not even the audience can tell who is in trance and who is faking.

It amazes me how many intelligent human beings believe that hypnosis is a total loss of conscience of their actions and thoughts. They think of the cartoons they saw as a child with the spinning eyes and a deep trance that they would never consciously remember. I have seen entertaining Hypnotist shows. Even after the hypnotist explains that the subjects will have full knowledge of their surroundings and actions, there are many in the audience that still reverts to thinking of what they recall from cartoons.

My wife is a professional CPA, and a very intelligent person. She went up on stage at a state fair and was hypnotised. She was sent off the stage early as she just sat there waiting for the "lights to go out". It took me a long time to explain to her that each person that remained on stage and entertained the audience, was fully aware of where they were, what they were doing. After talking to MANY who saw the series of shows at the fair, I discovered she was not alone in her thinking. Hypnotism is real, but TV and cartoons have given false impressions of what it truly is. When I say that it is real, I mean that people can be directed to "Think" and "Act" a certain way based on the power of suggestion...but only if they are open to those suggestions. At any time, a person under the relaxed state of "Hypnotism" can stand up and say "I'm done"