Journal of Abnormal Psychology 1978, Vol. 87, No. 5, 570-573
Experiential Analysis of Hypnosis: Some New Observations on Hypnotic Phenomena Peter W. Sheehan, Kevin M. McConkey, and Darryl Cross University of Queensland, Australia Ten highly susceptible subjects were shown videotaped versions of their previous hypnotic sessions in the presence of an independent inquirer who attempted to foster subjects' personal cqmments on their own experiences. A special method of inquiry (called the experiential analysis technique) was constructed to study subjects' recall, which was examined for fantasy involvement, rapport, and individual modes of cognition. Data from the application of the method indicated the idiosyncratic ways in which subjects interpret routine suggestions, the degree to which they become personally involved with the hypnotist, and three distinct modes of cognizing. Interpersonal process recall (IPR) was developed in the counseling context (Kagan, 197S) as a method by which therapists can view and react to immediately preceding contact with their clients through the medium of videotape. Clients, however, came to demonstrate insight into their experiences through application of the technique and showed an increased ability to identify, label, and discuss the meaning of both their overt and covert behavior (Kagan, Krathwohl, & Miller, 1963). Hypnosis has been used to facilitate the use of the IPR technique in the uncovering of subjective material in therapy (Woody, Krathwohl, Kagan, & Farquhar, 196S), but the method has never been employed to study the nature of hypnotic experience. Stromberg (1975) carne closest to acknowledging its potential advantages, however, when he argued for the value of the kind of subjective questioning in hypnosis which allows clients to personally direct the discussion of their experience. The present study tested highly susceptible subjects on a selected sample of hypnotic test items covering a range of hypnotic phenomena. The main intent of the study was to explore the implications of a new technique of recall we have labeled the experiential analysis technique (EAT), which attempts to apply IPR principles
The authors wish to thank the Australian Research Grants Committee for its financial assistance in partially supporting the study. Reprint requests should be sent to Peter W. Sheehan, Department of Psychology, University of Queensland, St. Lucia, Australia 4067.
to the study of hypnosis and so facilitate a greater understanding of hypnotic phenomena. Method Subjects A total of 10 highly susceptible hypnotic subjects (8 female and 2 male) voluntarily participated in the study. All subjects had previously been tested on the 12-item Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A (HGSHS:A; Shor & Orne, 1962), and their mean score was 10.20 (SD — .42). Procedure Initially, subjects were met by an experimenter (the hypnotist) who conducted the hypnotic test session. The inquiry session was conducted by a second person (the inquirer), who was experienced in the use of the IPR technique in the counseling setting. Prior to hypnotic testing, subjects were informed that they would be administered a number of hypnotic test items and would then discuss their experiences with another person. They were told that their hypnotic performances would be recorded on videotape but not that this record would form the basis of the inquiry session. Subjects were then hypnotized and administered eight hypnotic test items, six of which were especially selected in
Copyright 1978 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 0021-843X/78/8705-0570$00.75
570
SHORT REPORTS order to test subjects on aspects of hypnosis said to index a deep level of trance.1 Experiential analysis technique (EAT). Following hypnotic testing, subjects were initially informed that the record of their hypnotic performance would be played and that their viewing it would most likely assist recall of their ex' periences during hypnosis. The decision concerning when to stop the video record was left entirely to the subjects, who were instructed simply to stop the tape whenever they recalled something about their hypnotic experience, whether or not they considered it important. When subjects stopped the record and reported on their recall, the inquirer encouraged them to describe their feelings and personally interpret their experiences.2 At the end of the ses„ sion, subjects were asked about their overall perceptions of their hypnotic performances and the technique. Results Subjects varied in the degree to which they were spontaneously willing to stop the tape to comment on their experiences. The variation shown in the number of stops was substantial (range: 4-21) and reflected the degree to which some subjects became involved in recalling their hypnotic experiences. The verbal output of subjects ranged from 954-5,090 words per session, and the correlation between length of output and number of stops was .44 (/>>.10). The EAT was typically perceived positively by subjects. Of the 10 subjects, 9 considered that the review of their experiences provided by the technique was a valuable stimulant to their recall, and 7 of these reported that the technique gave them additional insights into their behavior and experiences during hypnosis. The material of the recall sessions was categorized for the information revealed concerning both the hypnotic phenomena and the nature of the experiences which individual subjects reported. Observations are discussed as they bear on (a) the idiosyncratic character of subjects' responses, (b) the nature of the rapport that was evident, and (c) subjects' cognitive styles of responding. Individuation of Response The subjective testimony offered by subjects during the inquiry indicated that objective measures of hypnotic performance are often misleading indices of the complexity of experience
