Hypnotic Susceptibility Revisited

Abstract The concept and measurement of hypnotic susceptibility are re-examined in their relation to hypnotizability, hypnotic depth and suggestibility. The Stanford Scales and similar instruments are found to have failed to take into account essential features defining traditional hypnosis and suggestibility and to have created confusion in the scientific inquiry into hypnotism. Other available measures have not been particularly successful, but some bear further attention. Recent claims that hypnotizability can be trained have failed to distinguish between hypnotizability proper and accessory processes, leaving some question about what is actually being trained. Possible future directions of work on susceptibility are considered. Attempts to distinquish between “clinical” and “laboratory” hypnotizability are examined and found to have been premature and loosely based on facts.