Understanding Hypnosis - Theory, Scope and Potential (PDFDrive) PDF

UNDERSTANDING HYPNOSIS:
THEORY, SCOPE AND POTENTIAL
No part of this digital document may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or
by any means. The publisher has taken reasonable care in the preparation of this digital document, but makes no
expressed or implied warranty of any kind and assumes no responsibility for any errors or omissions. No
liability is assumed for incidental or consequential damages in connection with or arising out of information
contained herein. This digital document is sold with the clear understanding that the publisher is not engaged in
rendering legal, medical or any other professional services.
UNDERSTANDING HYPNOSIS:
THEORY, SCOPE AND POTENTIAL
ALFRED A. BARRIOS
Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

New York
Copyright © 2009 by Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system
or transmitted in any form or by any means: electronic, electrostatic, magnetic, tape,
mechanical photocopying, recording or otherwise without the written permission of the
Publisher.
For permission to use material from this book please contact us:
Telephone 631-231-7269; Fax 631-231-8175
Web Site: http://www.novapublishers.com
NOTICE TO THE READER

The Publisher has taken reasonable care in the preparation of this book, but makes no
expressed or implied warranty of any kind and assumes no responsibility for any errors or
omissions. No liability is assumed for incidental or consequential damages in connection
with or arising out of information contained in this book. The Publisher shall not be liable
for any special, consequential, or exemplary damages resulting, in whole or in part, from
the readers’ use of, or reliance upon, this material.
Independent verification should be sought for any data, advice or recommendations

contained in this book. In addition, no responsibility is assumed by the publisher for any
injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from any methods, products,
instructions, ideas or otherwise contained in this publication.
This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information with regard
to the subject matter covered herein. It is sold with the clear understanding that the
Publisher is not engaged in rendering legal or any other professional services. If legal or
any other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent person should be
sought. FROM A DECLARATION OF PARTICIPANTS JOINTLY ADOPTED BY A
COMMITTEE OF THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION AND A COMMITTEE OF
PUBLISHERS.
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOGING-IN-PUBLICATION DATA

Barrios, Alfred A.
Understanding hypnosis : theory, scope and potential / Alfred A. Barrios.
p. cm.
Includes index.
ISBN 978-1-60876-686-4 (E-Book)
1. Hypnotism. I. Title.
BF1141.B34 2009
154.7--dc22 2008050318
Published by Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

  New York
DEDICATION
I would like to dedicate this book to the members of my immediate family all
of whom are no longer with me but who each in their own way played a part in
my life. This includes my father Arturo, my mother Carmen and my brothers Alex
and Artie. I wish they could all still be with me to share in the achievement of one
of my longtime goals. I would also like to include the most recent member of my
family to leave me who was like a son to me – my beloved little teacup Yorkie,
Mishka whose unconditional love sustained me all eight years of his too short life.
CONTENTS
Foreword ix
Preface xi
Acknowledgements xiii
Part I. 1
Chapter 1 Introduction 3
Chapter 2 Hypnotherapy: A Reappraisal 7
Chapter 3 Overview of My Theory of Hypnosis 17
Chapter 4 Comparison with Other Theories 19
Chapter 5 Support for the Theory 35
Chapter 6 Methodological Shortcomings of Many Hypnosis
Experiments and How to Prevent Them 39
Part II. Benefits of the Theory 43
Chapter 7 How the Theory Leads to Further Understanding of a
Number of Areas: The Hallucinogens, Schizophrenia,
Bi-Polar Disorder, Biofeedback, Learning Theory, and
the Placebo 45
Chapter 8 How the Theory Also Leads to Natural Explanations for
Religious Phenomena 53
Chapter 9 Developing More Effective Methods of Hypnotic
Induction and Post-Hypnotic Suggestion 61
viii Contents
Chapter 10 The Development of Self-Programmed Control and Its

Positive Application in: Education, Welfare, Medicine,
Industry and Drug
Rehabilitation 65
Conclusions of Part II 81
Appendix 83
References 125
Index 131
FOREWORD
John Steinbacher, CEO

Some 30 years ago a most remarkable person came into the life of the Cancer
Federation. At that time, the organization was but two years old, and we were
holding our second annual convention in San Diego. Earlier, I had been
introduced to the fascinating work of Dr. Alfred Barrios through reading his
seminal book, “Towards Greater Freedom and Happiness” I was convinced that
his landmark work related to Hypnosis and his Self-Programmed Control (SPC)
methods could help many of the desperate cancer patients who were coming to us
for assistance.
Dr. Barrios became a most popular speaker at many subsequent gatherings.
The attendees were particularly fascinated with Dr. Barrios’ unique “stress cards”
simply applied methods of controlling stress on a daily basis. Today those cards
are used all over the world, by various governmental agencies, in schools and
among America’s military and in companies of all kinds, as well as by just plain,
ordinary people.
This latest book by Dr. Barrios continues a significant body of outstanding
work, now recognized by professionals in his own field, as advancing hypnosis
into a new, higher plane of acceptance. This is a book that is as accessible to the
layman as it is to those who wish to put Dr. Barrio’s principles to work in their
own practice.
Of particular significance is the role that religious faith plays in this approach,
as opposed to the purely secular. Barrios brilliantly elucidates the manner in
which his theory points to natural explanations for religious phenomena (see
chapter 8). This is particularly significant in an age when there is much interest in
the role of faith in triggering the immune response.
x John Steinbacher
Most important, Barrios spells out the major benefits of hypnosis – the ability
to facilitate re-programming or change. The EPK journey that Dr. Barrios has
taken in the past 3 decades has happily culminated in this exceptional vindication
of his frequently ignored, or attacked, pioneering efforts. This book is also a
positive affirmation of the faith that we had in him at the dawning of the cancer
federation in his revolutionary concepts has not been misplaced.
PREFACE
Hypnosis, free will, the placebo, faith, and yes God have all been concepts of
great mystery, misunderstanding and disbelief to many throughout the years.
These are powerful concepts that can play a major part in man achieving optimum
fulfillment, happiness and health. But because these concepts have remained so
misunderstood their full potential has been denied to many in helping them
achieve these lofty goals. My objective was to provide a theory of hypnosis that
would present logical, rational explanations not only for hypnosis but all these
concepts so as to allow greater access to the power behind them and thus help
people achieve their full potential in all areas of life. One of the key things that
will be pointed out is that all these concepts are tied in with that of belief, with
hypnosis defined as a state of heightened belief, and belief defined as
concentration on a thought to the exclusion of anything that would contradict that
thought.
A major theme of the book is that one of people’s greatest problems is that it
is very hard for them to change, that they do not have as much free will as they
would like to think, that in reality most people are automatons governed by and
slaves to the automatic (subconscious) behavior that has been programmed into
them over the years. Yes, there are a small number of people who have
experienced only positive programming. And there are a small percentage of
people who have truly developed free will, who have the ability to reprogram
when necessary to achieve their highest goals. But why leave things to chance as
to who are the lucky few. Why not show people how they can systematically tap
into the power of belief to facilitate this ability to program in for themselves the
positive behaviors that will lead to optimum fulfillment. This then is the major
benefit of hypnosis – the ability to facilitate re-programming or change.
xii Alfred A. Barrios
To give you some idea of the power of hypnosis, the book starts by pointing
out the phenomenal success rate of hypnotherapy: 93% after an average of 6
sessions. This compared to 38% after an average of 600 sessions for
psychoanalysis.
Another major goal of the book was to suggest the best or optimum ways of
presenting or getting hypnosis to the general public so as to reach and benefit the
most people. This included not only eliminating the many fears associated with
hypnosis and providing techniques to make it most effective for producing change
but also pointing out the best direction or changes to program in. Towards this end
in 1970 I developed Self-Programmed Control (SPC). SPC embodies all the
positive ways suggested by the theory of hypnosis for making hypnosis more
acceptable as well as most effective for producing positive change. (It is
interesting to note the similarity of the terms SPC and Self-Programmed Control
to the terms NLP and Neuro-Linguistic Programming which were introduced by
Bandler and Grinder almost ten years after SPC’s arrival. NLP was based in large
part on Milton Erickson’s strategic approach to hypnotherapy which as I point out
in the book has many parallels to the SPC program, even though the latter was
developed completely independent of Erickson’s work.)
To reach the most people SPC has been introduced as a powerful aid in such
areas as education, industry and medicine. It was also pointed out that one need
not be a Ph.D. or M.D. in order to teach SPC to others; that those people
benefiting from it could themselves pass it on to others since it was so easy to
teach. This all is felt to be needed because at the exponentially fast rate at which
technology has been advancing, man now has the potential to totally destroy
himself and will unless we can get to him first.
Such innovators as Maslow (self-actualization), Bandura (self-efficacy),
Goleman (emotional intelligence), and Seligman (positive psychology) have
pointed the way. However, although pointing the way is important, it is not
enough. It is felt that SPC can be the catalyst that provides the all important
missing link – a means to facilitating change and thus helping to achieve these oh
so important goals.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Much of this book comes from my 1969 UCLA Ph.D. dissertation in

psychology, Towards Understanding Hypnotherapy: A Combined Clinical,
Theoretical and Experimental Approach, which as its title indicates was in three
major parts. Two of the three parts, the clinical review and the experiment were
published soon after. (The clinical review, “Hypnotherapy: a reappraisal” was
published in 1970 in Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice. And the
experiment, “Posthypnotic suggestion as higher order conditioning: a
methodological and experimental analysis” was published in 1973 in The
International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis.) However, the most
important part, the theory of hypnosis was rejected for publication at the time and
continued to be rejected for three decades. I would like to think this was because it
was too far ahead of its time. I am greatly indebted to one of the greatest
professionals in the field of experimental hypnosis, the late T.X. Barber, Ph.D.,
who over the years continued to encourage me to get it published, and to John
Gruzelier, Ph.D., the editor of Contemporary Hypnosis who finally felt the time
was right and had it published in his journal in 2001. I would also like to thank the
late William S. Kroger, M.D. one of the titans in the field of clinical and medical
hypnosis for much of the second half of the past century, for recognizing my
talents as a hypnotherapist and who hired me as his assistant in his clinical
practice in the late 1960’s. During this time he was kind enough to act as my
supervisor during my internship for getting my California license in clinical
psychology.
PART I.
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
For too a long time now hypnosis has remained a mystery to most people,
especially most professionals in the field of psychology and medicine, and
consequently it has been virtually ignored by them in spite of the long–standing
strong evidence of its therapeutic value (see below). The present book will help
place hypnosis in such a clear light as to finally open up the field to both
professionals and the general public so that its vast potential benefits can finally
be more fully realized.
The book starts with the startling results of a clinical review done almost 40
years ago comparing the effectiveness of hypnotherapy to psychoanalysis and
behavior therapy (Barrios, 1970). This review indicated that the average number
of sessions needed for psychoanalysis was 600 with a success rate of only 38%;
for behavior therapy the average number of sessions needed was 22 with a success
rate of 72%; while for hypnotherapy the average number of sessions needed was 6
with a success rate of 93%. This is followed with an overview of a comprehensive
theory of hypnosis based on principles of conditioning and inhibition explaining
all aspects of hypnotic phenomena and from this we can see why hypnotherapy is
so much more effective. The theory is then compared (pointing out the similarities
and differences) to three other current hypnosis theories: the Sociocognitive, the
Dissociation/Neo-Dissociation, and the Response-Expectancy perspectives (as
well as with Erickson’s strategic approach to therapy). In so doing at least one
major incorrect implication of the Sociocognitive and Response – Expectancy
theories is pointed out. These theories incorrectly lead one to believe that there are
no major differences between the hypnotic and the waking state, that hypnotic
induction leads only to a minor increase in suggestibility.
Research in support of the theory is next presented, including an experiment
done by the author proving the effectiveness of post-hypnotic suggestion and
4 Alfred A. Barrios
which presents ways of eliminating many of the methodological shortcomings of