571
involved. Subjects demonstrated substantial evidence that they accepted or interpreted the communications of the hypnotist (in particular, the test suggestions) in an individual, or personally idiosyncratic, way. We have labeled this process individuation. Items whicR were not performed consistently well according to objective criteria frequently required reformulation; further, the uncertainty that subjects expressed about their behavior, whether it was appropriate to the suggestion given, often challenged the validity of responses. Subject 6 illustrated the process of individuation. She responded successfully to the missing watch hand item (subjects were asked to negatively hallucinate the hour hand on a watch and then to tell the hypnotist the time) and reported in the following way: First time I saw it, it had two hands and I was shocked. It's got two hands and it's only supposed to have one. Then I tended to put my finger over that hand and I kept stroking the minute hand. He asked me what the time was and I kept stroking. Well, to tell the time you've got to have a minute and an hour hand, and I answered, One, because it was on the one. I couldn't say one o'clock or anything. I just said, One. It's one. And . . . I was hoping that he wouldn't say, "One what?" The data indicated that this subject both responded to the requirements of the suggestion and appreciated the limitations of her own response at one and the same time. Rapport Indications The extent to which some hypnotic subjects were motivated to cooperate was highlighted distinctively. Subject 1 asserted, for example, "I feel as if I can't do anything unless he says . . . the hypnotist asks you to do ... I just couldn't do anything unless he wanted it." Dynamic in1 The eight hypnotic items were hand lowering, arm immobilization, age regression, glove analgesia, delusion for the missing number 6, visual hallucination, missing watch hand, and posthypnotic amnesia. 2 The questions asked were based on those provided by Kagan (1975). Specific areas selected for probing were (a) cognitive activity, (b) imagery and imagination, (c) perception, association, and expectancy of events, and (d) isolated feeling states.
572
SHORT REPORTS
teractions were clearly evident among four of the subjects. Subject 7, for instance, reported, "I don't particularly like taking instructions from people . . . I realized I'm in a situation that I should have . . . like say at home with my parents and so forth. They say, do this, and I get a bit frightened, but that's with most things. At school I liked to know where I could stand, and liked to be told to do this and that." For this subject, hypnotic events were associated with characteristic ways of responding to authority figures outside hypnosis.8 Modes of Cognition Three distinct modes of cognitive response were implicated. These have been labeled concentrative-cooperative, cognitive-independent, and cognitive-constructive. The categories are not necessarily exhaustive or independent of each other, but they appeared to reflect discrete styles of reaction.4 Concentrative-cooperative. In response to the missing number item, Subject 1 reported, "I am not supposed to be thinking about 6 and when I put my mind to it I didn't . . . you realize it's wrong, but you'll just ignore it and concentrate on doing something better." Failure to respond appropriately was directly attributed by her to reduced concentration. The style of response expressed by this subject fits very well the mode of cognition argued to be present by those who consider social psychological processes to be most important in the explanation of hypnosis (Barber, 1972). Cognitive-independent. Subjects in this category demonstrated the process of individuation much more than those in the previous category. In commenting on the age regression item, for example, Subject 2 (who passed the item objectively) reported, I think in varying shades of grey all the time. I've got to re-sort the way I write to what feels right for that time . . . I was just doing what I ... I didn't . . . it doesn't worry me what he really wanted me to do. I was doing what . . . all I was able to do ... I don't know whether I was in Grade 1, I don't know . . . I don't really think the writing was a Grade 1 kid's writing, but it was what I was doing and I felt happy about doing, and whether its fits or not, I don't know. For this subject, failure was not at all an event to be explained ("I just do what I do."). The
