The Science of Hypnosis

[DrmDoc]

If some of you feel as I do regarding the status of America, you'd would very much like to forget about certain events transpiring this week and refocus you thoughts on more positive and productive interests. To that end, I've refocused my thoughts on interests of the mind and recently discovered this SciShow video on the Science of Hyponsis, which I found to be illuminating. Anecdotally, hypnosis appears to be an effective way to clear one's head of negative thoughts and memories. It seems that hypnosis could be more than just a parlor trick and may involve a relaxed yet hyper-attentive brain, according to the SciShow video host. This video discusses several credible studies on the subject of hypnosis with some suggesting a correlation between hypnosis sensitivity and an enlarge region of the brain called the rostrum, which is involve in attention. It seems there's some correlation between hypnosis and the placebo effect as well. So, what are your thoughts? Do you considered hypnosis credible or a viable therapy?

[StringJunky]

It seems there's some correlation between hypnosis and the placebo effect as well. So, what are your thoughts? Do you considered hypnosis credible or a viable therapy?

Give me a shiny, hard, little sweet, tell me it's a 1000mg paracetamol and my headache will be gone in five. Probably, the hypnotic effect is the placebo effect. The power of placebo should not be dismissed.

Edited November 12, 2016 by StringJunky

[DrmDoc]

Give me a shiny, hard, little sweet, tell me it's a 1000mg paracetamol and my headache will be gone in five. Probably, the hypnotic effect is the placebo effect. The power of placebo should not be dismissed.

 

Top-down self-hypnosis...expectation's influence on physiology...mind, a potent influence indeed. But what is the neurological mechanism? What is the neurology of self-deception...or belief, as I otherwise interpret? As I now understand, hypnosis can only influence what we perceive, which in turn influences our brain's physical, mental, and emotional response directives. Therefore, hypnosis somehow influences our brain's neurological perception matrix. The thalamus, maybe? Something more for me to study, oh joy...

[MonDie]

Dissociative conditions are highly relevant to hypnotism. Dissociative identity disorder (DID) patients and other dissociative patients tend to be "highly hypnotizable". https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19197715

Usually occurring during depression and lasting weeks to months, the dissociative fugue patient forgets personally identifying information and begins to identify as someone new. They may even change their manner of speaking. While in the fugue state, she impulsively attempts to start a new life somewhere else, until one day she switches back to the primary personality, suddenly and simultaneously regaining her old memories and forgetting the memories of the alter ego, resulting in an experience informally termed "time loss". Nonetheless the memories of the fugue episode can persist, and she may recover them at a later time. People with dissociative identity disorder (DID), who usually underwent severe abuse as children, will continually alternate between these identities for the rest of their lives. Dissociative fugue and DID are examples of "compartmentalizing" symptoms. Alas, repressed memories remain an elusive and controversial matter among scientists, and DID no less so.

 

http://www.healthyplace.com/abuse/dissociative-identity-disorder/dissociative-identity-disorder-controversy-is-did-real/

 

 

While the debate around DID will continue, people who are concerned with their diagnosis may be best served by working with a treatment provider that they trust and/or getting a second opinion. People should also keep in mind that there is some medical evidence of the existence of dissociative identity disorder:

• In 2006, Vermetten et al found significant differences in amygdala and hippocampus volumes in people diagnosed with DID.
• Reinders et al (2003, 2006) also found blood flow differences in the brain that corresponded to specific personalities.

 

I imagine compartmentalizing is related to the way long-term memory works. New, incoming information cannot be embedded in long-term memory unless the subject somehow relates it to old information. It's as if our long-term memories exist as a web, with perception "triggering" a part of that web which leads to an activation of that region of the web. "Trigger" is a term used in PTSD to denote situational themes that remind the patient of the trauma and activate his PTSD thereby. I'll try to create a speculative hypothesis from this.

It's as if the DID patient somehow constructs two or more independent webs of memories that have few connections inbetween and therefore rarely activate simultaneously. Hypnosis requires single-pointed concentration, which maybe perhaps could lead the subject to drown out irrelevant or even traumatic information while they focus on that one single thing. Perhaps hypnotizable people are capable of forging distinct states of mind that they can "alternate" between depending on what information they need on hand at the moment. ?