previous hypnosis experiments.
Finally, additional benefits of the theory are discussed. This includes
providing: (1) a further understanding of the hallucinogens, schizophrenia, bi-
polar disorder, biofeedback, the learning process, placebos and religion; (2)
development of more effective methods of hypnotic induction; (3) development of
more effective methods of giving post-hypnotic suggestions; and (4) development
of Self-Programmed Control (SPC), a positive-oriented improvement program
aimed at producing self-actualization, greater self-efficacy, and higher emotional
intelligence. The dramatic positive results of SPC’s application in the areas of:
education, welfare, industry, medicine and drug rehabilitation are presented.
As to who would be the principal audiences for this book, first of all it is clear
that it would appeal to a wide variety of professionals who could most definitely
benefit from it. This would of course include all hypnotherapists. For one, it
would most certainly help strengthen the credibility of hypnotherapy in the eyes
of their prospective patients. Already a large number of hypnotherapists are
referring to my article “Hypnotherapy: A Reappraisal”, in particular the clinical
review part indicating that the hypnotherapy is so much more effective than other
forms of therapy. And they of course could benefit greatly from the many new
highly effective hypnotic induction techniques offered as well as from the section
on how to make post hypnotic suggestions more effective.
I would also expect all those therapists currently using NLP (neurolinguistic
programming – a derivative of Ericksonian hypnosis) to also find the book of
great value because of the parallel I draw between Erickson’s work and mine. The
book would stimulate many additional useful ideas and techniques that they could
use in their practice.
Then there are the followers of two of the leading psychologists in the field
today: Albert Bandura of Stanford University and Martin Seligman of the
University of Pennsylvania. With regards to Bandura, I feel strongly that a proper
application of hypnosis could play a major role in heightening one’s level of self-
efficacy (which he feels is the key to facilitating behavioral change). In a recent
email interchange with him I apparently managed to convince him that it might
indeed be of interest to see if hypnosis could make verbal persuasion more
effective for building self-efficacy.
With regards to Martin Seligman, I wrote him recently and pointed out to him
that although a major emphasis of his in his recent books on positive psychology
(he is considered the father of the new Positive Psychology Movement) was that it
is possible for people to change more towards the positive, he has never once
referred to hypnosis as a possible means for facilitating such change. I of course
Introduction 5
pointed out to him how I felt hypnosis would definitely be more effective in
helping people to achieve such positive changes than most other approaches
currently being used by psychotherapists. I think it is just a matter of time before
he also starts to think like Bandura recently did and starts looking towards
hypnosis as a possible valuable tool.
Because of the novel ideas I propose in the areas of biofeedback,
schizophrenia, bi-polar disorder, drug rehabilitation, the placebo, learning theory,
alternative medicine, education and religion, the book would be of interest to
professionals in these areas as well.
And then of course there is the general public. People have always been
fascinated by the subject of hypnosis but I would say a large proportion of them
have most likely remained somewhat incredulous as to all the miraculous claims
made regarding its benefits and consequently have hesitated to explore its
possibilities. However, thanks to its clear and rational presentation herein, this no
longer need be the case.
There is one particularly large segment of the general public that would
especially find this book of great interest. These are the people who have been
caught up in the current excitement over the book The Secret. The basic theme of
the approach presented in The Secret, as pointed out on the Larry King show
August 2nd 2008, is “Change your mind – Change your life”. However, what these
people seem to be overlooking is the fact that it is not that easy to change. What
the current book can provide them then is the “missing link”, “the secret”, to
insure The Secret’s success – a systematic means of facilitating change.
Chapter 2
HYPNOTHERAPY: A REAPPRAISAL ∗
INTRODUCTION
Throughout the years there have been periodic surges of great interest in
hypnosis. Many extraordinary phenomena have been attributed to its effects and
great claims made as to its effectiveness in therapy. Yet, in spite of such claims,
there still appear to be relatively few therapists using hypnosis as a major tool.
Why? Is it because the criticisms usually leveled at hypnosis are true? That it is
overrated, actually limited to a small range of problems, unable to produce lasting
changes? Will removal of symptoms by hypnosis lead to new symptoms? Is it
dangerous? No, there is far too much clinical evidence contradicting these
statements. Such evidence can no longer be ignored. It is felt that the major reason
behind the rejection of hypnosis has been that for most people it is still virtually
an unknown. It seems to be human nature to stay clear of or reject anything that
doesn’t seem to fit in or be explained rationally, especially when it seems to be
something potentially powerful. It is mainly its unknown nature that has led to the
many misconceptions surrounding hypnosis and has kept us from making the best
use of it.
The purpose of the present paper is to present some of the recent clinical
evidence contradicting the common criticisms and misconceptions surrounding
hypnotherapy, to provide a good indication of how to make the best use of this
∗
This chapter is a verbatim copy of the Barrios, 1970 article in Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and
Practice. Copyright © 1970 by the Division of Psychotherapy (29), American Psychological
Association. Reproduced with permission. The official citation that should be used in
referencing this material is: Barrios AA (1970) Hypnotherapy: A Reappraisal. Psychotherapy:
Theory, Research and Practice 7:2-7.
8 Alfred A. Barrios
tool, and to provide a rational explanation for its hard-to-believe therapeutic

effects.
OVERVIEW OF RECENT LITERATURE

There have been 1,018 articles dealing with hypnosis in the past three years
(1966 through 1968), approximately forty per cent of which dealt with its use in
therapy. In the same period we find 899 articles on psychoanalytic therapy and
355 on behavior therapy.
Contrary to popular opinion that hypnosis is only effective in certain specific
symptom-removal cases, a wide range of diagnostic categories have been
successfully treated by hypnotherapy. This includes anxiety reaction, obsessive-
compulsive neurosis, hysterical reactions and sociopathic disorders (Hussain,
1964), as well as epilepsy (Stein, 1963), alcoholism (Chong Tong Mun, 1966),
frigidity (Richardson, 1963), stammering and homosexuality (Alexander, 1965),
various psychosomatic disorders including asthma, spontaneous abortions,
dysmenorrhea, allergic rhinitis, ulcers, dermatitis, infertility and essential
hypertension (Chong Tong Mun, 1964, 1966). Also in the past few years an
increasing number of reports indicate that the psychoses are quite amenable to
hypnotherapy (Abrams, 1963, 1964; Biddle, 1967).
THREE LARGE SCALE STUDIES

Three large scale studies in the past five years contain basic findings.
Richardson’s (1963) study dealt with seventy-six cases of frigidity. He reports
94.7% of the patients improved. The average number of sessions needed was 1.53.
The criterion for judging improvement was increase in percentage of orgasms.
The percentage of orgasms rose from a pre-treatment average of 24% to a post-
treatment average of 84%. Follow-ups (exact length not given) showed that only
two patients were unable to continue realizing climaxes at the same percentages as
when treatment terminated. Richardson’s method of treatment was a combination
of direct symptom removal, uncovering, and removal of underlying causes, since
he had found that direct symptom removal alone was not always sufficient. He
reports no hypnotic induction failures.
Chong Tong Mun’s (1964, 1966) study covered 108 patients suffering from
asthma, insomnia, alcoholism, dysmenorrhea, dermatitis, anxiety state, and
Hypnotherapy: A Reappraisal 9
impotence. The percentage of patients reported improved was 90%. The average
number of sessions was five. The criteria for judging improvement were removal
or improvement of symptoms. The average follow-up period was nine months.
Chong Tong Mun’s method of treatment was a three-fold approach. With some
patients he would work on reeducating the patient with regard to the behavior
patterns immediately underlying the symptoms. With others he would first regress
the patient back to the original onset of the symptom. Once regressed, he would
reeducate the patient to the fact that the original cause was no longer operative. In
addition, he usually used supplementary suggestions of direct symptom removal.
Hussain’s (1964) study reports on 105 patients suffering from alcoholism,
sexual promiscuity, impotence and frigidity, sociopathic personality disturbance,
hysterical reactions, behavior disorders of school children, speech disorders, and a
number of different psychosomatic illnesses. The percentage of patients reported
improved was 95.2%. The number of sessions needed ranged from four to sixteen.
The criteria for judging improvement were complete or almost complete removal
of symptoms. In follow-ups ranging from six months to two years no instance of
relapse or symptom substitution was noted.
Hussain’s approach is illustrated by the case of a 35 year old woman
exhibiting the following symptoms: anxiety, alcoholism, depression with suicidal
tendencies, sexual promiscuity, insomnia, and inability to make decisions and
future plans.
Prior to treatment, Hussain pinpointed the various fears and negative attitudes
which he felt were underlying the symptoms – e.g., the patient feeling unloved
and unwanted in regards to her marriage, feelings of inadequacy at being a
mother, fear of her own mother, fear of responsibility and making decisions, and
guilt over her sexual promiscuity.
Hussain then used a therapeutic technique somewhat similar to Wolpe’s
(1958) desensitization technique to eliminate these fears and negative attitudes.
For example, he would have the patient think of a particular fear-producing
situation and recondition her by suggesting she would find herself calm and
relaxed in the situation. This particular approach is very often used now in one
form or another. Abrams (1963) refers to it as an “artificial situation” technique.
Through hypnosis the patient is able to experience his new attitudes in an
“artificial situation,” an imagined situation. [This artificial situation technique was
incorporated into the SPC program discussed below in Chapter 9 and is referred to
as the “Projection Method” for self-programming of positive suggestions (Barrios,
1985, pp. 43-51).] It differs from Wolpe’s approach in two respects. First of all,
Wolpe does not often use hypnosis. Secondly, Wolpe has the patient go through a
hierarchy of “imagined situations,” going from easiest to deal with to most
10 Alfred A. Barrios
difficult. (There is no reason, however, why this hierarchy approach cannot be

incorporated into hypnotherapy)
With the above patient Hussain also used direct symptom-removal
suggestions. For example, “aversion to the thought and sight of alcohol was also
built up by direct suggestion.”
This patient was discharged from the hospital after twelve sessions. “No
relevant symptoms were left behind and there was no relapse during the six-month
follow-up period.”
CURRENT METHOD OF USING HYPNOSIS

As one can see in the above studies, and this probably comes as a surprise to
most therapists, the main use of hypnosis is not as a means of direct symptom
removal. Nor is its main use as an uncovering device. The current trend is to use
hypnosis to remove the negative attitudes, fears, maladaptive behavior patterns,
and negative self-images underlying the symptoms. Uncovering and direct
symptom removal are still used to a certain extent, but usually in conjunction with
this new main function.
In the past, so much emphasis was directed towards symptoms and disease
processes that some of us were guilty of forgetting the person in the body. It is
incumbent upon us [hypnotherapists] to concentrate on treating the particular
patient who presents the symptom rather than the symptom presented by the
patient (Mann, 1963).
Psychiatric hypnotherapy, as practiced today by the leading practitioners in

the field, has in common with all other forms of modern psychiatric treatment
that it concerns itself not only with the presenting symptoms but chiefly with the
dynamic impasse in which the patient finds himself and with his character
structure (Alexander, 1965).
The objection that the results of symptom removal will seldom be permanent
is certainly not valid. This may have been so in the past, when direct symptom
removal alone was practiced and nothing was done to strengthen the patients’
ability to cope with his difficulty or to encourage him to stand on his own two
feet (Hartland, 1965).
This change is being stressed in the present paper because it is part of its
purpose to fit hypnotherapy into “the scheme of things.” Many therapists have
rejected hypnosis because its direct symptom approach of the past clashed
violently with their dynamic approach. Now we see that such a clash need no
longer exist.
THE AHISTORICAL VS. THE

HISTORICAL APPROACH IN THERAPY
Some hypnotherapists use, in part, a historical approach, going back into the
patient’s childhood and changing his attitudes regarding the causes of these
patterns (Fromm, 1965; Abrams, 1963; Chong Tong Mun, 1964, 1966). However,
most hypnotherapy is ahistorical and, it would seem, faster. If we wanted to
change the direction of a river it might be much easier to work on the main
current directly (once it had been located) rather than going back upstream,
locating all the tributaries, and pointing each one in a new direction.
A COMMENT ON THE DANGERS ASCRIBED TO HYPNOSIS

In the past there have been certain dangers ascribed to the use of hypnosis –
for example, the danger of a psychotic break, or the substitution of more
damaging symptoms. According to a number of investigators (Kroger, 1963;
Abrams, 1964) these dangers have been grossly exaggerated. However, whatever
dangers there were have been virtually eliminated by this new approach. The few
mishaps that have occurred in the past resulted either from (1) the misuse of
hypnosis as an uncovering agent, or (2) its misuse as a direct symptom remover.
The first type of mishap was produced by a therapist, who would allow, or force,
the patient to become aware of repressed information which he was not strong
enough to face. The second type of mishap occurred when the therapist wrested
away a symptom which the patient was using as a crutch before he was strong
enough to stand on his own.
HYPNOTIZABILITY OF PATIENTS
Freud abandoned hypnosis because of “the small number of people who could
be put into a deep state of hypnosis” at that time and because in the cathartic
approach, symptoms would disappear at first, but reappear later if the patient-
therapist relationship were disturbed (Freud, 1955, p. 237). In the above studies
the only hypnotic induction failures were reported by Chong Tong Mun (eight
failures out of 108 patients.) This can mean one of two things: the hypnotic
induction procedures have improved since Freud’s day, or that the reconditioning
approach used in these studies (as opposed to Freud’s cathartic approach) does not
require very deep levels of hypnosis. There is evidence that both factors may be
involved.
Although many have thought that hypnotic susceptibility was a set character
trait, there are a number of studies which now seem to indicate that this is not the
case, and that responsiveness can be increased by certain changes in the hypnotic
induction procedure (Pascal and Salzberg, 1959; Sachs and Anderson, 1967;
Baykushev, 1969), as well as by means of a pre-induction talk aimed at insuring a
positive attitude, an appropriate expectancy and a high motivation toward
hypnosis (Dorcus, 1963; Barber, 1969a; Barrios, 1969).
With regard to the depth of hypnosis required for the reconditioning approach
to work, there are a number of therapists who feel that only a light state of
hypnosis is necessary (Van Pelt, 1958; Kline, 1958; Kroger, 1963) A study by
Barrios (1969) gives this contention some support; it was found that an increase in
the conditioning of the salivary response could be produced almost as effectively
by lighter levels of hypnosis as by deeper levels.
The latter point brings us to the question of whether hypnotic induction is
necessary at all for the re-conditioning approach to work. Judging from the work
of Wolpe (1958) it would appear that hypnosis is not an absolutely necessary
requirement. This would also be supported by the work of Barber (1961, 1965)
who found that hypnotic phenomena could be produced without a prior hypnotic
induction. However, the real question to be answered is not whether hypnotic
induction is absolutely necessary, but whether it can further facilitate the
conditioning process. Wolpe, himself, concedes the hypnosis apparently does
facilitate the conditioning:
“Patients who cannot relax will not make progress with this method. Those
who cannot or will not be hypnotized but who can relax will make progress,
although apparently more slowly than when hypnosis is used.” (Wolpe, 1958, p.
141; italics added).
Also, although Barrios’ [1973a] study indicated that conditioning could be

increased during lighter levels of hypnosis, it was also found that there was no
increase in conditioning with those subjects indicating no response to the hypnotic
induction.
As pointed out in the theory (Barrios, 1969), hypnotic and waking suggestion
are on the same continuum and hypnotic induction should be looked upon as a
procedure whereby we can increase the probability of getting a more positive
response to suggestion. The next question to be decided now is not so much
whether hypnotic induction procedures increase responsiveness (this is fairly well
accepted – e.g., Barber, 1969a) but what variables in the hypnotic induction are
playing the key roles and what can be done to strengthen the effectiveness of these
factors.
COMPARISON WITH PSYCHOANALYSIS

AND BEHAVIOR THERAPY
In Wolpe’s comparison of his and the psychoanalytic approaches (Wolpe,

Salter, and Reyna, 1964), we find the following: Based on all psychoneurotic
patients seen, the number of patients cured or much improved by psychoanalysis
was 45% in one study involving 534 patients and 31% in the other study
involving 595 patients (the only two large scale studies in the literature on
psychoanalysis). The average duration of treatment for the improved patients
(given only for the first study) was three to four years at an average of three to
four sessions per week, or an average of approximately 600 sessions per patient.
For Wolpe’s approach we find that, based on all patients seen, the recovery rate
was 65% in his own study involving 295 patients (usually [misleadingly] reported
as 90% of 210 patients) and 78% in a study by Lazarus (1963) involving 408
patients. The duration of treatment for the improved patients was an average of
thirty sessions in the former and fourteen in the latter.
Averaging the above figures, we find that for psychoanalysis we can expect a
recovery rate of 38% after approximately 600 sessions. For Wolpian therapy, we
can expect a recovery rate of 72% after an average of 22 sessions, and for
hypnotherapy we can expect a recovery rate of 93% after an average of 6 sessions.
It is interesting to note the negative correlation between number of sessions
and percentage recovery rate. At first sight this seems paradoxical. However, if a
form of therapy is truly effective, it should not only increase recovery rate, but
also shorten the number of sessions necessary (as well as widen the range of cases
treatable).
THE NEED FOR A RATIONAL EXPLANATION

