How hypnotic suggestions work – A systematic review of prominent theories of hypnosis

IF 2.1 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Consciousness and Cognition Pub Date : 2024-07-20 DOI:10.1016/j.concog.2024.103730
Anoushiravan Zahedi , Steven Jay Lynn , Werner Sommer
{"title":"How hypnotic suggestions work – A systematic review of prominent theories of hypnosis","authors":"Anoushiravan Zahedi ,&nbsp;Steven Jay Lynn ,&nbsp;Werner Sommer","doi":"10.1016/j.concog.2024.103730","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In recent decades, hypnosis has increasingly moved into the mainstream of scientific inquiry. Hypnotic suggestions are frequently implemented in behavioral, neurocognitive, and clinical investigations and interventions. Despite abundant reports about the effectiveness of suggestions in altering behavior, perception, cognition, and agency, no consensus exists regarding the mechanisms driving these changes. This article reviews competing theoretical accounts that address the genesis of subjective, behavioral, and neurophysiological responses to hypnotic suggestions. We systematically analyze the broad landscape of hypnosis theories that best represent our estimation of the current status and future avenues of scientific thinking. We start with procedural descriptions of hypnosis, suggestions, and hypnotizability, followed by a comparative analysis of systematically selected theories. Considering that prominent theoretical perspectives emphasize different aspects of hypnosis, our review reveals that each perspective possesses salient strengths, limitations, and heuristic values. We highlight the necessity of revisiting extant theories and formulating novel evidence-based accounts of hypnosis.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51358,"journal":{"name":"Consciousness and Cognition","volume":"123 ","pages":"Article 103730"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053810024000977/pdfft?md5=cd439b49c4880fc07b0c87890c0bbcf4&pid=1-s2.0-S1053810024000977-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Consciousness and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053810024000977","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In recent decades, hypnosis has increasingly moved into the mainstream of scientific inquiry. Hypnotic suggestions are frequently implemented in behavioral, neurocognitive, and clinical investigations and interventions. Despite abundant reports about the effectiveness of suggestions in altering behavior, perception, cognition, and agency, no consensus exists regarding the mechanisms driving these changes. This article reviews competing theoretical accounts that address the genesis of subjective, behavioral, and neurophysiological responses to hypnotic suggestions. We systematically analyze the broad landscape of hypnosis theories that best represent our estimation of the current status and future avenues of scientific thinking. We start with procedural descriptions of hypnosis, suggestions, and hypnotizability, followed by a comparative analysis of systematically selected theories. Considering that prominent theoretical perspectives emphasize different aspects of hypnosis, our review reveals that each perspective possesses salient strengths, limitations, and heuristic values. We highlight the necessity of revisiting extant theories and formulating novel evidence-based accounts of hypnosis.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
催眠建议是如何起作用的--对著名催眠理论的系统回顾
近几十年来,催眠逐渐成为科学研究的主流。催眠建议经常被用于行为、神经认知和临床研究与干预。尽管有大量关于暗示在改变行为、感知、认知和代理方面的有效性的报道,但对于这些改变的驱动机制却没有达成共识。本文回顾了针对催眠暗示的主观、行为和神经生理学反应的起源的各种理论观点。我们系统地分析了催眠理论的广阔前景,这些理论最能代表我们对科学思维的现状和未来途径的估计。我们首先对催眠、暗示和可催眠性进行程序性描述,然后对系统选择的理论进行比较分析。考虑到著名的理论观点强调催眠的不同方面,我们的综述揭示了每种观点都具有突出的优势、局限性和启发式价值。我们强调,有必要重新审视现有理论,并对催眠进行以证据为基础的新阐述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Consciousness and Cognition
Consciousness and Cognition PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
8.30%
发文量
123
期刊介绍: Consciousness and Cognition: An International Journal provides a forum for a natural-science approach to the issues of consciousness, voluntary control, and self. The journal features empirical research (in the form of regular articles and short reports) and theoretical articles. Integrative theoretical and critical literature reviews, and tutorial reviews are also published. The journal aims to be both scientifically rigorous and open to novel contributions.
期刊最新文献
Priors for natural image statistics inform confidence in perceptual decisions. Immersive exposure to simulated visual hallucinations modulates high-level human cognition. Opening the black box: Think Aloud as a method to study the spontaneous stream of consciousness. Optimising episodic encoding within segmented virtual contexts. How can virtual reality help to understand consciousness? A thematic analysis of students' experiences in a novel virtual environment.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1