Edited November 25, 2016 by MonDie

[DrmDoc]

Dissociative conditions are highly relevant to hypnotism. Dissociative identity disorder (DID) patients and other dissociative patients tend to be "highly hypnotizable". https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19197715

Usually occurring during depression and lasting weeks to months, the dissociative fugue patient forgets personally identifying information and begins to identify as someone new. They may even change their manner of speaking. While in the fugue state, she impulsively attempts to start a new life somewhere else, until one day she switches back to the primary personality, suddenly and simultaneously regaining her old memories and forgetting the memories of the alter ego, resulting in an experience informally termed "time loss". Nonetheless the memories of the fugue episode can persist, and she may recover them at a later time. People with dissociative identity disorder (DID), who usually underwent severe abuse as children, will continually alternate between these identities for the rest of their lives. Dissociative fugue and DID are examples of "compartmentalizing" symptoms. Alas, repressed memories remain an elusive and controversial matter among scientists, and DID no less so.

 

http://www.healthyplace.com/abuse/dissociative-identity-disorder/dissociative-identity-disorder-controversy-is-did-real/

 

 

 

I imagine compartmentalizing is related to the way long-term memory works. New, incoming information cannot be embedded in long-term memory unless the subject somehow relates it to old information. It's as if our long-term memories exist as a web, with perception "triggering" a part of that web which leads to an activation of that region of the web. "Trigger" is a term used in PTSD to denote situational themes that remind the patient of the trauma and activate his PTSD thereby. I'll try to create a speculative hypothesis from this.

It's as if the DID patient somehow constructs two or more independent webs of memories that have few connections inbetween and therefore rarely activate simultaneously. Hypnosis requires single-pointed concentration, which maybe perhaps could lead the subject to drown out irrelevant or even traumatic information while they focus on that one single thing. Perhaps hypnotizable people are capable of forging distinct states of mind that they can "alternate" between depending on what information they need on hand at the moment. ?

 

Your hypothesis of the DID memory construct and activation is fascinating. It appears to conform to what the neuroscience suggests to me about the nature of sensory perception and its activation of the network of memories we use to navigate reality or perceptual experience. Essentially, our brain is a simple machine whose functional matrix could be described as a series of inputs and outputs. Afferent or sensory input initiates efferent responses in the brain that can produce both internal and external behaviors as output. With DID and PTSD, trigger suggests those sensory inputs related to those memory and behavioral aberrations patients engage as output. Hypnosis appears to produce a focused state where efferent brain responses and behavioral outputs conform to verbal inputs without consideration of an incongruent perceptual reality. Hypnosis creates a brain state where verbal commands are perceived as reality to the exclusion of all other perceptions. This suggests that the hypnotized brain inhibits responses to tactile, visual, oral, and other varied sensory input with aural input as the only exception. For me, this offers a fascinating neurological study of how the brain is able to render all sensory input subordinate to that perceived aurally.

[fredreload]

Thing is the person needs to be conscious, if the person is not conscious, can some type of image trigger a response? For instance, move feet or hand involuntarily

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_cortex

Edited November 27, 2016 by fredreload

[DrmDoc]

Thing is the person needs to be conscious, if the person is not conscious, can some type of image trigger a response? For instance, move feet or hand involuntarily

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_cortex

 

This is another interesting perspective because it appears to support our focus on the thalamus, which I speculated about earlier. Although visual sensory is ultimately received and processed in the occipital lobe, it must initially traverse the lateral geniculate nucleus of the thalamus. Excluding olfaction, all sensory input initially passes through the thalamus before reaching hierarchal areas of the cortex. In hypnosis, visual fixation coupled with verbal suggestions appear to alter thalamic function where only verbal suggestions are received and processed by hierarchal areas as reality. This dated Nature Review article on an fMRI study of hypnotic and physical pain appears to support a conclusion that verbal suggestions under hypnosis are perceived and processed by the cortex as reality when subjects were given the suggestion that a mild stimulus would produce pain. Unfortunately, this study doesn't reveal how or whether the thalamus filters sensory input under hypnosis; however, cortical activation only occurs in the presence of subcortical relays. Therefore, cortical activations that produce pain may only result from subcortical connections relaying that sensory information, which again directs attention back to the thalamus. Our thalamus is the primary source and recipient of neural relays to and from the cortex.