naturalness of one's own responsivity was clearly the most important thing to subjects demonstrating this mode of cognition. Cognitive-constructive. Some subjects consistently reacted in a decidedly more effortful cognitive fashion than others. Subject 8, for instance, handled the demands of the missing number item by substituting a letter of the alphabet for the number 6: "There were some 6s in those sums, and they sort of didn't register. They looked like letters or something you know. Say you had 3, 2, 5 and L written down here and (you) added them up. L just wouldn't go with the others . . . I sort of ... just left them out of it." The solutions offered by such idiosyncratic cognitive constructions typically resolved the various cue demands of items so that tasks were perceived consistently. Discussion Subjects observing themselves in interpersonal contact with the hypnotist— via a skilled inquirer using the EAT—reveal in length and in depth subtle meanings of trance behavior and experience that help define the nature of the phenomena being studied. Results demonstrated substantial inter- and intraindividual differences in response to hypnotic test suggestions. There were marked differences, for example, in the mode of subjects' cognitions and in the nature of their personal interactions with the hypnotist during the trance session. Data indicated substantial evidence of what has been termed here individuation of response and of strong personal attachment of subjects to the hypnotist, despite the fact that testing was conducted in a laboratory setting and items were administered in a routine fashion. The evidence suggests that rapport had been little observed in laboratory testing in the past, because the techniques of inquiry adopted to study hypnotic phenomena have not been sensitive enough to elicit report of the archaic involvement that some subjects obviously experience. 3
The involvement of subjects was not always positive, however. Subject 10, for example, responded on the analgesia item by reporting, "I started to say to myself—Well glory, how can a person do that to you . , . this type of thing? . . . I started to see sadistic tendencies in him." *No support is claimed for personality types of subjects but rather for the operation of distinct modes of cognition which may well interact with task complexity in response to the suggestions that subjects receive.
573
SHORT REPORTS
One of the most salient inferences that can be made from the study is that hypnotic subjects should not be conceptualized as passive recipients of hypnotic suggestion. Responses were virtually never in literal accord with the suggestions that were given. Subjects not only interpreted the communications they received and imbedded them into their own preferred fantasies but often illustrated simultaneous awareness of the suggestions and the reality that lay behind them. The evidence dramatically illustrated the fluid operation of multiple streams of awareness in the subjects who were tested (see also Hilgard, 1977) and attest to the fact that subjects, while hypnotized, are often aware of a variety of conflicting cognitions. At one level, subjects received the communication of the hypnotist and responded to it in a distinctive cognitive fashion, whereas at another level, they frequently examined the communication from the viewpoint of their everyday frame of reference and conversed with themselves, as it were, regarding the most appropriate response to make. The EAT would appear to have a number of distinct advantages that future research may well explore. It analyzes experiences in order of importance to the subject (rather than to the hypnotist); the subject feels he or she is in control; and rapport between the subject and hypnotist can be examined in depth, as well as the emotional expressiveness of the subject. In this way, some of- the paradoxes of hypnotic response can be studied to gain new insights into hypnotic phenomena.6 Finally, EAT recall may be used to assess theoretical viewpoints about hypnotic phenomena when the theories in question require particular interpretation of subjects' trance experiences. For all its potential usefulness, the EAT is limited, like any other method of inquiry, and should be contrasted with other techniques of recall for effectiveness. One needs also to ask whether the monitoring of responses by subjects has any inhibitory effect on their responsiveness in future EAT settings. In this respect, data in the counseling context suggest otherwise; Kingdon (197S) found, for example, that IPR enhances clients' levels of self-exploration signifi-
cantly better than other methods of counseling over time. Finally, future research should look closely at the effects of specific components of the new technique and the way these components possibly interact with the reported experience of subjects. 6 Close analysis of such paradoxes may provide information relevant to the "double awareness" phase of psychotkally disturbed persons (Sacks, Carpenter, & Strauss, 1974). The phenomenon of double awareness—stemming as it does from reality intruding into the psychotic delusion to create a more flexible state of consciousness—was somewhat akin to the processes reported by hypnotic subjects during EAT recall.