In spite of all the encouraging reports, there continues to be considerable
hesitation on the part of psychotherapists to use hypnosis. Hypnosis is still looked
upon as an “unknown” by most therapists. They are as yet not aware of any
reasonable rational explanation for hypnotic phenomena that would satisfy them,
one that would tie these phenomena down to observable facts and laws. As long
as hypnosis continues to exude an air of mysticism and charlatanism, it will
continue to be rejected by many, no matter how great the claims on its behalf.
AN EXPLANATION BASED ON PRINCIPLES OF CONDITIONING

The experienced therapist really should not be so surprised at the
effectiveness of hypnosis in facilitating therapy. Hypnotic induction can be looked
upon as a technique for establishing a very strong rapport, for establishing a
greater confidence, a greater belief in the therapist, whereby the latter’s words will
be much more effective. As Sundberg and Tyler (1962) point out, one of the
common features among all methods of psychotherapy is the attempt to “create a
strong personal relationship that can be used as a vehicle for constructive
change… It is a significant fact that many theoretical writers, as their experience
increases, come to place much more emphasis on this variable” (pp.293-294).
The question still remains, however – what exactly is the process whereby
“mere words” can produce such great changes in personality.
As pointed out in Barrios’ (1969) theory of hypnosis, the ability of words to
produce behavior changes is really not so difficult to understand if we are familiar
with the principles of higher-order conditioning.
First of all, we know that words can act as conditioned stimuli.
Pavlov recognized this fact:
Obviously for man speech provides conditioned stimuli which are just as
real as any other stimuli… Speech, on account of the whole preceding life of the
adult, is connected up with all the internal and external stimuli which can reach
the cortex, signaling all of them and replacing all of them, and therefore it can
call forth all those reactions of the organism which are normally determined by
the actual stimuli themselves (Pavlov, 1960, p. 407).
Now, according to principles of high-order conditioning we know that by

paring word B with word A we should transfer the response produced by word B
to word A and consequently anything that would evoke word A. Thus, for
example, if we wanted to condition a person to be more relaxed in the presence of
people, we would pair the words “people” (A) and “relaxed” (B), using a sentence
or suggestion such as, “From now on you will find yourself more relaxed in the
presence of people.” Mower’s theoretical formulations on the sentence as a
conditioning device (Mowrer, 1960) tend to support this contention.
Of course, we know that under ordinary circumstances suggestions are not
always accepted (and thus conditioning doesn’t always result when an appropriate
suggestion is given). Why is this? Osgood (1963) holds that a suggestion will tend
to be rejected if it is incongruent with the subject’s previously held beliefs and
attitudes or his present perceptions. It would seem that if there were some means
of eliminating the latter we should be able to have a suggestion more readily
accepted and thus facilitate the higher-order conditioning. Hypnosis is such a
means.
Thus we come to the reason hypnosis is so effective in facilitating therapy:
the incongruent perceptions, beliefs, and attitudes are kept from interfering with
the suggestion (and thus with the conditioning). As put by Pavlov:
The command of the hypnotist, in correspondence with the general law,

concentrates the excitation in the cortex of the subject (which is in a condition of
partial inhibition) in some definite narrow region, at the same time intensifying
(by negative induction) the inhibition of the rest of the cortex and so abolishing
all competing effects of contemporary stimuli [present perceptions] and traces
left by previously received ones [previously held beliefs and attitudes]. This
accounts for the large and practically insurmountable influence of suggestions as
a stimulus during hypnosis as well as shortly after it (Pavlov, 1960, p. 407; italics
added).
As an illustration, let us say we wanted to change a patient’s self-image from

that of an inadequate person to a more self-confident one. If under ordinary
circumstances we suggested that he would no longer feel inadequate, it would
most likely accomplish little. This is because the patient’s negative self-image,
usually ever-present and quite dominant, would quickly suppress any positive
image suggested, or at least keep it from being too vivid or real. But in the hyper-
suggestible hypnotic state conditions are different. The patient’s negative self-
image is now more easily inhibited and should therefore be less likely to interfere
when we attempt to evoke the positive self-image through suggestion. As a result,
the conditioning can take place and new associations can be made. The person can
truly picture himself feeling self-confident in various situations and these new
conditioned associations in turn can lead to new behavior. This new attitude can
now become permanent by means of self-reinforcement, just as his old

negative attitude had been kept permanent by self-reinforcement. As long as the
patient has negative attitudes, these are self-reinforcing. They lead to his tensing
up, acting awkward and making numerous mistakes. Also, he is unlikely to
believe any praise or any positive occurrences should they chance his way. But if
this negative self-image has been replaced by a positive one, the opposite cycle
can result. Being more confident and relaxed he will naturally be more likely to be
accepted. Also, he will now be more open to believing and accepting praise and
positive outcomes.
Chapter 3
OVERVIEW OF MY THEORY OF HYPNOSIS ∗
In the theory (Barrios, 2001) a hypnotic induction is defined as the giving of a

series of suggestions so that a positive response to a previous suggestion
predisposes the subject to respond more strongly to the next suggestion. Hypnosis
is defined then as the state of heightened suggestibility, also referred to as a state
of heightened belief, produced by a hypnotic induction. What occurs during a
hypnotic induction to increase suggestibility is a process of conditioning of an
inhibitory set. The latter increases responsiveness to suggestion by inhibiting
thoughts and stimuli which would contradict the suggested response. The more
effective the hypnotic induction, the greater this inhibitory set.
It is postulated that at any point in time there are any number of stimuli (both
cognitive and sensory) that one can be responsive to, some more strongly than
others. This is referred to as the stimulus dominance hierarchy. The various
hypnotic and post-hypnotic phenomena can be explained in terms of how the
inhibitory set can rearrange the dominant position of a particular stimulus
(cognitive or sensory) focused on by the suggestion. Post-hypnotic behavior
changes are explained as produced through a process of higher order conditioning
where the inhibitory set facilitates such conditioning by suppressing any dominant
stimuli present (cognitive or sensory) that would interfere with the intended
conditioning.
From the theory, a number of ways can be deduced for increasing
responsiveness to suggestion and thereby increasing the effectiveness of hypnotic
induction. These include: the amplification of minute responses to suggestion
such as with the use of biofeedback devices; the minimization or inhibition of
competing stimuli such as in sensory deprivation or under the influence of
∗
See appendix for the entire theory as presented in Contemporary Hypnosis (Barrios, 2001).
inhibitory drugs; and the subtle introduction of stimuli that would naturally evoke
the suggested response.
Since the theory defines hypnosis as a state of heightened belief, one can see
that hypnosis can be a natural everyday occurrence. Salesmen, lawyers and
politicians are constantly benefiting from a variation of hypnosis (the powers of
persuasion). So too are doctors (the power of the placebo) and ministers (the
power of faith).
Chapter 4
COMPARISON WITH OTHER THEORIES

COMPARISON OF THE THEORY
WITH SOCIOCOGNITIVE THEORIES
Similarities
Both perspectives discuss the importance of the part played by individual

differences in affecting initial responsiveness to suggestion. The following are
included as individual influencing factors in both perspectives: subjects'
expectations and beliefs about hypnosis; motivation; and imagination (or fantasy
proneness).
Two areas of individual differences mentioned in the theory which apparently
are not mentioned in the literature on sociocognitive theories are age of the
subject and prestige of the hypnotist in the eyes of the subject. It is expected that
sociocognitive theorists would agree that these are also important individual
difference factors. However, the explanation for how these factors play a part
according to the theory might differ from the sociocognitive perspective.
With regards to age, for instance, the theory states that the reason initial
suggestibility varies with age, may be traced to certain factors that vary with age.
One of these is language ability. Since [according to the theory] hypnosis is
dependent to a great extent on the conditioned response evoked by words, we can
understand why very young children whose language ability is not yet well-
developed would make very poor subjects for hypnosis, and thus why we would
expect an initial gradual increase in suggestibility with increasing age.
An explanation for the gradual decline in suggestibility after the age of eight
is that with continued increasing age the number of cognitive stimuli competing
with a suggestion increases (that is, knowledge increases with age) and a corollary
to the 'reciprocal inhibition' or 'stimulus dominance hierarchy' postulate is that the

more stimuli in the hierarchy, the lower the probability of a reaction to any one of
them ... with increasing age there will be a greater number of possible
contradictory stimuli [competing with] a suggestion; that is, subjects have more
information available with which to verify or contradict the suggestion. (Barrios,
2001: 185)
With regards to prestige, It is fairly well accepted that the more 'prestige' a
hypnotist has in the eyes of subjects, the better his chances of success. It is felt
this is so because the statements, commands or suggestions of a person with
prestige tend to be questioned less, that is, such a person evokes a greater
inhibitory set to begin with. In general, people have previously been conditioned
to accept at face value the statements of someone who is an authority in his field.
That is, an inhibitory set which inhibits contradictory stimuli [in the stimulus
dominance hierarchy] has been previously conditioned (in much the same way as
in the hypnotic induction process). This is so because what the authority says has
usually turned out to be true! (Barrios, 2001: 181)
It will be recalled that in the theory a positive response to a series of
suggestions (the hypnotic induction) conditions in an inhibitory set to
automatically inhibit any stimuli (cognitive or sensory) in the stimulus dominance
hierarchy that would contradict the suggestion.
Another similarity between the sociocognitive and the theory's perspective
revolves around the use of what the sociocognitives refer to as 'goal directed
fantasies' (GDFs). GDFs are defined as 'imagined situations which, if they were to
occur, would be expected to lead to the involuntary occurrence of the motor
response called for by the suggestion' (Spanos, Rivers and Ross, 1977: 211). In
other words, the more cognitive stimuli used associated with the suggested
response, the more likely the response. In the theory, Hypothesis IV states: 'A
suggestion produces the desired response by first evoking a cognitive stimulus
which is associated with that response.' And a corollary to this hypothesis,
Corollary 8, states: 'The more (compatible) cognitive stimuli associated with the
response evoked by the suggestion, the stronger the response to the suggestion’.
For example, to increase the probability of producing the involuntary response of
salivation and/or the secretion of pepsin, you might want to suggest that the
subject was eating a delicious steak or, better yet, a thick juicy steak smothered in
onions.
A third similarity between the two perspectives is how they apparently both
seem to fit in with Milton Erickson's strategic approach to therapy. How
Erickson's approach fits in with the sociocognitive perspective is discussed in a
Comparison with Other Theories 21
very extensive article by Lynn and Sherman (2000). The following includes some
examples of how Erickson's ideas parallel those presented in the theory:
Scripts
In the section of Lynn and Sherman's article where they are discussing
Erickson's strategy of using scripts, they point out that Erickson found this
technique useful in engendering a 'yea saying' response pattern. He would start
with questions with an obvious 'yes' answer; to establish a pattern or response set,
he would keep asking such questions. Patients would [then] apparently agree to
things that they would not have agreed to in the absence of such a response set.
(Lynn and Sherman, 2000: 306)
This also explains the effectiveness of persuasive salesmen who 'prep' a
person to buy by getting the person to respond with 'yeses' to a series of questions.
If we can look upon these 'questions' as a variation of suggestions, then in both
cases the individual is being put through a form of hypnotic induction according
to the theory. As stated by Hypothesis III of the theory: 'a positive response to a
suggestion will induce within the responding person a more or less generalized
increase in the normally existent tendency to respond to succeeding suggestions'
(Barrios, 2001: 178).
Also related to this 'yea saying' technique of Erickson is another he often used
to get positive responses to his suggestions: 'He often tied suggestions to naturally
or frequently occurring responses, or more broadly to whatever response the
patient made (Erickson, Rossi and Rossi: 1976). Certain naturally occurring
responses, such as lowering of an outstretched arm, provide immediate positive
propioceptive feedback' (Lynn and Sherman, 2000: 307). To see the similarity of
this to what is said in the theory, see Corollary 6 following Hypothesis III of the
theory: 'The response could be "artificially" induced in a number of ways. For
instance, the suggestions that the eyes are going to get tired may be helped if a
slight eye strain is placed on them by having the subjects look at an object at a
difficult angle' (Barrios, 2001: 180).
Altering Accessibility
Altering accessibility of facts or events in memory was another of Erickson’s
therapeutic techniques. 'This can increase the salience of particular outcome
expectations and bring to mind concepts and ideas consistent with positive
outcomes and inconsistent with negative outcomes... For example, imagining
negative outcomes of smoking and overeating and positive outcomes of not doing
so can make it easier to resist these urges'. (Lynn & Sherman, 2000: 306) This
very same procedure is referred to as the 'Punishment-Reward' technique, one of
several visualization techniques for facilitating reprogramming, in the self-

programmed control (SPC) program for improving behavior (see Barrios, 1973b
and Barrios, 1985: 49 and 50). These techniques and others for facilitating
suggestion and post-hypnotic suggestion are derived from Corollary 8 of the
theory (see above) and will be discussed further in chapter 9. (see also Barrios,
2007b)
Reframing
Reframing was a technique of Erickson's to make general positive
suggestions or treatment goals more attainable. For example one of his approaches
to break a patient out of depression over certain deficits was to 'turn the patient's
deficits into assets'. This is very similar to one of the positive attitudes, Positive
Attitude 4, 'Learn to look for the good in even the worst of situations,' in the
chapter on positive attitudes in the SPC program (see Chapter IV of Barrios,
1985). If the goal of therapy is to help the patient break free of a depression
caused by some negative life occurrence, for instance, instead of the
hypnotherapist giving only the general suggestion that the patient will no longer
be depressed, it would be more effective if the patient is also given the suggestion
that he will learn to look for the good (look for the “silver lining”) in even the
worst of situations, in this way turning the patient's deficits into assets.
In essence, this is saying that general suggestions alone (regarding treatment
goals) without guidance to substantiate the suggestions are not as effective as the
combination of the general suggestion plus guidance. This basic premise will be
explored again later in chapter 8 in the section on faith healing when pointing out
that belief alone (e.g. a placebo) is not as effective as belief plus guidance. In so
many words, this is similar to what Lynn and Sherman (2000: 307) mean when
they state that 'As implied by these examples, Erickson's approach involves
considerable reframing of behaviors [so] as [to be] consistent with treatment
objectives.'
Another area where Erickson's ideas fit in with the theory is where he talks
about how it is that hypnosis plays a part in facilitating change in behavior.
According to Lynn and Sherman (2000: 305):
Erickson's appreciation of the crucial role of response sets is further revealed

by his (Erickson, et al. 1976) observation that, 'much initial effort in every trance
induction is to evoke a set or framework of associations that will facilitate the
work that is to be accomplished' (p. 58). In fact, the authors define the
'therapeutic aspects of trance' as occurring when 'the limitations of one's usual
conscious sets and belief system are temporarily altered so that one can be
receptive to an experience of other patterns of association and modes of mental

functioning ... that are usually experienced as involuntary by the patient' (p. 20).
All of these comments concur with the general thrust of response set theory
[except for the concept of trance].
This is very similar to what is said following Hypothesis VII of the theory (in
the section on posthypnotic suggestion) about how the inhibitory set aspect of
hypnosis facilitates cognitive-cognitive conditioning and thereby facilitates
positive behavioral change by eliminating any stimuli present that would interfere
with the conditioning: 'Hypnosis, it is felt, provides an especially effective means
(the inhibitory set) whereby interfering stimuli can be readily inhibited' (Barrios,
2001: 194-5).
What Erickson refers to as 'the limitations of one's usual conscious sets and
belief systems' the theory refers to as interfering stimuli, cognitive stimuli whose
presence would ordinarily preclude the establishment of the desired new cognitive
patterns and need to be 'temporarily altered' or as the theory puts it, 'inhibited,' in
order for the new patterns to be made; or as Erickson puts it, 'so that one can be
receptive to an experience of other patterns of association and modes of mental
functioning' (Erickson, Rossi and Rossi, 1976: 20).
Differences
Relative Importance of Hypnotic Inductions