[MonDie]

A paradox occurred to me regarding depression and hypnotizability. Dissociatives are highly hypnotizable and therefore should have better concentration. We might infer that hypnotizability will be stronger for dissociative fugue patients given that it is especially strong for DID patients. Furthermore, "highly hypnotizable" people have better focus, sustained attention, and absorption. The paradox is that people in depression usually have worse concentration.

 

Is high hypnotizability a necessary diathesis for pathological dissociation?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27216366

 

Sustained attentional and disattentional abilities: differences between low and highly hypnotizable persons.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8282921

 

I will start speculating once again. Dissociation is associated with low serotonin and depressino thereby, but it is also associated with heightened cortisol (from the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis), consistent with its role as an adaption for stress management. It might be more common in psychotically depressed patients who probably exhibit more anxiety with their depression. The anxiety induction might lead to temporarily amplified concentration as the body prepares to respond to the perceived threat.

In contrast, patients with the related borderline personality disorder (BPD) often suffer from ADD, but I suspect that the ADD is largely the product of their anxiety. That is, being worried, vigilant, and restless, their attention may be naturally drawn to threatening stimuli, making it difficult for them to focus on non-threatening stimuli.

[DrmDoc]

A paradox occurred to me regarding depression and hypnotizability. Dissociatives are highly hypnotizable and therefore should have better concentration. We might infer that hypnotizability will be stronger for dissociative fugue patients given that it is especially strong for DID patients. Furthermore, "highly hypnotizable" people have better focus, sustained attention, and absorption. The paradox is that people in depression usually have worse concentration.

 

Is high hypnotizability a necessary diathesis for pathological dissociation?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27216366

 

Sustained attentional and disattentional abilities: differences between low and highly hypnotizable persons.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8282921

 

I will start speculating once again. Dissociation is associated with low serotonin and depressino thereby, but it is also associated with heightened cortisol (from the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis), consistent with its role as an adaption for stress management. It might be more common in psychotically depressed patients who probably exhibit more anxiety with their depression. The anxiety induction might lead to temporarily amplified concentration as the body prepares to respond to the perceived threat.

In contrast, patients with the related borderline personality disorder (BPD) often suffer from ADD, but I suspect that the ADD is largely the product of their anxiety. That is, being worried, vigilant, and restless, their attention may be naturally drawn to threatening stimuli, making it difficult for them to focus on non-threatening stimuli.

 

In my reductionist opinion, all mental illnesses are aberrations of our brain's functional matrix which, as I previously conveyed, essentially consists of a series of efferent responses (output) to afferent sensory (input). Mental illness is an aberrant output of our brain's functional matrix and hypnosis appears to induce functional aberrance; therefore, hypnotizability should be consistent with susceptibility or sensitivity to some functional aberrance. The perceived attentional deficits of the depressed brain may only be a deficit as it relates to the specific measures applied to attention assessment in mental illness. It could be that depression is a state of brain function where sufferers are attentive and focused in ways inconsistent with standard testing and measures relative to mental illness. Our brain responses are produced through a series of cortical and subcortical relays where most tests and studies appear to focus on cortical areas rather than subcortical. This is an important distinction to me because it is equivalent to focusing on the brain's efferent response systems without adequate consideration of that system's afferent or input delivery matrix. It's important because of the dependency of our brain's responses on afferent stimuli, which only emerges from subcortical relays.

Edited December 4, 2016 by DrmDoc

[MonDie]

Incidentally, I ran across this research investigating whether the fearless traits exhibited by psychopaths might be attributable to attentional differences. In summary, psychopaths show reduced "fear potentiated startle" (FPS) and reduced amygdala activation when exposed to threatening stimuli. Furthermore, the primary psychopath has low anxiety and low anxiety is also associated with reduced startle. In this instance, the threatening stimuli was a red word preceding a shock. The psychopaths showed normal startle were instructed to push a button indicating whether the word was red or green, but reduced startle when instructed to indicate upper vs lower case or the sequence of letters.