References Barber, T. X. Suggested ("hypnotic") behavior: The trance paradigm versus an alternative paradigm. In E. Fromm & R. E, Shor (Eds.), Hypnosis: Research developments and perspectives. Chicago, III.: Aldine-Atherton, 197,2. Hilgard, E. R. Divided consciousness: Multiple controls in human thought and action. New York, Wiley, 1977. Kagan, N. I. Interpersonal process recall: A method of influencing human interaction. East Lansing: Michigan State University, 1975. Kagan, N., Krathwohl, D. R., & Miller, R. Stimulated recall in therapy using video tape—A case study. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1963, 10, 237^243. Kingdon, M. A. A cost/benefit analysis of the interpersonal process recall technique. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1975, 22, 353-357. Sacks, M. H., Carpenter, N. T., & Strauss, J. S. Recovery from delusions. Archives of General Psychiatry, 1974, 30, 111 7^120. Shor, R. E., & Orne, C. The Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A. Palo Alto, Calif.: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1962. Stromberg, B. V. The use of subjective questioning in hypnotic psychotherapy. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 197S, 31, 110-115. Woody, R. N., Krathwohl, D. R., Kagan, N., & Farquhar, W. W. Stimulated recall in psychotherapy using hypnosis and videotape. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 1965, 7, 234-241.
Received March 31, 1978 •
Experiential Analysis of Hypnosis: Some New Observations on Hypnotic Phenomena Peter W. Sheehan, Kevin M. McConkey, and Darryl Cross University of Queensland, Australia Ten highly susceptible subjects were shown videotaped versions of their previous hypnotic sessions in the presence of an independent inquirer who attempted to foster subjects' personal cqmments on their own experiences. A special method of inquiry (called the experiential analysis technique) was constructed to study subjects' recall, which was examined for fantasy involvement, rapport, and individual modes of cognition. Data from the application of the method indicated the idiosyncratic ways in which subjects interpret routine suggestions, the degree to which they become personally involved with the hypnotist, and three distinct modes of cognizing. Interpersonal process recall (IPR) was developed in the counseling context (Kagan, 197S) as a method by which therapists can view and react to immediately preceding contact with their clients through the medium of videotape. Clients, however, came to demonstrate insight into their experiences through application of the technique and showed an increased ability to identify, label, and discuss the meaning of both their overt and covert behavior (Kagan, Krathwohl, & Miller, 1963). Hypnosis has been used to facilitate the use of the IPR technique in the uncovering of subjective material in therapy (Woody, Krathwohl, Kagan, & Farquhar, 196S), but the method has never been employed to study the nature of hypnotic experience. Stromberg (1975) carne closest to acknowledging its potential advantages, however, when he argued for the value of the kind of subjective questioning in hypnosis which allows clients to personally direct the discussion of their experience. The present study tested highly susceptible subjects on a selected sample of hypnotic test items covering a range of hypnotic phenomena. The main intent of the study was to explore the implications of a new technique of recall we have labeled the experiential analysis technique (EAT), which attempts to apply IPR principles
The authors wish to thank the Australian Research Grants Committee for its financial assistance in partially supporting the study. Reprint requests should be sent to Peter W. Sheehan, Department of Psychology, University of Queensland, St. Lucia, Australia 4067.