One major difference between the theory's perspective and the sociocognitive
one revolves around the perceived importance of hypnotic inductions. The
sociocognitive perspective seems to feel that hypnotic inductions increase
suggestibility only to a minor degree whereas the theory does not agree with this.
As Lynn and Sherman (2000: 298) put it, 'Suggestions can be responded to with
or without hypnosis, and the function of a formal induction is primarily to
increase suggestibility to a minor degree (see Barber, 1969b; Hilgard, 1965).'
The problem with this perspective is that it implies that all hypnotic
inductions are able to increase suggestibility only to a minor degree, and thus it is
implied that hypnotic inductions are really not that necessary. Yes, it may be true
that the standard hypnotic induction emphasizing relaxation used in many of
Barber's studies, for instance, is capable of increasing suggestibility only to a
minor degree, but as indicated by Corollaries 5 and 6, following Hypothesis III of
the theory, there are ways of increasing the effectiveness of hypnotic inductions
even more (see: Wilson, 1967; Wickless and Kirsch, 1989; Kirsh, Wickless and
Moffit, 1999 and Wickramasekera, 1973).
State vs. Non-State

Another significant difference between the sociocognitive and the theory's
perspective revolves around the state vs. non-state issue. According to Lynn and
Sherman, Barber and his colleagues (Barber, 1969b; Barber and Calverley,
1964a&b, 1969; Barber, Spanos and Chavez, 1974) in demonstrating the
importance of individual differences in hypnotic responding showed that non-
hypnotized subjects exhibited increments in responsiveness to suggestions that
were as large as the increments produced by hypnotic procedures. This research
supported the idea that despite external appearances, hypnotic responses were not
particularly unusual, and therefore did not require the positing of unusual states of
consciousness. Accordingly, there is no need for clinicians to insure that their
patients are in a 'trance' before meaningful therapeutic suggestions are provided.
(Lynn and Sherman, 2000: 298)
There is some truth to this last statement. Some meaningful therapeutic
changes can be produced with suggestions even without a formal hypnotic
induction for some individuals. This would be true especially amongst those
subjects who were highly suggestible even without a hypnotic induction. And
even those who might not initially be highly suggestible could have their initial
responsiveness to suggestion increased by manipulating certain individual
difference factors such as attitude, motivation and fears, as pointed out on pages
183 and 184 of the theory (see Weitzenhoffer, 1953; Dorcus, 1963; and Barber
and Calverley, 1964a&b as cited in Barrios, 2001: 183 and 184).
However, by following such recommendations as those presented by
corollaries 5 and 6 following Hypothesis III of the theory, the effectiveness of
hypnotic inductions can be increased considerably more and responsiveness to
suggestion (and therapeutic success) as a result raised significantly more than
after a standard hypnotic induction (see: Wilson, 1967; Wickless and Kirsch,
1989; Kirsch et al., 1999; and Wickramasekera, 1973). If it is true that certain
hypnotic inductions can produce significantly higher levels of suggestibility (even
in already highly suggestible individuals), then I feel we can talk in terms of a
hypnotic and non-hypnotic state. A hypnotic state could be defined simply as the
heightened state of suggestibility (or as Skinner would put it, a heightened state of
belief; see Barrios, 2001: 171) produced by the hypnotic induction.
Yes, it is true that on an inter-individual basis, i.e. comparing one individual
to another individual, some people can respond to suggestions without a hypnotic
induction at the same level as another person who has gone through a hypnotic
induction. In this sense there is no difference between states. But if we go on an

intra-individual basis, i.e. comparing the same individual before and after a
hypnotic induction, the hypnotic state for a given individual can be different than
the waking state, especially after an effective hypnotic induction.
Just one more thing: I would not recommend using the term 'trance' to
designate a hypnotic state as it has 'zombie-like' connotations and we know a
person can be in a hypersuggestible hypnotic state and still appear perfectly
normal.
The Best Way to Measure Hypnotizability

Also related to the question of whether there is that much difference between
waking and hypnotic suggestion is the question of how best to measure
hypnotizability. Many in the field, especially those from the sociocognitive
perspective, seem to feel that a measure of suggestibility after the hypnotic
induction is more than sufficient to measure hypnotizability. They feel they need
not use the difference between hypnotic and waking suggestion as the measure
since they find the correlation between the two to be very high (see especially
Kirsch, 1997b: 213).
However, this high correlation could be due to the fact that the researchers are
basing their results on studies where only the standard hypnotic induction has
been used, which tends to increase suggestibility 'only to a minor degree'. As more
effective hypnotic inductions are used, this correlation will be less and it will
become more appropriate to use the difference between hypnotic and waking
suggestibility as the more correct measure of hypnotizability or hypnotic depth as
I prefer to refer to it (See also section below in chapter 6 on preventing
methodological shortcomings in hypnosis experiments taken from Barrios,
1973a).
A COMPARISON OF THE THEORY WITH HILGARD'S

NEO-DISSOCIATION THEORY
There are a number of similarities as well as a number of key differences
between the theory and Hilgard's neo-dissociation theory of hypnosis.
In discussing ways that determine what actions a person will take at any one
time, Hilgard talks about a hierarchy of subsystems (habits or cognitive structures)
that would vie for dominant position to determine the final common path leading
to action. This is very similar to the stimulus dominance hierarchy referred to in
the theory except, as per the theory, sensory stimuli are also included along with
cognitive stimuli in this stimulus dominance hierarchy.
Hilgard proposes two possible means for determining which subsystem will
be in the dominant position of the hierarchy determining which action will take
place. One, which he considers the old way, is where the subsystems would fight
for control of the final common path leading to action according to their relative
strengths. The other possible way of determining dominant position, and the way
he seems to have finally leaned towards, is by way of a central regulatory
mechanism. As he puts it, the subsystems
are actuated according to the demands and plans of the central system. This
central regulatory mechanism is responsible for the facilitations and inhibitions
that are required to actuate the subsystem selectively. A hierarchy of subsystems
is implied, although it is a shifting hierarchy under the management of the central
mechanism. Once a subsystem has been activated it continues with a measure of
autonomy. (Hilgard, 1977: 217-18)
He then states 'Suggestions from the hypnotist may influence the executive
functions themselves and change the hierarchical arrangement of the subsystem'
(p. 218).
According to the original version (Barrios, 1969), the theory leaned more to
the old way of looking at how the subsystems arranged themselves in the
hierarchy according to their individual strengths, and the inhibitory set part of the
hypnotic suggestion was seen as directly influencing the eventual positioning of
the dominant subsystem by inhibiting the competing subsystems. But now I see
the possibility of a central function also playing a part in certain situations. This
central control function I would describe as the will of the hypnotic subject, which
can be listed as another of the individual differences of hypnotic subjects which
can influence a hypnotic induction, i.e. everyone has a different level of willpower
or free will that they bring with them.
As presented in the paper 'Science in support of religion' (Barrios, 2002), free
will is defined as control over one's involuntary functions (one's subconscious) via
the power of belief, belief in one's ability to control one's destiny (control one's
involuntary functions). This free will factor can have developed over the years or
in a short period of time by means of a series of reinforced self-suggestions much
like a self-hypnotic induction where the subjects come to develop their power of
controlling their involuntary behavior through the power of belief.
In a hypnotic induction this free will factor could either add to the depth of
hypnosis achieved (the amount of heightened belief) or work against it. If the
individuals see the suggestions given as working to their benefit, it would work in
favor of a deeper induction. If against their benefit, it would work against a deeper
induction. It would more likely work in favor of a deeper induction if in the pre-
induction talk the subject is assured that all suggestions given will be positive
ones or to the benefit of the subject; or if the induction is presented along the lines
of self-hypnosis, i.e. as a means of developing even greater self control over one's
involuntary behaviour. Now with regards to how according to Hilgard, does the
hypnotic induction rearrange the hierarchy of subsystems, Kirsch and Lynn (1998:
110) feel that Hilgard 'leaves many unanswered questions: How do the hypnotist's
words produce this rearrangement? ... and how does this contribute to the
production of suggested responses?'
In fairness to Hilgard, I feel he does present at least a partial explanation or
answer to these questions. He posits two ways that hypnosis facilitates this
rearrangement of the hierarchy (Hilgard, 1977):
(1) 'Looked at in other ways, we find that hypnotic procedures are designed
to produce a readiness for dissociative experiences by obstructing the ordinary
continuities of memories and by distorting or concealing reality orientations
through the power that words exert by direct suggestion, through selective
attention and inattention, and through stimulating the imagination appropriately'
(p. 226)
And
(2) 'The stress on muscular relaxation, familiar in hypnotic inductions assists

in disorientation ... The lack of appropriately aroused memories makes the
hypnotically responsive person less critical. To be critical requires comparing a
present observation with familiar ones to judge its veridicality. If the memory
context recedes, criticism also recedes. Hence imagination more readily becomes
hallucination ... These illustrations show how memory interference has helped
produce the dissociations found in hypnosis ... Under such circumstances,
response to stimulation provided by the hypnotist takes precedence over planned
or self-initiated action [the central regulatory mechanism] and the voice of the
hypnotist becomes unusually persuasive'. (p. 227)
In somewhat different wording, Hilgard is saying the same thing that the
theory is saying as to how and why hypnotic phenomena occur. The theory states
that the suggested response occurs because the stimulus focused on by the
suggestion rises to the dominant position in the hierarchy because the inhibitory
set produced by the hypnotic induction inhibits the competing cognitive stimuli in
the hierarchy (what Hilgard refers to as 'critical memories') as well as any present
'critical' sensory stimuli - something Hilgard does not include in his explanation.
Something else that Hilgard does not include, which the theory does, is how this
inhibitory set referred to is built up during the hypnotic induction through a
process of conditioning. Hilgard does talk about selective attention and inattention
(both of which have inhibitory components) and stimulating the imagination
appropriately (i.e. triggering a cognitive stimulus) as part of the power that words
exert through direct suggestion, but he does not explain why or how the
hypnotist's words have become even more powerful after a hypnotic induction -
which the theory explains as the build-up of, or conditioning in, of a strong
inhibitory set.
With regards to the part suggestions of relaxation play in producing the state
of hypnosis, it is pointed out in the theory that suggestions of relaxation or sleep
may help since the relaxed or sleep-like state 'may provide for even greater
inhibition of stimuli competing with the suggestion' (Barrios, 2001: 172).
However, the theory makes clear that a hypnotic state can also be produced
without any suggestions of relaxation or sleep.
INVOLUNTARY BEHAVIOR AND THE SUBCONSCIOUS

There is one more thing that I would like to point out regarding similarities
and differences between my perspective and Hilgard’s (and the sociocognitive and
response set perspectives as well). It has to do with the automaticity of most
behavior. It appears that all current theories concur with this apparent fact. One
difference is that I have gone on to label this behavior as subconscious behavior
or “the subconscious”:
“The subconscious, or subconscious behavior, can be defined as behavior

(learned or innate) that is so deeply programmed as to occur automatically
without the need for that much conscious attention, if any (i.e. below conscious
awareness). Driving a car is an example of learned subconscious behavior. When
first learning to drive, you had to be aware of (be conscious of) every little
movement. Now all the movements have pretty much become automatic. The
‘subconscious’ is to be differentiated from the ‘unconscious’ which can be
defined as engrams or memories below immediate conscious accessibility. Most
adult human behavior falls under the heading of subconscious behavior. The
advantage of subconscious behavior is that it allows us to do many things at
once, and relatively quickly. The main disadvantage is that once programmed in,
the behavior is so automatic that it becomes difficult to change.” (Barrios, 2002,

p.7)
It is the latter fact, i.e. that certain automatic behaviors are so hard to change,
that makes hypnosis such a valuable tool. Hypnosis provides us a systematic
means of controlling the subconscious, of being able to rearrange the hierarchies
of automatic behavior. And the more deeply imbedded this automatic behavior
that we wish to change is (i.e. the higher in the hierarchy it is), the more effective
a hypnotic induction is needed.
It is this ability of hypnosis to facilitate post-hypnotic behavior change that
plays the biggest part in making hypnotherapy so much more effective than any
other form of therapy. The biggest problem with most people is that it is very hard
for them to change. So anything that can facilitate change or re-programming will
play a major role in achieving therapeutic success.
In a way one can say that all humans are automotons because most of their
behavior is automatic. But one major difference between humans and robots is
that humans have the potential (through the free will factor) to reprogram
themselves when necessary. Keep in mind, however, I said humans have the
potential for re-programming but this potential has to be brought out and it is with
tools like hypnosis and self-hypnosis that this can be done.
It should be realized that when hypnosis is used in a therapeutic setting there
are two ways that a hypnotherapist can help: One is to help add to the
suggestibility (belief) factor sufficiently with an effective hypnotic induction in
order to transcend or overcome certain negative automatic habits or cognitions
that the patients with their own level of free will have been unable to accomplish.
The other way the therapist can help is by providing the patients with some good
guidance, a good idea of what habits and cognitions need to be changed. Now
sometimes the latter is all that is needed and together with a sufficient level of free
will to begin with the patients can then bring about the needed restructuring of the
hierarchy on their own even without a hypnotic induction. But if the negative
behavior is too high in the hierarchy for the patients’ own level of free will (own
willpower) to rearrange it, this is when an effective hypnotic induction can be
especially beneficial.
A COMPARISON WITH THE RESPONSE SET AND RESPONSE