 

Attention moderates the fearlessness of psychopathic offenders

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2795048/

 

This would appear to suggest that psychopaths would be better at single pointed attention and thus more hypnotizable, and yet it is borderline personality that is associated with dissociative disorders, which are in turn associated with hypnotizability. The two personality disorders might be related, but this attentional difference is apparently specific to psychopathy, and likely the primary psychopaths whose deficiency in fear corresponds to their lower anxiety, anxiety being associated with amplification of the "fear potentiated startle" (FPS) that is blunted in psychopathy. This reemphasizes the paradox that high anxiety may be associated with increased processing of peripheral stimuli even though it is associated with dissociative disorders, which are in turn associated with hypnotizability,

Edited December 21, 2016 by MonDie

[Velocity_Boy]

Hypnosis is not a science, as it does not rely on the empirical method.

 

I would personally give it Psuedo Science stature.

 

At best.

 

At worst?

 

Irresponsible and often dangerous superstitious hoakum. Onboard with Astrology and homeopathy.

 

 

http://www.sciencefocus.com/qa/there-any-scientific-explanation-hypnosis

Edited March 18, 2017 by Velocity_Boy

[DrmDoc]

Hypnosis is not a science, as it does not rely on the empirical method.

 

I would personally give it Psuedo Science stature.

 

At best.

 

At worst?

 

Irresponsible and often dangerous superstitious hoakum. Onboard with Astrology and homeopathy.

 

 

http://www.sciencefocus.com/qa/there-any-scientific-explanation-hypnosis

 

That is, of course, your opinion; however, as the SciShow video link above discusses, hypnosis has been the subject of scientific investigation. If you've selected the link and viewed the video, then you must be aware that their is some evidence in science that hypnosis may be more than just a parlor trick. Although I also do not personally consider hypnosis a science, its reported psychological and physiological effects do merit scientific investigation in my opinion.

[Dave Moore]

We're all hypnotized. Some believe they are learned doctors. Others, like me, believe they are retired carpenters.

Hypnosis is simply belief adjustment. It's result is no different than normal perception.

A man can believe he is a dog, and he will bark and get down on all fours if he submits to the hypnotist.

In Fatima, Portugal, in 1918, tens of thousands of people saw the sun dancing in the sky. Who hypnotized them?

Agreements about what had happened occurred after the event, and the visions aligned very closely.

Otherwise, they would never have seen what appeared to be the same event in the first place.

Retroactive causality is present at all times, a feature of both subjective reality and determinism.

The hypnotist's belief in his ability compounds his efficacy, but hypnosis can also be done by a rank amateur.

Effective deception is the key.

The majority who are aware of the efficacy of Mesmerism contribute to efficacy as well. Their own beliefs come into play.

They became convinced in the late 18th century that hypnotism was a real phenomenon. It is a great tool for use in adjusting beliefs.

People who believe in UFOs being real will also hypnotize well. Children are inherently more suggestable than adults.

People such as Pacific island cultures would be difficult to hypnotize if their culture had never heard of hypnosis. After a period of time, however, they would improve.

Hypnosis is, at it's root, belief and hence manifestation of reality to a limited potential. To the observer, it is not "real". The unwitting observer is unaware, of course, that he is also hypnotized and has been so since early infancy.

However, as reality is subjective, there being no single objective universe, perception is not only projected (within the bounds of other's manifested description of reality), but the only reality is perception itself.

Determinism guarantees that only believable events ever take place (barring insanity of course) so that no paradoxes ever occur within the bounds of reasonable believability, reflecting the lowest energetic outcomes on average.

So belief is shifted through energy, i.e., energy to manifest, which is a very personal variable.

One could think of strong beliefs as very heavy weights that are not easily shifted without a very large expenditure of energy.

Hypnosis requires little energy because the belief is conditional or very small (such as a rash disappearing by suggestion, or a placebo pill curing a headache).

What I am writing will not be believed and so it will seem ridiculous to everyone here. Yet, it is quite true. It isn't a belief I am talking about, but a feature of the human mind, which is believed to exist within a thing called a "brain".

Each of you possess the innate capacity to understand this. However, the chance you will do so is very very small indeed.