to the study of hypnosis and so facilitate a greater understanding of hypnotic phenomena. Method Subjects A total of 10 highly susceptible hypnotic subjects (8 female and 2 male) voluntarily participated in the study. All subjects had previously been tested on the 12-item Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A (HGSHS:A; Shor & Orne, 1962), and their mean score was 10.20 (SD — .42). Procedure Initially, subjects were met by an experimenter (the hypnotist) who conducted the hypnotic test session. The inquiry session was conducted by a second person (the inquirer), who was experienced in the use of the IPR technique in the counseling setting. Prior to hypnotic testing, subjects were informed that they would be administered a number of hypnotic test items and would then discuss their experiences with another person. They were told that their hypnotic performances would be recorded on videotape but not that this record would form the basis of the inquiry session. Subjects were then hypnotized and administered eight hypnotic test items, six of which were especially selected in
Copyright 1978 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 0021-843X/78/8705-0570$00.75
570
SHORT REPORTS order to test subjects on aspects of hypnosis said to index a deep level of trance.1 Experiential analysis technique (EAT). Following hypnotic testing, subjects were initially informed that the record of their hypnotic performance would be played and that their viewing it would most likely assist recall of their ex' periences during hypnosis. The decision concerning when to stop the video record was left entirely to the subjects, who were instructed simply to stop the tape whenever they recalled something about their hypnotic experience, whether or not they considered it important. When subjects stopped the record and reported on their recall, the inquirer encouraged them to describe their feelings and personally interpret their experiences.2 At the end of the ses„ sion, subjects were asked about their overall perceptions of their hypnotic performances and the technique. Results Subjects varied in the degree to which they were spontaneously willing to stop the tape to comment on their experiences. The variation shown in the number of stops was substantial (range: 4-21) and reflected the degree to which some subjects became involved in recalling their hypnotic experiences. The verbal output of subjects ranged from 954-5,090 words per session, and the correlation between length of output and number of stops was .44 (/>>.10). The EAT was typically perceived positively by subjects. Of the 10 subjects, 9 considered that the review of their experiences provided by the technique was a valuable stimulant to their recall, and 7 of these reported that the technique gave them additional insights into their behavior and experiences during hypnosis. The material of the recall sessions was categorized for the information revealed concerning both the hypnotic phenomena and the nature of the experiences which individual subjects reported. Observations are discussed as they bear on (a) the idiosyncratic character of subjects' responses, (b) the nature of the rapport that was evident, and (c) subjects' cognitive styles of responding. Individuation of Response The subjective testimony offered by subjects during the inquiry indicated that objective measures of hypnotic performance are often misleading indices of the complexity of experience
571
involved. Subjects demonstrated substantial evidence that they accepted or interpreted the communications of the hypnotist (in particular, the test suggestions) in an individual, or personally idiosyncratic, way. We have labeled this process individuation. Items whicR were not performed consistently well according to objective criteria frequently required reformulation; further, the uncertainty that subjects expressed about their behavior, whether it was appropriate to the suggestion given, often challenged the validity of responses. Subject 6 illustrated the process of individuation. She responded successfully to the missing watch hand item (subjects were asked to negatively hallucinate the hour hand on a watch and then to tell the hypnotist the time) and reported in the following way: First time I saw it, it had two hands and I was shocked. It's got two hands and it's only supposed to have one. Then I tended to put my finger over that hand and I kept stroking the minute hand. He asked me what the time was and I kept stroking. Well, to tell the time you've got to have a minute and an hour hand, and I answered, One, because it was on the one. I couldn't say one o'clock or anything. I just said, One. It's one. And . . . I was hoping that he wouldn't say, "One what?" The data indicated that this subject both responded to the requirements of the suggestion and appreciated the limitations of her own response at one and the same time. Rapport Indications The extent to which some hypnotic subjects were motivated to cooperate was highlighted distinctively. Subject 1 asserted, for example, "I feel as if I can't do anything unless he says . . . the hypnotist asks you to do ... I just couldn't do anything unless he wanted it." Dynamic in1 The eight hypnotic items were hand lowering, arm immobilization, age regression, glove analgesia, delusion for the missing number 6, visual hallucination, missing watch hand, and posthypnotic amnesia. 2 The questions asked were based on those provided by Kagan (1975). Specific areas selected for probing were (a) cognitive activity, (b) imagery and imagination, (c) perception, association, and expectancy of events, and (d) isolated feeling states.