EXPECTANCY THEORY OF HYPNOSIS
There are a number of similarities and differences between the theory and the
response expectancy perspective (Kirsch, 1985, 1997a, 2000). The following will
present both the similarities and the differences.
First, a major difference between the two is that Kirsch believes, as do most
sociocognitivists, that 'The induction of hypnosis, for example, has a relatively
small effect on the degree to which people respond to typical hypnotic suggestion'
(Kirsch, 2000: 276). As already pointed out, although this statement might be true
for the standard relaxation-type induction, it is not for other more effective types
of hypnotic induction (see: Wilson, 1967; Wickless and Kirsch, 1989; Kirsch et
a1., 1999; and Wickramasekera, 1973).
The second major difference (and similarity) between the two revolves
around his use of the term 'response expectancy'. Kirsch seems to feel that the key
to increasing hypnotic responding is by increasing the subject's response
expectancy (see Kirsch 2000: 275).
I would be more inclined to agree with Kirsch if he were to use the term
'belief' in place of 'response expectancy'. Kirsch prefers to use the latter to
describe what is being manipulated by a hypnotic induction whereas I would
prefer to use the term 'belief'. As Kirsch puts it: 'A path analysis supported the
hypothesis that hypnotic inductions enhance responsiveness by altering response
expectancies' (1985: 1195).
In the original theory I do refer more to 'suggestibility' as to what is being
manipulated by a hypnotic induction. However, I have come to see the term
'suggestibility' as having some negative connotations, with some people possibly
relating it to the term 'gullibility'. Consequently I now prefer to follow Skinner's
lead of using the term 'belief' in describing hypnosis. As Skinner put it:
With respect to a particular speaker, the behavior of the listener is also a

function of what is called belief (a term very similar to suggestibility) ... our
belief in what someone tells us is similarly a function of, or identical with, our
tendency to act upon the verbal stimuli which he provides. If we have always
been successful when responding with respect to his verbal behavior, our belief
will be strong ... Various devices used professionally to increase belief of a
listener (for example by salesmen or therapists) can be analyzed in these terms.
The therapist may begin with a number of statements which are so obviously true
that the listener's behavior is strongly reinforced. Later a strong reaction is
obtained to statements which would otherwise have led to little or no response.
Hypnosis is not at the moment very well understood, but it seems to exemplify a
heightened 'belief' in the present sense (Skinner, 1957, pp. 159-160). (See
Barrios, 2001: 171)
Now getting back to 'response expectancy' and why I prefer the term 'belief':
one problem with the former term is that it implies that there is a visible response
connected to the expectancy. Yes, you can get someone to produce the visible
response of 'arm rising' if he has a strong response expectancy of 'arm rising'. But
where is the visible response when the response expectancy is that the subject will
see the color red? Not all cognitions necessarily have a clearly visible response
attached to them.
Next comes the question of how response expectancy or belief produces
responses. Kirsch himself poses the question thusly: 'To accept a suggestion is to
believe or expect that these events will in fact happen. So the real problem is to
understand the effects of response expectancy on experience, behavior and
physiology. How does response expectancy produce these changes?' (Kirsch
2000: 279). (Note how Kirsch uses the terms 'believe' and 'expect' interchangeably
here which would lead one to believe that he might also be willing to use 'belief'
and 'expectancy' interchangeably.)
Kirsch's answer to this question is to posit some underlying substrate or
connection between actual responses and the expectancy of that response. As he
puts it, 'if we assume that there is a physiological substrate for any experiential
state, then a change in perception is always a change in physiology, as well. For
that reason, expectancy induced changes in experience will always be
accompanied by at least some physiological change' (Kirsch, 2000: 280). And,
'Just as the expectation of an experiential response tends to generate that response,
so too the expectation of an overt automatic response promotes its occurrence' (p.
280).
The main difference between mine and Kirsch's explanation for how
belief/response expectancy leads to responses is that first of all I explain how
there is a response connected to the suggestion (as a result of classical
conditioning - see the Pavlov quote on page 167 of the theory, Barrios 2001); and
second, I explain the heightened response to hypnotic suggestion as resulting
because of the greater inhibitory set produced by the hypnotic induction which
inhibits competing stimuli.
A third major difference between our perspectives is how we explain how
response expectancy/belief can be increased in hypnotic situations. According to
Kirsch:
There are three kinds of cognitions that ought to affect response

expectancies in hypnotic situations: (a) perceptions of the situation as more or
less appropriate for the occurrence of hypnotic responses; (b) perceptions of the
response as being appropriate to the role of a hypnotized subject ... and (c)
judgments of one's hypnotizability. (Kirsch, 1985: 1194)
As for his first two ways (a and b) I agree. These are covered in the theory
under the heading of 'Subjects' expectation' in the section on 'Individual
differences factors influencing hypnotic induction' (see Barrios, 2001: 181-3). It is
pointed out that (a) as a result of the expectancy of being hypnotized, subjects are
more likely to ascribe correctly the occurrence of the 'strange phenomena to the
hypnotist than to some external cause' (p. 182); and (b) 'Subjects' expectations of
what hypnosis is like can influence hypnotic induction in other ways. For example
if the subjects are told that a catalepsy of the dominant hand occurs when they
experience hypnosis (Orne, 1959), then as subjects feel themselves responding,
they are also indirectly being given the suggestion of catalepsy of the dominant
hand. This response can, in turn influence the hypnotic induction, as can any
positive responses to previous suggestions' (p. 183).
With regards to how Kirsch describes methods of affecting response
expectancies by manipulating 'judgments of one's hypnotizability', I differ
significantly with Kirsch. What he describes as one way of manipulating
judgments of hypnotizability by surreptitiously provided experiential feedback
simply as 'an expectancy modification procedure' (Wickless and Kirsch, 1989:
762), I would directly refer to as an actual hypnotic induction according to
Corollary 6, following Hypothesis III of the theory, which states: ‘An hypnotic
state can be facilitated if, along with each of the first few suggestions given in a
hypnotic induction, the actual sensory stimuli which would ordinarily evoke these
suggested responses accompany the suggestion without the subject’s knowledge’
(p.180).
As indicated on page 171 of the theory, hypnotic induction is defined as the
giving of two or more suggestions in succession so that a positive response to one
increases the probability of responding to the next one. And Hypothesis III states
'A positive response to a suggestion will induce within the responding person a
more or less generalized increase in the normally existent tendency to respond to
succeeding suggestions.'
It is interesting that Kirsch states that: 'According to response expectancy
theory, people's beliefs about their hypnotic ability are one of the determinants of
the number of suggestions to which they are able to respond successfully'
(Wickless and Kirsch, 1989: 762). Now if he would also say that the number of
suggestions to which subjects are able to respond successfully is in turn a

determinant of people's belief about their hypnotic ability, he would be coming
very close to saying what is said in Hypothesis III of the theory.
SUMMARY OF THE ABOVE SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES

There were a number of similarities and differences presented between the
theory and three current theoretical perspectives. Among the similarities between
the theory and the Sociocognitive and Response Expectancy theories is the
emphasis on the importance of the part played by individual differences in
affecting initial responsiveness to suggestion; how both the theory and the
Sociocognitive theories seem to fit in with Milton Erickson's strategic approach to
therapy; and how similar the theory is to the Response Expectancy theory if one
can look upon the term 'response expectancy' as equivalent to the term 'belief'.
The main similarity between the theory and Hilgard's theory is the use of a
stimulus dominance hierarchy concept to explain what actions a person will take
at any one time and how hypnotic induction influences a rearrangement of the
hierarchy.
The main difference between the theory and the Sociocognitive and Response
Expectancy theories is that the latter two perspectives seem to imply that all
hypnotic inductions can increase suggestibility only to a minor degree whereas the
theory predicts that there are ways of increasing the effectiveness of hypnotic
induction beyond just a 'minor degree'. And related to this, the theory, as opposed
to these other two perspectives, concludes that there can be such a thing as a
'hypnotic state' which is significantly different from the 'waking state'.
Chapter 5
SUPPORT FOR THE THEORY

STUDIES PRESENTED IN THE ORIGINAL PUBLICATION
Numerous studies and experiments in support of the theory were presented in
the original publication of the theory (Barrios, 1969, see also complete theory in
the appendix). This included the experiment done by the author to support
Hypothesis VII of the theory – that hypnosis facilitates the higher-order
conditioning produced via post-hypnotic suggestion (the explanation provided by
the theory for how post-hypnotic suggestion works). The results supported the
three predictions made from the hypothesis: (a) The hypnosis group (N=43)
showed greater conditioning (p<.01) than the control group (N=42); (b) the
amount of conditioning for the hypnotic group was correlated with hypnotic depth
(p<.01); and (c) this conditioned response, once formed, was a strong one, as
evidenced by little extinction and the phenomenon of spontaneous recovery.
(Barrios, 1973a)
FURTHER SUPPORT FOR THE THEORY

Further support for the theory since its original writing (Barrios, 1969) comes
from at least three areas:
(1) studies on the use of subtle sensory reinforcement;

(2) the area of biofeedback; and
(3) studies on sensory deprivation.
Subtle Reinforcement Studies
Corollary 6 following Hypothesis III of the theory states: 'An hypnotic state
can be facilitated if, along with each of the first few suggestions given in a
hypnotic induction, the actual sensory stimuli which would ordinarily evoke these
suggested responses accompany the suggestions without the subject's knowledge.'
There are at least three studies whose results support this corollary. The first was
part of a Ph.D dissertation submitted in 1967 (Wilson, 1967), which I did not
become aware of until after I had submitted my dissertation. Wilson had subjects
experience surreptitiously provided reinforcement of suggestions. 'After
suggesting that subjects imagine the color red, for example, Wilson imparted a
faint red tinge to the room via a hidden light bulb. Subsequent testing of waking
suggestibility on the Barber Suggestibility Scale (Barber, 1969b) revealed
substantially higher scores among these subjects than among controls' (Wickless
and Kirsch, 1989: 762).
A subsequent study by Wickless and Kirsch (1989) essentially confirmed
Wilson's findings. They found that 53% of the group that had been given
surreptitiously provided experiential feedback scored as highly hypnotizable as
compared to only 6.7% of the control group.
In a follow-up study Kirsch et al. (1999) found that, once again,
surreptitiously provided experiential feedback significantly increased
responsiveness to suggestion. And this time an additional important fact was
determined - that for this to occur it was important that the subjects not be aware
of the artificial source of the reinforcement (as stated in Corollary 6). Those
subjects that were allowed to detect that the reinforcement was artificial showed
no increase in responsiveness.
Biofeedback Studies
Biofeedback can be defined as the use of special devices to amplify automatic

responses for the purpose of gaining greater control of these responses. For the
most part, the typical responses have been relaxation-related such as Galvanic
Skin Response (GSR), heart rate, Electromyography (EMG) and fingertip
temperature, although biofeedback need not be limited to just relaxation
responses. A typical procedure might involve having the subject focus on
thoughts of relaxation and being given the goal of causing the movement of the
biofeedback measure in the appropriate direction; for example, slowing the heart
rate down or raising fingertip temperature.
Support for the Theory 37
As I see it, the reason biofeedback has proven to be so effective for gaining
control of involuntary physiological responses is that in actuality, subjects being
treated with biofeedback are being put through a form of hypnotic induction as
defined by the theory. Remember, a hypnotic induction 'is defined as the giving of
two or more suggestions in succession so that a positive response to one increases
the probability of responding to the next one' (Barrios, 2001: 171). Suggestions
(or goals) of relaxation, whether instigated by the biofeedback operator or by the
subjects themselves, produce initial minute relaxation responses which are
immediately amplified by the device and thus made more visible to the subject.
These act as an immediate reinforcement letting the subjects know that they have
responded positively to the suggestions of relaxation. The resultant heightened
belief should in turn allow the subjects to respond even more strongly to
succeeding suggestions of relaxation.
Although the widespread use of biofeedback devices has been around only
since about the 1970s, the basic principle behind biofeedback has been used to
facilitate hypnotic induction long before that if we can look upon the Chevreul
Pendulum as a hypnotic aid device; for if you stop to think about it, the Chevreul
Pendulum is in actuality a biofeedback device. What the pendulum does is
amplify minute ideomotor movements of the hand when the thought of a
particular movement is suggested. Many in the hypnosis field recommend use of
the Chevreul Pendulum as a 'warm up' procedure to get subjects in a more
receptive mood for hypnosis (e.g. see Lynn and Sherman, 2000: 202). In fact a
complete hypnotic induction procedure starting with suggestions of movements of
the pendulum has been devised (see pendulum technique in Barrios, 1985: 36-8).
There has been at least one study where the use of autonomic biofeedback did
lead to an increase in suggestibility. Wickramasekera (1973) using forms A and B
of the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale found a significant increase (p =
0.001) in suggestibility upon using EMG biofeedback to reinforce suggestions of
relaxation. There is, however, one caveat to this study. One does not know
whether it was the deepened state of relaxation or the use of biofeedback, or a
combination of the two that increased suggestibility. One way to truly test the
hypothesis that the use of biofeedback devices, per se, sans relaxation suggestions,
can increase suggestibility is to not use relaxation suggestions. For instance, one
could use a temperature biofeedback device with suggestions of coldness in the
hands (e.g. 'as if you were placing your hand in cold or ice water') to cause the
device to indicate a drop in hand temperature. One could also use a heart rate
biofeedback device to feed back heart rate increase in response to suggestions of
heart rate increase ('as if you were in an athletic competition').
Sensory Deprivation Studies
Corollary 9 following Hypothesis V of the theory states that 'suggestibility