Some Buddhists might understand, but only those who have experienced enlightenment or "awakening".

Regarding the similarity of placebo effect to hypnosis, it should be understood that both are manipulations of reality through belief adjustment.

One has to approach this phenomenon with an open mind. To begin with, the imagination will play a very large role in even beginning to understand this. The manifestation of reality is quite reasonable if one can imagine that no exterior realm of reaity exists if each person is projecting and hence manifesting his own beliefs.

In other words, each person always projects a different reality, and that reality is the only reality he will ever experience.

A bright person, which I think you all are, should be able to imagine this easily.

I am saying that our supposedly solid and empirical universe is not shared. Nothing is the same. No one reality. Nothing that actually binds our separate realities together.

Please stick with me. It's worth it.

Now, immediately there arrives a question. I know what it is.

If we are all "creating" our own versions of reality, how come paradoxes are not constantly arising? How can I say, "look at that red car?", and you don't say, "What washing machine?"

So we introduce a second variable. this time, it's determinism, or super determinism if you are a physicist.

Let's begin to put it together. If subjective reality is true and determinism is true, a third variable would be that we always manifest the reality that issues from what we already believe, within the bounds of probability. That is to say, that outcome that requires the least energy for all observers involved.

In this context, we are talking about energy we can easily perceive, which, in subjective reality, is the only energy we can ever actually experience--- and it is finite. That means we can subjectively be aware of how much energy it takes to manifest a perception (hence reality).

We sense an energy loss as a "bad" feeling. In an argument, that means anything from unhappiness to a major heart attack. In contrast, a net gain of energy is felt as anything from mild satisfaction to bliss.

So in going about our daily lives, we manifest our personal realities through carefully bargaining for energy. We can save up energy or spend it foolishly. A perfect example is how we deal with money, but also, with our health if we drink too much too often instead of being more prudent and sober.

Nothing and I repeat nothing I'm saying doesn't very easily fit as a model of reality. You cannot prove me wrong.

Yet, I can show you how what you believe about the objective universe is completely wrong.

For one thing, a believer in an empirical objective reality must deal with all kinds of things that never make sense. Such things as UFOs, or Bigfoot, or more prosaic items such as placeboes and hypnosis can never be explained even while they are known to exist.

The most irrational (ironically) of the posters here will call themselves the most rational of all, poo-pooing anything that doesn't fit their very limited world view. This is the safe bet because it so happens that the moderators dislike intensely anything that cannot be backed up by rote information on the web. I will probably get banned for such heretical claims.

Nevertheless, I do have some faith in my fellow man to think imaginatively.

So, going back to the previous discussion, one could call this axiomatic knowledge (or theory if you prefer the word), 'Reality by Description"

What it means, in short, is that we co-observe by dint of the fact that we are of the same culture or species, where we always expend the least energy possible to manifest what we already believe to be true.

Thus, every event we witness is derived from a very limited set of circumstances and seldom allows anything out of the ordinary.

We mostly believe in the same things. However, you can see that crop formations are a feature, mostly, or England's culture. Placebo efficacy is very different in Europe as it is in the USA. If it is true that belief is what manifests reality, imagine if you can (it's hard, I know) that if a yogi can levitate, he is doing so because he can believe it's possible (so that leaves Buddhist physicists out for the most part). And you, dear Amazing Randi, with your million dollar offer, will never manifest the loss of that money because you are so convinced that nothing such as levitation is possible.

It would take more energy to do it than you could ever muster. Nor would anyone ever be able to convince you that certain things are possible.

It's a catch-22. No belief, no manifestation, and all of it playing like a well-rehearsed script. Don't forget that variable, determinism.

Logically, what I've said makes absolutely perfect and elegant sense.

he world "out there" is exactly like a play on a stage, one that lasts for an entire life. The script was there all along, before you went on stage to play your part. Always, you are the one at center stage. It is your epic story. And behind the visible stage set, there is nothing, so efficient is the human mind. Nothing to use up your limited energy.

You were born knowing this. You knew determinism. You had to learn the hard way to accept responsibility for your reach to grab, or to crawl to your rattle. You knew subjective reality as well as you played with your "invisible" friend. But all that's gone now. You no longer know that its a script. You believe in good and evil, in responsibility and guilt.