572
SHORT REPORTS
teractions were clearly evident among four of the subjects. Subject 7, for instance, reported, "I don't particularly like taking instructions from people . . . I realized I'm in a situation that I should have . . . like say at home with my parents and so forth. They say, do this, and I get a bit frightened, but that's with most things. At school I liked to know where I could stand, and liked to be told to do this and that." For this subject, hypnotic events were associated with characteristic ways of responding to authority figures outside hypnosis.8 Modes of Cognition Three distinct modes of cognitive response were implicated. These have been labeled concentrative-cooperative, cognitive-independent, and cognitive-constructive. The categories are not necessarily exhaustive or independent of each other, but they appeared to reflect discrete styles of reaction.4 Concentrative-cooperative. In response to the missing number item, Subject 1 reported, "I am not supposed to be thinking about 6 and when I put my mind to it I didn't . . . you realize it's wrong, but you'll just ignore it and concentrate on doing something better." Failure to respond appropriately was directly attributed by her to reduced concentration. The style of response expressed by this subject fits very well the mode of cognition argued to be present by those who consider social psychological processes to be most important in the explanation of hypnosis (Barber, 1972). Cognitive-independent. Subjects in this category demonstrated the process of individuation much more than those in the previous category. In commenting on the age regression item, for example, Subject 2 (who passed the item objectively) reported, I think in varying shades of grey all the time. I've got to re-sort the way I write to what feels right for that time . . . I was just doing what I ... I didn't . . . it doesn't worry me what he really wanted me to do. I was doing what . . . all I was able to do ... I don't know whether I was in Grade 1, I don't know . . . I don't really think the writing was a Grade 1 kid's writing, but it was what I was doing and I felt happy about doing, and whether its fits or not, I don't know. For this subject, failure was not at all an event to be explained ("I just do what I do."). The
naturalness of one's own responsivity was clearly the most important thing to subjects demonstrating this mode of cognition. Cognitive-constructive. Some subjects consistently reacted in a decidedly more effortful cognitive fashion than others. Subject 8, for instance, handled the demands of the missing number item by substituting a letter of the alphabet for the number 6: "There were some 6s in those sums, and they sort of didn't register. They looked like letters or something you know. Say you had 3, 2, 5 and L written down here and (you) added them up. L just wouldn't go with the others . . . I sort of ... just left them out of it." The solutions offered by such idiosyncratic cognitive constructions typically resolved the various cue demands of items so that tasks were perceived consistently. Discussion Subjects observing themselves in interpersonal contact with the hypnotist— via a skilled inquirer using the EAT—reveal in length and in depth subtle meanings of trance behavior and experience that help define the nature of the phenomena being studied. Results demonstrated substantial inter- and intraindividual differences in response to hypnotic test suggestions. There were marked differences, for example, in the mode of subjects' cognitions and in the nature of their personal interactions with the hypnotist during the trance session. Data indicated substantial evidence of what has been termed here individuation of response and of strong personal attachment of subjects to the hypnotist, despite the fact that testing was conducted in a laboratory setting and items were administered in a routine fashion. The evidence suggests that rapport had been little observed in laboratory testing in the past, because the techniques of inquiry adopted to study hypnotic phenomena have not been sensitive enough to elicit report of the archaic involvement that some subjects obviously experience. 3
The involvement of subjects was not always positive, however. Subject 10, for example, responded on the analgesia item by reporting, "I started to say to myself—Well glory, how can a person do that to you . , . this type of thing? . . . I started to see sadistic tendencies in him." *No support is claimed for personality types of subjects but rather for the operation of distinct modes of cognition which may well interact with task complexity in response to the suggestions that subjects receive.
