Tim Brunson DCH

Welcome to The International Hypnosis Research Institute Web site. Our intention is to provide quality information to clinicians and the general public concerning hypnosis, hypnotherapy, and other mind/body modalities. We intend to expand our coverage to include such topics as Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP), energy psychology and medicine, and other related topics. While our intention is to provide quality information derived from valid sources, including peer reviewed literature concerning significant research, this site is not presented as a source of medical or psychological advice. Clinicians wishing to expand their scope of practice or protocols based upon presented information should perform due diligence prior to use. It is our sincere hope to stimulate interest in these topics and to contribute to the evolution of the science of hypnosis. -- Tim Brunson DCH

Paired-associate learning and recall of high and low imagery words.

Relationships between recall of low and high imagery paired-associate (P-A) words and hypnotic susceptibility, and the influence of hypnosis on recall as moderated by hypnotic level were examined. Subjects were assessed on 2 hypnotic susceptibility scales [Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility; Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C (SHSS:C)]. Forty-one low (0-4 SHSS:C) and 41 highly (9-12 SHSS:C) hypnotizable college students were assigned to 1 of 4 experimental groups: waking-hypnosis, hypnosis-waking, waking-waking, or hypnosis-hypnosis. Recall was significantly better for high than low imagery words. In the more sensitive within-subjects design, high hypnotizables recalled more P-A words during hypnosis than waking, and lows did not differ. In the between-subjects design, hypnotic level was not a moderator of performance during hypnosis. Low hypnotizables recalled more words in the within-subjects design. Visualization ability was a poor moderator of imagery-mediated learning. High imagery recall correlated significantly with Marks's (1973) Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire (.25) and Paivio and Harshman's (1983) Individual Differences Questionnaire (IDQ) Verbal scale (.29), but not with the IDQ Imagery scale, the Mental Rotations Test (Vandenberg & Kuse, 1973), or the revised Minnesota Paper Form Board Test (Likert & Quasha, 1941).

Am J Psychol. 1996 Fall;109(3):353-72. Crawford HJ, Allen SN. Department of Psychology, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg 24061-0436, USA. HJC@VT.EDU

TrackBacks
There are no trackbacks for this entry.

Trackback URL for this entry:
http://www.hypnosisresearchinstitute.org/trackback.cfm?B211D5BB-C09F-2A3B-F6FE35D25792B963

Comments
© 2000 - 2008The International Hypnosis Research Institute, All Rights Reserved.

Contact