should be increased if sensory stimulation is curtailed'. Further support of this
corollary was provided by a number of different studies: Sanders and Rehyer
(1969) using the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale (SHSS) forms A and B
and working with ten subjects initially resistant to hypnosis and an equivalent
control group found sensory deprivation did significantly increase enhancement of
hypnotic susceptibility. Also using SHSS forms A and B, Wickramasekera in two
separate studies (1969, 1970) achieved similar results.
Chapter 6
METHODOLOGICAL SHORTCOMINGS OF
MANY HYPNOSIS EXPERIMENTS AND
HOW TO PREVENT THEM
The main problem in many hypnosis experiments prior to the publication of
the theory (Barrios, 1969) and very possibly afterwards as well lies in their
methodological shortcomings. This problem was specifically addressed in the
study on testing Hypothesis VII of the theory with regard to post-hypnotic
suggestion (PHS). The following is an excerpt from this study (Barrios, 1973a):
Several such shortcomings are reviewed below with reference to the way in
which the present study attempts to eliminate them. (Shortcomings 1-4 will be
familiar to most readers as those expounded upon recently by Barber [1969b] and
Barber and Calverley [1966].)
1. In many cases there was no comparison with a non-hypnotic control group.
In such studies one could not be sure that presenting the suggestion, without
inducing hypnosis might not have achieved the same results. (This is especially
true of the clinical studies.) In the present study not only was there a non-hypnosis
group, but, in addition, each S acted as his own control.
2. When control Ss were used, the experimental Ss were usually pre-selected
for their high hypnotic susceptibility, whereas controls were not, or, even worse,
the controls were sometimes selected for their poor hypnotic susceptibility. In
such cases one could not be sure that it was the actual hypnotic induction, and not
the high initial level of suggestibility of the experimental Ss, that produced the
difference in effect.
In the present study there was no pre-selection of Ss for hypnotic
susceptibility, directly or indirectly. The standard procedure for recruiting college
Ss was followed, and Ss were randomly assigned to one of the two groups. It
should be mentioned that still another often referred to shortcoming was

eliminated by the design - there was no more time or special attention spent on the
hypnotic Ss than on control Ss.
3. In experiments where hypnotic Ss have been used as their own controls it is
usually obvious to these Ss which is the control state. As Barber (1962) points out,
these Ss could ensure a worse performance in the control state, sensing that this is
what E expects of them. This point was also brought out in the study by Scharf
and Zamansky (1963). According to Orne (1959), the demand characteristics of
an experiment may be particularly pronounced in hypnotic experiments because
Ss recognize that they are expected to do better in hypnosis and, thus, we might
also anticipate they are more likely to do poorer during the control phase (see also
Barber, 1969b). In most hypnosis experiments this may very well be the case
since the "own-control" session is run after the hypnosis session. In the current
experiment the own-control" session was run first for all Ss, and before they even
knew hypnosis was to be involved.
4. In experiments where controls have been used, E has not usually controlled
for difference in tone of voice or other subconscious differences in treatment of
the groups, thus possibly biasing the results in favor of his hypothesis. That
differences in tone of voice can have an effect was shown in a study by Barber
and Calverley (1964c). This shortcoming was taken care of in the current
experiment by the extensive use of tapes.
5. Most of the responses used as the dependent variable in PHS experiments
are highly subject to voluntary control. Such use of voluntary responses are more
apt to lead to the criticism that S was faking - just performing the response to
please the hypnotist. In the current experiment use was made of the salivary
response, a response that is considerably less subject to voluntary control than
most responses previously used in PHS experiments.
6. Controls have usually not been run for the effect of the hypnotic state, per
se. Some might feel that the posthypnotic changes can be produced by just the
state itself, rather than any specific suggestion. This shortcoming was taken care
of in the design by means of a neutral stimulus. If the salivary responses obtained
were due solely to the effects of having been hypnotized, we should find no
difference between the response to the conditioned stimulus and the response to
the neutral stimulus. As can be seen by the results, this was not the case.
7. Perhaps the most prevalent, as well as the most insidious, of the
shortcomings is that the usual indicants of hypnosis are misleading. This includes
both (a) the "antecedent" type of indicant where E assumes that hypnosis has been
induced because Ss have been put through a standard hypnotic induction, and (b)
the "consequent" type of indicant where E concludes that hypnosis has been
Methodological Shortcomings of Many Hypnosis Experiments… 41
induced because of S's responsiveness to a set of test suggestions given after S is

hypnotized.
(a) The basic problem with the antecedent indicant is that it usually leads one
to the incorrect conclusion that the results of the experiment hold for hypnosis in
general, when actually they hold only for the particular hypnotic induction used.
For example, many people seem to commit this error with regard to many of
Barber's (1969b) experiments where he appears to operationally define hypnosis
as a “standard 15 minute induction," and where he concludes that task motivating
instructions (TMI) can produce hypnotic phenomena as effectively as a hypnotic
induction. The use of such an antecedent indicant is quite acceptable as long as E
makes it clear that any conclusions regarding hypnosis refer only to this narrow,
operationally-defined band on the hypnosis continuum. Apparently this has not
been done sufficiently, for many have mistakenly interpreted Barber as implying
that hypnosis is not as effective as had previously been thought.
Underlying such overgeneralizations are two basic assumptions, both subject
to questioning. First, there is the assumption that hypnotic responsiveness is a
fixed character-trait, heretofore accepted as fact. Recent studies (e.g., Barber,
1964) seem to indicate that such an assumption is not justified, and a considerable
number of studies indicate that responsiveness can be increased with improved
methods of hypnotic induction (Barber, 1969a; Baykushev, 1969; Dorcus, 1963;
Klinger, 1968; Pascal and Salzberg, 1959; Sachs and Anderson, 1967; Wilson,
1967).
Thus, it is incumbent upon any E "testing the effectiveness of hypnosis" that
he make it very clear that his experiment is merely testing the effectiveness of a
particular hypnotic induction procedure and not hypnosis in general.
The second assumption open to questioning is that hypnotic induction
primarily involves the giving of suggestions of relaxation, drowsiness, and sleep
(after S has been properly motivated and a positive attitude and expectancy toward
hypnosis established). According to the definition of hypnotic induction given in
the theory proposed by the author (Barrios, 1969), this is just one form of
hypnotic induction. Barber's TMI followed by his test suggestions in ascending
order of difficulty would also classify as a hypnotic induction. Thus, when Barber
states that his TMI are just as effective as hypnotic induction, one should realize
that he is merely comparing, the relative effectiveness of two forms of hypnotic
induction.
Thus, it is also incumbent on E to let the reader know how he defines
hypnosis and that results refer primarily to this definition and not "hypnosis in
general."
(b) The trouble with the consequent type of indicant is that it is merely a
measure of responsiveness, not increase in responsiveness. A truer indicant of
how effective a hypnotic induction is (and the one used in the present study)
would be the difference in response to test suggestions given both after and before
S is hypnotized (T2 - Tl). Using T2 alone as the indicant can be misleading in a
number of ways. For example, a hypnotic induction could be ineffective and we
could still get a high T2 score if Ss were high responders to begin with.
Conversely, a hypnotic induction could be effective but not show up as such if Ss
were very low responders to begin with.
PART II. BENEFITS OF THE THEORY
Chapter 7
HOW THE THEORY LEADS TO FURTHER

UNDERSTANDING OF A NUMBER OF AREAS:
THE HALLUCINOGENS, SCHIZOPHRENIA, BI-
POLAR DISORDER, BIOFEEDBACK, LEARNING
THEORY, AND THE PLACEBO
EXPLAINING THE EFFECTS OF HALLUCINOGENS
One of the benefits of the theory is that it led to my theory on the
hallucinogens (Barrios, 1965). The same principles of inhibition and conditioning
used to explain the behavioral and therapeutic effect of hypnosis presented in the
hypnosis theory including the Stimulus Dominance Hierarchy concept were used
to explain the behavioral and therapeutic effects of the hallucinogens. These
effects are seen as resulting from the hyper-responsive, hypersuggestible state
produced by the inhibitory aspects of the hallucinogens in the same way as the
hypersuggestible state of hypnosis is produced by the inhibitory set aspect of
hypnosis.
One important point that needs to be made is that for one to achieve
therapeutic effects from use of the hallucinogens’ hypersuggestible state, it is
most productive if it is a controlled state.
In the controlled state positive suggestions can be properly directed at
whatever positive therapeutic changes are needed. If uncontrolled, the
hypersuggestible, hyper-responsive state can lead to a number of problems. It can
lead to uncalled for hallucinations and delusions which to someone not fully
understanding what is going on, not in control, can become quite frightening.
It is felt that the many cases of psychotic breakdowns reported as resulting

from unsupervised ingestion of hallucinogenic drugs could very well have been
due to this uncontrolled state of hypersuggestibility with resultant frightening
hallucinations and delusions and the (heightened) belief that they would be
permanently occurring; the latter being possibly the main reason for the psychotic
state continuing long after the drug effects wore off.
AN EXPLANATION AND POSSIBLE

CURE FOR SCHIZOPHRENIA
One may wonder if something very similar to this frightening state of
uncontrolled hypersuggestibility isn’t at the bottom of non-drug induced
psychotic-breakdowns. One question that would need to be answered here of
course is what could have led to this state of uncontrolled hypersuggestibility,
hyper-responsiveness, in the first place? We know that a certain percentage of the
population is highly suggestible to begin with. (Could this possibility be because
some individuals have a higher concentration of hallucinogenic-type chemicals in
their bloodstream than others? If so, this would fit in with the idea that
schizophrenia is caused by a “chemical imbalance”.) Is it possible that a state of
high stress or anxiety or certain negative thinking could cause this suggestibility
to get out of control? And if uncontrolled heightened suggestibility does play a
part leading to psychoses, such as schizophrenia, could a form of controlled
hypersuggestibility (such as hypnosis) be used to somehow reverse the psychosis;
i.e., cure the psychosis? Could it be used to reverse the belief that the psychotic
symptoms would be permanent? We know hypnosis could be used to remove the
causes of any precipitating high stress, anxiety or negative thinking. There are
some interesting possibilities here. (See the above mentioned studies by Abrams,
1963 and 1964 and Biddle, 1967 on the successful use of hypnosis in the
treatment of psychoses.)
One of the most phenomenal hypnotherapy cases I have worked on was that
of a paranoid schizophrenic whom I cured in one three-hour session by making
use of the hypnotic state of heightened belief to reverse the negative thinking, the
negative beliefs underlying her paranoia. The following excerpt from my book
Towards Greater Freedom & Happiness describes the case:
Maria, a woman in her late thirties, was brought to me by her sister out of
desperation. The woman had been suffering from paranoid schizophrenia for the
How the Theory Leads to Further Understanding of a Number of Areas 47
past three years and she was getting worse. Her primary symptom was the
delusion that people were ‘out to get her’. She had also recently shown signs of
being homicidal - having so scared her husband with very real threats on his life
that he moved out.
As with many psychotics, Maria had been put on a drug treatment program
and sent home, even though not cured. The drugs had only served to mask the
symptoms, and little had been done about getting rid of the root cause of her
problem. When I saw her, she had stopped taking the drugs, without approval.
One advantage I had was the fact that I had cured her 27-year-old nephew of
heroin addiction - in a total of only three sessions, incidentally. The all important
belief or prestige factor was thus quite high from the beginning.
The first half of the three-hour session was devoted to getting some idea of
the root causes of her problem. It wasn't too long before I saw that she had deep-
seated feelings of inferiority and as a result she felt that no one could possibly
love her.
Judging from her background, I could see why she might have thought this.
Coming from a minority background, she had been conditioned to think of
herself as inferior from an early age. Her subsequent life experience only served
to add to this low self-image. She had been a heroin addict for a good part of her
life and had resorted to prostitution as well as dealing in heroin to support her
habit. The latter had resulted in her spending five years in prison, so she was an
ex-con as well. The breakdown had been triggered by a younger sister who, in a
fit of temper, one day threw all this in her face.
How did I cure her in just one session? Using the Pendulum technique (p.
36) I put her into a state some people refer to as hypnosis, but which I prefer to
think of as a state of increased responsiveness to words. Once she was in this
state, I was able to convince her that she was indeed capable of being loved. I
pointed out all her good points and assured her that her family, and especially her
husband, did love her. Others before me had tried to convince her of this, but to
no avail; the words had gone in one ear and out the other. But in this state of
increased responsiveness to words [heightened belief], I was now more able to
get through.
Within a week every one of her symptoms – hallucinations, delusions, etc. -
were gone. She had gotten back with her husband and was happily looking
forward to a trip to San Francisco with him. Six months later when I called to see
how she was doing, her sister informed me that she continued to be fine and free
of symptoms.
The most amazing thing about this case was that I had been able to cure this
woman of paranoid schizophrenia in just one three hour session. Such a feat is
considered so extraordinary that I hesitated mentioning it lest I be labeled a
charlatan by my fellow professionals - for paranoid schizophrenia is a most
difficult mental illness to cure. It usually takes months, even years and many are
never cured. So to say that I cured such a case in one session is almost like
someone claiming to have cured a case of cancer by "laying on of the hands".
I have included it because I want the reader to see the real potential of an
approach that allows the power of the word to really get through. This is not to
say, of course, that all such problems can be cleared up in just one SPC session.
But still, it should take a lot less time and be more effective than if a standard
approach were taken.
(Barrios, 1985, pp. 23 and 24)
A POSSIBLE EXPLANATION AND

CURE FOR BIPOLAR DISORDER
Could it be that an explanation for bipolar disorder (once referred to as manic
– depressive disorder) lies along similar lines? If in a state of hypersuggestibility,
a state of hyper-responsiveness, cognitive stimuli can be amplified to cause
psychotic delusions and hallucinations, why not the possibility of manic and
depressive thoughts or behavior also being magnified in a similar uncontrolled
hyper-responsive state leading to a state of hyper-mania or hyper-depression? And
if so, then one can see the possible use of hypnosis to also helping one regain
control and toning down or reversing these hyper states as well as getting rid of
any underlying negative states of mind adding to the problem.
EXPLAINING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF BIOFEEDBACK

As pointed out in Chapter 5, the reason biofeedback has proven to be so
effective for gaining control of involuntary behavior is that in actuality subjects
being put through a biofeedback procedure are being put through a form of
hypnotic induction.
HELPING TOWARDS A MORE