573
SHORT REPORTS
One of the most salient inferences that can be made from the study is that hypnotic subjects should not be conceptualized as passive recipients of hypnotic suggestion. Responses were virtually never in literal accord with the suggestions that were given. Subjects not only interpreted the communications they received and imbedded them into their own preferred fantasies but often illustrated simultaneous awareness of the suggestions and the reality that lay behind them. The evidence dramatically illustrated the fluid operation of multiple streams of awareness in the subjects who were tested (see also Hilgard, 1977) and attest to the fact that subjects, while hypnotized, are often aware of a variety of conflicting cognitions. At one level, subjects received the communication of the hypnotist and responded to it in a distinctive cognitive fashion, whereas at another level, they frequently examined the communication from the viewpoint of their everyday frame of reference and conversed with themselves, as it were, regarding the most appropriate response to make. The EAT would appear to have a number of distinct advantages that future research may well explore. It analyzes experiences in order of importance to the subject (rather than to the hypnotist); the subject feels he or she is in control; and rapport between the subject and hypnotist can be examined in depth, as well as the emotional expressiveness of the subject. In this way, some of- the paradoxes of hypnotic response can be studied to gain new insights into hypnotic phenomena.6 Finally, EAT recall may be used to assess theoretical viewpoints about hypnotic phenomena when the theories in question require particular interpretation of subjects' trance experiences. For all its potential usefulness, the EAT is limited, like any other method of inquiry, and should be contrasted with other techniques of recall for effectiveness. One needs also to ask whether the monitoring of responses by subjects has any inhibitory effect on their responsiveness in future EAT settings. In this respect, data in the counseling context suggest otherwise; Kingdon (197S) found, for example, that IPR enhances clients' levels of self-exploration signifi-
cantly better than other methods of counseling over time. Finally, future research should look closely at the effects of specific components of the new technique and the way these components possibly interact with the reported experience of subjects. 6 Close analysis of such paradoxes may provide information relevant to the "double awareness" phase of psychotkally disturbed persons (Sacks, Carpenter, & Strauss, 1974). The phenomenon of double awareness—stemming as it does from reality intruding into the psychotic delusion to create a more flexible state of consciousness—was somewhat akin to the processes reported by hypnotic subjects during EAT recall.
References Barber, T. X. Suggested ("hypnotic") behavior: The trance paradigm versus an alternative paradigm. In E. Fromm & R. E, Shor (Eds.), Hypnosis: Research developments and perspectives. Chicago, III.: Aldine-Atherton, 197,2. Hilgard, E. R. Divided consciousness: Multiple controls in human thought and action. New York, Wiley, 1977. Kagan, N. I. Interpersonal process recall: A method of influencing human interaction. East Lansing: Michigan State University, 1975. Kagan, N., Krathwohl, D. R., & Miller, R. Stimulated recall in therapy using video tape—A case study. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1963, 10, 237^243. Kingdon, M. A. A cost/benefit analysis of the interpersonal process recall technique. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1975, 22, 353-357. Sacks, M. H., Carpenter, N. T., & Strauss, J. S. Recovery from delusions. Archives of General Psychiatry, 1974, 30, 111 7^120. Shor, R. E., & Orne, C. The Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A. Palo Alto, Calif.: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1962. Stromberg, B. V. The use of subjective questioning in hypnotic psychotherapy. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 197S, 31, 110-115. Woody, R. N., Krathwohl, D. R., Kagan, N., & Farquhar, W. W. Stimulated recall in psychotherapy using hypnosis and videotape. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 1965, 7, 234-241.
Received March 31, 1978 •