Sad it is, but necessary because without that 'hypnosis", you could never have survived, or remained sane.

Yet, in returning to that knowledge, you return to that infancy. It's still possible to play the part of the believer in free will, but always with the knowledge that it's all just a make-believe play.

Edited March 26, 2017 by Dave Moore

[MonDie]

Hypnosis is not a science, as it does not rely on the empirical method.

 

I would personally give it Psuedo Science stature.

 

At best.

 

At worst?

 

Irresponsible and often dangerous superstitious hoakum. Onboard with Astrology and homeopathy.

 

 

http://www.sciencefocus.com/qa/there-any-scientific-explanation-hypnosis

 

Hypnosis can refer to either a state of mind or the technique for inducing that state of mind. Perhaps the thread title should have been "the science of trance".

[DrmDoc]

 

Hypnosis can refer to either a state of mind or the technique for inducing that state of mind. Perhaps the thread title should have been "the science of trance".

 

Some of you may have misunderstood the title of this thread. The science of hypnosis refers to the research of this technique's effects through methods in science rather than a reference to hypnosis as science. Hypnosis is not a science but there has been scientific investigation of hypnosis to either prove or disprove its effects--which is what the SciShow link above provides.

[MonDie]

I had an interesting thought regarding dissociate fugue and hypnotic susceptibility. "Absorption" is related to hypnotic susceptibility and to "Openness to Experience". Perhaps this helps to explain why a person who has undergone dissociative fugue finds themself in an unfamiliar place after the alter wanders away from home and starts a new life. It's almost like extreme openness—the preference for novelty becomes so strong that the person just leaves and goes somewhere else.

 

Anyway, although there are probably many more, here is just one research paper that discusses empirically observable effects of hypnosis.

 

Oxytocin impedes the effect of word blindness post-hypnotic suggestion on Stroop task performance (Parris, Dienes, Bate, Gothard, 2014)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4090953/

 

 

 

Raz et al. (2002) showed that the Stroop effect (Stroop, 1935), one of the most robust effects in cognitive psychological research, can be virtually eliminated following a post-hypnotic suggestion. The Stroop task requires participants to identify the colour of the font in which a word is presented, while ignoring the meaning of the word itself. When the written word is incongruent with the ink colour (red written in blue), the time it takes to identify the colour is increased relative to neutral stimuli (i.e. when the word is not colour-related, e.g. top written in red). When the word is congruent with the colour (red in red), colour identification time is reduced compared with neutral stimuli. The effect of word congruency on colour classification times is known as the Stroop effect. The Stroop effect has been referred to as the ‘gold standard’ of attentional processes and has long been held as strong evidence for the obligatory nature of word processing (MacLeod, 1992). However, a post-hypnotic suggestion describing the word dimension of the Stroop stimulus as being made up of ‘meaningless symbols’ and ‘characters of a foreign language’ (to be referred to as the word blindness suggestion) resulted in the virtual elimination of not only Stroop interference (Incongruent-Neutral Stroop trials) but also Stroop facilitation (Neutral-Congruent trials) in the reaction time (RT) data, and Stroop effects typically observed in error data. The authors argued that their results were inconsistent with the notion that the processes of visual word recognition are obligatory and that the post-hypnotic suggestion works via a top-down mechanism that modifies the processing of input words through a means not voluntarily available.

[DrmDoc]

I had an interesting thought regarding dissociate fugue and hypnotic susceptibility. "Absorption" is related to hypnotic susceptibility and to "Openness to Experience". Perhaps this helps to explain why a person who has undergone dissociative fugue finds themself in an unfamiliar place after the alter wanders away from home and starts a new life. It's almost like extreme openness—the preference for novelty becomes so strong that the person just leaves and goes somewhere else.

 

Anyway, although there are probably many more, here is just one research paper that discusses empirically observable effects of hypnosis.

 

Oxytocin impedes the effect of word blindness post-hypnotic suggestion on Stroop task performance (Parris, Dienes, Bate, Gothard, 2014)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4090953/

 

 

Very interesting indeed.