COMPREHENSIVE THEORY OF LEARNING
My theory of hypnosis leads to a more comprehensive theory of learning by
showing the importance of inhibitory sets in the learning process and how they
can explain one trial conditioning and functional autonomy.
We know that dramatic, all-encompassing changes can take place in

hypnotherapy, sometimes overnight. This often means that all the negative habits,
attitudes and beliefs associated with a patient's negative behavior can be
transformed even after just one hypnotic session (as in the above-mentioned case
of paranoid schizophrenia).
'Understandably, a learning theorist might hesitate before accepting the
possibility that it is a process of conditioning which underlies the dramatic
changes produced in hypnotherapy. One-trial conditioning and functional
autonomy are not commonly encountered in the laboratory' (Barrios, 2001: 196).
How is this possible and yet explainable in terms of principles of conditioning?
First of all, we would have to establish that, as stated in Hypothesis VI of the
theory: 'Suggestion leads to behavior change by a form of higher-order
conditioning called C-C conditioning.' This hypothesis is given considerable
support by Mowrer's theoretical formulations on the sentence (a form of
suggestion) as a conditioning device (Mowrer, 1960: 141-2, 147).
But we would still have to explain the fact that suggestions are not always
readily accepted, that sentence conditioning does not always take place. As
pointed out in the theory (Barrios, 2001: 194 and 195):
We will find that the answer to this question will begin to throw some light
on the part played by hypnosis in facilitating C-C conditioning. Osgood perhaps
best answered this question in his presidential address to the American
Psychological Association when discussing Mowrer's concept of the sentence as
a conditioning device. According to Osgood (1963), if the assertion made by the
sentence (the suggestion) is incongruent with subject's previously held beliefs
and attitudes (the cognitive environment) or their present perceptions (the
sensory environment), it will tend to be suppressed ... Since incongruent or
incompatible beliefs, attitudes, perceptions, etc., tend to suppress the cognitive
stimuli to be paired, they thus interfere with the conditioning. Therefore, we
hypothesize that anything that would eliminate such interfering stimuli should
facilitate C-C conditioning ... This leads to the part played by hypnosis in the
facilitation of conditioning. Hypnosis, it is felt, provides an especially effective
means (the inhibitory set) whereby interfering stimuli can be readily inhibited.
And this inhibitory set can be so efficient as to have the conditioning take
place in only one trial.
Regarding the functionally autonomous nature of the posthypnotic response:
It is felt that the functionally autonomous nature of the post-hypnotic

conditioned response can best be explained if an interference theory explanation
of extinction is assumed. This theory states that in order for a response to become
extinguished, another incompatible response must become conditioned to the CS.
An implication from this interference theory would be that if the CR is stronger
than a potentially interfering response, the latter will be the one inhibited. Thus,
as long as there is a strong enough CR to begin with, it can keep itself from being
extinguished. (Barrios, 2001: 195)
As implied above in pointing out how the strong inhibitory set aspect of
hypnosis can lead to strong one trial conditioning, we can see how this strong
inhibitory set can also lead to functionally autonomous posthypnotic responses.
The large part played by the inhibitory set in facilitating conditioning and
leading to strong conditioned responses is supported by the work of Harry Harlow
(1959) and his error-factor theory. He considered much of learning to involve the
inhibition of what he referred to as error-producing factors, referred to in the
theory as competing stimuli (Barrios, 2001: 196).
EXPLAINING THE PLACEBO EFFECT

In discussing the broad implications of the definition of hypnotic induction, it
was stated that the theory could also be used to explain 'the hypnotic effects
(placebo effect) of psychotherapists and doctors of medicine' (Barrios, 2001: 171).
The question is how? The section of the theory on prestige helps throw some light
on this question:
[T]he statements, commands or suggestions of a person with prestige tend to

be questioned less; that is, such a person evokes a greater inhibitory set to begin
with. In general, people have previously been conditioned to accept at face value
the statements of someone who is an authority in his field. That is, an inhibitory
set which inhibits contradictory stimuli has been previously conditioned (in much
the same way as in the hypnotic induction process). This is so because what the
authority says has usually turned out to be true. (Barrios, 2001: 181)
The placebo when given by a doctor or person of authority works in the same
way as hypnotic suggestion, for the person is in a heightened state of belief. For
example, when the doctor gives a patient an injection 'to kill the pain', he is
essentially giving the suggestion 'this is going to ease your pain'. The actual pain
relief occurs even if the injection is an inert saline solution because of two factors
associated with suggestion. First, there is the cognitive stimulus 'pain relief' with
its associated endorphin (the body's natural pain killing substance) release into the
bloodstream. And second, the inhibitory set of the suggestion is evoked that
would inhibit anything that might interfere with the cognitive stimulus, such as
any doubts about the doctor's skills, or doubts about the painkiller's effectiveness,
or even the sensory pain stimulus itself.
As another example, when the doctor gives the patient any medicine or
treatment that he says will cure the patient, the cognitive stimulus 'healing' is
evoked with its attendant immune associated response (e.g. release of t-cells,
macrophages, etc.).*1
The next question that needs to be answered is from whence do the cognitive
stimuli 'pain relief' or 'healing' derive their meaning: i.e. how did the words or
thought 'pain relief' come to be associated with endorphin secretion or how did the
word or thought 'healing' come to be associated with the immune response? I
would say the answer is: through a process of higher-order classical conditioning.
As Pavlov (1960: 407) so aptly put it: 'Speech, on account of the whole preceding
life of the adult, is connected up with all the internal and external stimuli which
can reach the cortex, signaling all of them and replacing all of them, and therefore
can call forth all those reactions of the organism which are normally determined
by the actual stimuli themselves.'
In other words, at some point in a person's life, the words or thought 'pain
relief' were associated with the body's own natural pain relieving endorphin
secretion response; and the word or thought 'healing' was associated with the
body's own natural healing response while the person was experiencing the same.
There, of course, is still another way that a placebo response can occur. This
would be more from a form of first-order classical conditioning. For instance,
when a person or animal is injected a number of different times with a pain killing
medication, the stimuli associated with the injection (e.g. the syringe, the person
giving the injection, etc.) are the conditioned stimuli (the CS). The pain relief (the
UCR) produced by the actual painkiller, let's say morphine (the UCS), becomes
associated with the CS such that the CS can eventually produce a conditioned
response (CR) of pain relief. This CR can then also be looked upon as a placebo -
in this case produced via first order conditioning. I believe this is what is behind
the conditioning explanation of the placebo response of such researchers as
*One can also tie in this placebo healing effect with the idea of creating a state of hopefulness
through the power of belief. When a patient strongly believes he is being healed you can say a
state of hopefulness has been created. And studies have shown that a mental state of
hopelessness can suppress the immune system, and replacing the state of hopelessness with one
of hopefulness can help revive the immune system (see section on faith healing in the next
chapter).
Gliedman, Gantt and Teitelbaum, 1957; Hernstein, 1962; Knowles, 1963; and
Wickramasekera, 1980.
I believe the above two-fold (first-order and higher-order conditioning)
explanation may help throw some light on the questions raised in the section on
placebos in Kirsch's 1985 paper on response expectancies. This should help
eliminate the apparent clash between the 'conditioning' and the 'response
expectancy' explanation of placebos if we can look upon the terms 'response
expectancy' and 'belief' as being similar as I have previously discussed, and see
that conditioning is also a factor in the 'expectancy' placebo, although higher-
order as opposed to first-order.
One other area that should also be cleared up by the above higher-order
conditioning explanation of placebos is the question raised by Kirsch: how can
one explain placebos in terms of conditioning when placebos often exhibit
functional autonomy? As put by Kirsch:
A second interesting finding of the Montgomery (1995) study is that instead

of extinguishing, the placebo effect increased over the course of 10 extinction
trials. This is inconsistent with classical conditioning, models of placebo-effects,
but is consistent with clinical data indicating that placebo effects can be
remarkably persistent. (Kirsch, 1997: p 75)
However, one can see from the previous section 'Helping towards a more
comprehensive theory of learning', how one can establish some fairly strong
functionally autonomous responses via the conditioning power of the belief or
response expectancy aspect of placebos.
THE NOCEBO AND VOODOO

Related to the placebo effect are the nocebo and voodoo effects. Just as one
can produce positive health or bodily effects through the power of the placebo
where positive expectations are created, in the same way (i.e., via similar
mechanisms as presented above) negative effects are possible when negative
expectations or beliefs are created via the nocebo or voodoo.
Chapter 8
HOW THE THEORY ALSO LEADS TO NATURAL

EXPLANATIONS FOR RELIGIOUS PHENOMENA
In the theory, the statement was made that the theory can also be used to
explain the belief effects (faith) of ministers and faith healers or, to put it more
broadly, the theory also provides a natural (as opposed to supernatural)
explanation for how the power of religious faith (belief) is developed and how it
can affect human behavior. It helps provide natural (as opposed to supernatural)
explanations/support for various religious phenomena.
HOW THE POWER OF RELIGIOUS

FAITH (BELIEF) IS DEVELOPED
In many religions the foundations of belief can be traced to the fulfillment of
certain predictions, expectations or prophecies. The following are four key
examples of such predicted or suggested outcomes in religion: (1) the fulfillment
of religious prophecies; (2) miracles produced through the powers of the religion's
prophet; (3) positive responses to one's prayers to God; and (4) the positive
occurrences in one's life resulting from following the religion's guidelines.
This would fit right in with Hypothesis III of the theory that states that belief,
or response to a suggestion, is built up if you have a positive response to a
previous suggestion.
The following are examples of religious phenomena that the theory helps
provide a natural explanation for:
Demons, Exorcism and Born Again Transformations
The above section on how hypnosis can lead to one trial conditioning and
functionally autonomous responses as a result of the heightened state of belief
under hypnosis also helps to explain the overnight and long lasting changes that
can occur as a result of the heightened state of religious belief. And knowing of
the strong blocking action of the inhibitory set aspect of belief helps to explain
exorcism. As put in the article, 'Science in support of religion: from the
perspective of a behavioral scientist' (Barrios, 2002: 6):
Looking at belief in this new light can also help us better understand the
concept of exorcising (blocking out) of demons or the devil (negative
programming) within us and the role belief can play ... This also helps us to more
fully understand the far-reaching and in-depth changes that can often be produced
(almost instantaneously) by a 'religious experience'; how it can indeed be
possible to be reborn or born again as a result of such an intense heightened
belief experience.
THE PHENOMENON OF FREE WILL

Religious practitioners tell us that of course we have free will; that God gives
us a choice in life, gives us the power to choose between good and evil, between
happiness and misery.
But then the realists point to all the miserable people in the world and say:
'Are we to believe that all these people have freely chosen to be miserable?' Is
there free will or not? In order to answer this question, again we need to define
our terms. As presented in Towards Greater Freedom and Happiness (Barrios,
1985: 16) free will is defined as the ability to transcend one's automatic side, one's
subconscious, by means of inner speech or thought ... by focusing sufficiently on
the appropriate thought. The key words here are 'by focusing sufficiently on the
appropriate thought'. Not all people have developed the ability to focus on the
appropriate thought when they wish to. Very often, conflicting and opposite
thoughts interfere and do not allow the full positive response ... This is why the
belief factor is so important ... Belief is the key to allowing an individual to tap
into his free will potential. Remember, the definition of belief used herein is:
concentration on a thought to the exclusion of anything that would contradict that
thought' (Barrios, 2002: 7 and 8).
How the Theory Also Leads to Natural Explanations … 55
So we see that the answer to the question 'does man have free will?' is that all
humans have the potential for free will because they have the potential to build up
belief in their ability to control their automatic behavior via a form of self-
hypnosis over time (as discussed in Chapter 4 in the section comparing the theory
to Hilgard's) and this is why we find that people differ from one another in their
level of free will or will power.
THE PHENOMENON OF FAITH HEALING

The following excerpt from Barrios, 2002 (p. 11) introduces rational support
for the reality of faith healing based on the concept of belief espoused in the
theory:
Many studies in recent years have shown that a person’s state of mind and
lifestyle can definitely play a key role in determining his or her state of health.
We know that excess stress (or more correctly, one’s inability to deal with excess
stress) can eventually lead to such diseases as stroke and heart disease by causing
high blood pressure and cholesterol buildup in the arteries. (See book Type A
Behavior and Your Heart by Meyer Friedman, 1974 pp 75-83 & 120-121.) And
as mentioned above, certain negative lifestyle habits such as excessive - drinking,
eating, smoking, etc. can eventually lead to disease and death. We also know
that certain negative mental factors (such as hopelessness and inability to express
one’s feelings and needs) can suppress the immune system sufficiently to make a
person more susceptible to such diseases as cancer. Evidence in support of this
can be found in the book The Type C Connection: The Mind Body Link to Cancer
and Your Health by Temoshok, 1993, pp. 136-138 and pp 202-209. See also the
studies of Glaser & Glaser, et al; Levy & Heberman; and Stein, Schleifer &
Keller regarding the direct suppressive effects on the immune system by mental
states of depression and hopelessness as reported in Norman Cousins’ book Head
First: the Biology of Hope, 1989, pp. 39 & 85. Two other studies by the Glasers,
also reported in Cousins’ book - pp. 39 & 40, indicated the enhancement of
positive emotions can have the effect of boosting immunity.
If we accept the fact that a person’s state of mind and lifestyle can play a
significant role in affecting the body, then it should be obvious that anything that
can play a major role in affecting the mind, such as belief and faith, could be a
major factor in affecting health and well being.
Evidence of the power of belief to affect the body health-wise can be found in
many studies on the power of the placebo (see for instance the book Timeless
Healing: The Power and Biology of Belief, 1996 by Herbert Benson, and the
section on placebos in Cousins' book Head First, 1989) ...
However, there is something that needs to be made clear. Although strong
belief of being healed can be very effective in producing at least temporary
improvement in one's health (by allowing for a stronger immune response and
creating greater peace of mind at least for the moment), in order for this
temporary improvement to remain permanent, the belief factor must also be used
to help fully absorb the guidance factor [see section in chapter 9 on making
posthypnotic suggestion more effective by adding a guidance factor] so that the
immuno-suppressive psychological factors can be more likely to be permanently
removed (see Barrios, 1985, pp 124,125 and 154). Thus we can see that one way
of differentiating between the concept of belief and the concept of faith is to point
out that faith usually means 'guided' belief or belief in a certain way of life...
One way of determining how much more effective faith is than belief alone in
affecting permanent healing would be to do a thorough search of the placebo
literature or to do further studies on the placebo to determine whether the positive
effects of the placebo (or belief alone) are long lasting if there were no significant
lifestyle changes also taking place.
This basic idea that belief alone is not as effective for insuring permanent
healing to take place as when the belief is also used to bring about positive
lifestyle changes is illustrated when the case of Jolee Marshall is contrasted with
some of the other cancer patients I have worked with:
Jolee Marshall: After a very strong emotional upheaval Jolee had developed
an inoperable cancerous tumor of the intestines and had been given two weeks to
live. I worked with her for a period of four hours [with the hypnotic belief-
building and imaging techniques section of the self-programmed control-
psychoneuroimmunological (SPC-PN1) approach presented in the chapter on
cancer in Towards Greater Freedom and Happiness (Barrios, 1985)] and left her
with a very strong belief that her body's natural defenses would clear away the
tumor. The tumor did disappear (in fact overnight) much to the astonishment of
her doctor and Jolee did live cancer-free for one more year. However, upon
experiencing another similar emotional upheaval one year after my first and only
session with Jolee, the cancer returned and this time Jolee soon succumbed to it.
The strong belief that she would be cured was apparently sufficient to heal
her for one year. However, in the case of Jolee, the complete SPC-PNI approach
(which now also includes helping the patient make certain necessary lifestyle
changes) had not been followed. (Unfortunately, at this point in time I had not
fully realized that belief alone was not enough.) Because of this, there had been no
real follow-through for making the necessary changes in her way of life that could
have helped her more effectively prevent the second, and this time fatal,
emotional upheaval that occurred a year later.
This is in stark contrast to other cancer patients I have worked with where the
more complete SPC-PNI approach was followed. The following examples of the
approach taken and results achieved with a number of these patients will give you
some idea of the different outcomes that can be expected when a more complete
“faith healing” approach is taken towards eliminating the contributing
psychological factors (hopelessness, etc.):
Adele Bucanan: As opposed to just one session with Jolee, I saw Adele once
a week for eight weeks. At the time I first saw her, Adele, age 45, was suffering
from a fast moving cancer of the spine, lymph glands, the rib cage and the base
of the brain - a metastasis from an original cancer of the breast. (At this point in
time the only treatment she was undergoing was a very low dosage
chemotherapy, as she had had a strong negative reaction to the standard dosage.)
Because of the extended amount of time with Adele, I was not only able to
build up a strong belief in her body's ability to cure itself of the cancers but
through the heightened state of belief I was also able to bring about some major
changes in her way of life. In particular, she was able to develop a more assertive
personality. This allowed her to break out of the hopeless life situation that had
most likely played a key role in making her more susceptible to cancer in the first
place. She was now able to stand up to her very dominating and controlling
husband. Six months later the cancer had disappeared in all four areas and three
years after that, when last contacted, Adele was still very much alive.
John Roswick: John had been given radiation treatment for cancer of the
tongue. However, he refused the recommended follow up radical surgery. At this
point he discovered SPC. The following letter was written in August of 1985 upon
my request for him to summarize for me what had happened:
Dear Dr. Barrios, August 5, 1985

Almost 6 years ago on Oct 19, 1979 1 was told I had cancer of the tongue
and had a year or less to live. I hit the bottom of the pit. I started praying. Knew
nothing of God or Jesus, never read the Bible, but I started. I received 35 massive
radiation treatments in the neck. I said to the doctors “am I healed”. They said we
now have to do surgery. I said, What surgery? They were going to take out half
my neck. I said no. I contacted you in the summer of 1980. You agreed to see me
once a week for 8 or 9 weeks, instructed me on SPC techniques and other
counseling on belief and visualization. I used your garden technique and
visualized myself 'well' on a mountain top. During my first visit with you, you
gave me your book 'Towards Greater Freedom and Happiness.' You said: you
now have two good books (meaning yours and the Bible) and told me to read
them both. I thank God for you and your book, you strengthened my belief in
what Jesus said in Mark ll:23 ['Believe and all things are possible']
Dr. Barrios, in my opinion your program is bridging the gap between the
mind, and the spirit then the body. Your program SPC was the beginning in my
healing, reinforcing my belief in Jesus teachings, ridding myself of all pent up
fear, especially fear, guilt, doubts, anger, unforgivness, and a bringing together of
the Mind, Spirit and Body.
My saliva returned to me during my sessions with you, my voice, and I
forgot to mention, MY TASTER. [After radiation] I couldn't taste anything. The
doctors said my saliva would never be the same, that my taster, taste buds, would
be about 50 to 75% returned. Well today I enjoy full saliva, and full tasting
abilities I had before radiation.
It is sad to note that medical doctors don’t, or won’t advise patients on
positive principles laid down in your book or the bible. I would urge anyone who
has an illness of any nature to seek out the SPC program. It works. It puts you in
tune with the real you, the spirit. It has for me and I know it will for others. I
firmly believe you are an instrument of God's. And I thank him for you. I am not
the same person you first met, frightened, confused, oh yes confused! My
condition is healed. Your holistic approach is a blessing."
Pam Roth: When I first started working on Pam’s case, she had just gone
through chemotherapy and radiation for metastasis breast cancer. She was also
having great difficulty breaking free of a 30 year two pack a day cigarette habit.
The following letter (which she wrote on my behalf when I was nominated in
1996 for the Norman Cousins Award in mind-body health) tells her story:
To Whom It May Concern: June 14, 1996

As CEO of P.J. Roth and Associates and President of The Public Service
News Bureau, I have had the honor of knowing Dr. Barrios and observing his
work since 1983.
Through his SPC approach, Dr. Barrios has developed a program that has
allowed people worldwide to tap into their own personal power to change their
health, their happiness and their lives for the better! He has made the mind/body
link accessible and understandable to the world.
Over the years, I observed the extraordinary development of the clinical
applications of his pioneering theories, and his enormous influence on the
American public. At the same time, I felt it had little to do with me on a personal
level. That is until 1992, when I was diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer. It
was then that Dr. Barrios made the mind/body link accessible and
understandable to me in the most profound way possible!
In light of my particular case and my prognosis, my physicians encouraged

me to undergo the most strenuous chemotherapy and radiation; which I did.
At the same time, even faced with my own mortality, I could not summon up
the resources to make necessary changes in my personal lifestyle. In many ways
this was not surprising, after all, I had previously spent years of therapy
unsuccessfully attempting to deal with the underlying lack of self worth that
showed itself in an aggressive disregard of and for my own physical and
emotional well being..
Years of therapy, will power and even cancer seemed to make little
difference to ending my two pack a day habit and a 30 year addiction to nicotine.
None of these could change the stress attached to my particular career choice or
the fact that I had never developed necessary care and consideration for my
physical “self”. I was in trouble and I knew it. I had tried everything including
traditional hypnosis but nothing seemed to work.
I was depressed, anxious about the cancer that I was sure was still with me,
debilitated by my treatment and more out of touch than ever with the body that
had betrayed me. It was then that Dr. Barrios stepped back into my life bringing
all the benefits of his years of clinical experience in mind-body health.
Within two sessions, I made the remarkable breakthroughs that years of
therapy and prior hypnosis were unable to achieve! And it was all so easy. Dr.
Barrios’ approach not only convinced me that I had the power to tap into my own
subconscious – it showed me how to use and apply that power to achieve deep
seated change.
Within weeks, through applying these powerful hypnotic and visualization
techniques to my cancer and my personal “mind/body” split – I not only stopped
smoking once and for all, I was transformed into a person in touch with and
caring for her own physical and emotional needs.
Today, I am a committed ex-smoker, who exercises, eats well and takes care
of herself in every way possible. I am also, according to all tests, “cancer free”
[still “free” as of October, 2007]. More importantly, I intend to give myself every
opportunity to stay that way by continuing to practice the SPC techniques that
have made the difference in my recovery!
It should be pointed out that I am not the only one to report such long lasting
recoveries from cancer when a more complete “faith healing” approach is taken.
In her book, Temoshok cites numerous cases of successful cancer cures brought
about by her and other researchers in the field using the more complete healing
approach. Take for instance the story of Irwin:
Diagnosed initially with testicular cancer, the cancer had eventually spread to
his lymph nodes, chest and lungs. One tumor on his neck had grown so large he
was forced to keep his head at an odd tilt. His doctors told him that even with the
best treatment at the time (a combination of surgery, radiation, cobalt and nitrogen
mustard, which he did undergo) he had only three to four months to live and that
he had zero chance of survival. At this point he sought the help of a
psychotherapist who used hypnosis along with traditional psychoanalysis. Under
hypnosis he was much more open to healing suggestions aimed at opening up
blocks in his capacity to love and be loved and to work on achieving his long term
life goals. Within six months, he had resolved his love problems and gotten
married and was ordained as an Episcopal priest - a lifelong goal. On the very day
he was ordained “he got the news that his follow-up x-rays showed no more
evidence of cancer. His lymph nodes and lungs were completely clear. This
seeming miracle occurred six months after his original diagnosis...Today, thirty
three years later, Irwin is alive, well and cancer-free.” (Temoshok, 1993, p. 320
italics added).
It should be pointed out that my presentation of the above anecdotal evidence
of cancer cures through a form of faith healing is done more as support for, rather
than definitive proof of the ability to cure cancer by using a mental/spiritual,
“faith healing”, approach. For this definitive proof we will need larger, controlled
studies. In such studies, among other things, all the important variables can be
studied systematically and under scientifically controlled conditions. For instance,
such studies would include accurate and more complete measurements of how
strong the belief factor was and how complete were the necessary lifestyle
changes for each individual case. The latter would I feel help throw light on the
question often posed: “How do you explain counter anecdotal cases whereby
terminally ill patients have tried to pray for their recovery substantially but to no
avail?” One answer to such a question might be that the degree and length of
healing would be directly correlated to strength of belief and depth of relevant life
changes that took place.
Chapter 9
DEVELOPING MORE EFFECTIVE

METHODS OF HYPNOTIC INDUCTION AND
POST-HYPNOTIC SUGGESTION
DEVELOPING MORE EFFECTIVE
METHODS OF HYPNOTIC INDUCTION
There are a number of ways the theory has helped increase the effectiveness
of hypnotic induction both in terms of providing a proper pre-induction talk as
well as providing more effective hypnotic induction techniques. The ideas to be
discussed were first presented in a paper delivered at the 6th International
Congress for Hypnosis on July 3, 1973 in Upsala Sweden (Barrios, 1973b).
With regards to a proper pre-induction talk, several basic areas that need to be
addressed according to the theory are: (1) eliminating misconceptions regarding
hypnosis; (2) eliminating the fear of losing control; (3) eliminating fear of the
unknown; and (4) minimizing the negative effect of failure.
Misconceptions can be eliminated by defining hypnosis as a state of
heightened belief produced by responding positively to a series of suggestions (as
per the theory) and not a state of sleep or unconsciousness. And to help eliminate
the fear of losing control, hypnotic inductions should be defined more in terms of
inducing self-hypnosis or a heightened state of belief in the individual’s ability to
gain greater control over his or her automatic behavior (what eventually came to
be referred to as self-programmed control or SPC). So in fact instead of losing
control the individual can now be relieved to know that he/she will be actually
gaining greater control.
Fear of the unknown is eliminated in the pre-induction talk by providing a
rational explanation for how this state of greater control is developed as the result
of the power of words, the power of thoughts and the power of belief to control
automatic responses. The demonstration of salivating to the thought of biting into
a sour lemon based on principles of conditioning is one way to help get across this
point.
The negative effects of failure are minimized by telling subjects that 'because
of individual differences there may be some suggestions that work very well for
some people but not for others, and therefore it should not bother them if they do
not respond to a suggestion. In such a case they should just wait for the next one.'
In the SPC program discussed below, to minimize the negative effects of failure
subjects are told that they will be introduced to a number of different SPC
techniques and because every person is different they are to find the techniques
that they respond best to and work with these.
As for providing for more effective hypnotic induction techniques, as
suggested by the theory, anything that would ensure a positive response to
suggestion would help heighten the belief factor and thus increase the
effectiveness of the hypnotic induction. Several ways of doing this are
recommended by the theory: the use of easy to respond to suggestions to begin
with (see Corollary 5, following Hypothesis III); the use of naturally-occurring
responses; the use of subtle reinforcement of suggested stimuli or responses (see
Corollary 6); and the use of biofeedback devices.
The following are some of the SPC techniques I developed as a result (see
Barrios, 1985: 36-42 for a complete presentation of all the SPC techniques; they
are also available on an audio cassette – see www.stresscards.com.):
One of the techniques developed by following these guidelines was the
already mentioned pendulum technique. In this technique there is first the
biofeedback amplification provided by the length of the pendulum to amplify the
minute automatic movements of the hand. First, swinging from left to right is
suggested; then swinging in a circle. Then there are a series of other naturally
reinforced suggestions starting with the suggestion that the fingers will
automatically begin to creep open and as a result the pendulum will soon be
dropped. This response occurs naturally as the hand slowly begins to bend at the
wrist as suggestions are given that the hand will relax. This is followed by
suggestions that the hand and arm will be floating down as the state of relaxation
continues to deepen (another natural response).
The concentration spiral technique also takes advantage of naturally
occurring phenomena. This technique involves having the subjects looking at a
spinning spiral. I lead them through a series of suggestions of visual phenomena
which I devised by mirroring the subtle visual effects I experienced myself as I
visualized the spinning spiral. The following suggestions are given: as your mind
Developing More Effective Methods of Hypnotic Induction… 63
becomes more and more concentrated, you will begin to see a fuzziness or
waviness in the lines of the spiral; you will see a yellowish fluorescent-like fringe
to the black lines; dark rays will appear to spin off the edge of the disk; you will
feel as if you are riding backwards on a train in a spiral tunnel looking out the rear
window. Throughout, suggestions that the spiral is concentrating the power of the
mind continue to be given. Then, to emphasize this point, the suggestion is made
that upon looking away from the spiral at the clock on the wall (or some other
object like a plant in the room) the clock (or plant) will be magnified and appear
to grow larger. This very dramatic effect is a naturally-occurring effect as a result
of looking at the spiral spinning in a clockwise direction. Of course, as per the
theory, by having responded positively to the series of previous suggestions, the
effect is magnified that much more. (A DVD of the spiral technique is available –
see Barrios, 2006.)
To minimize any feelings of deception for the few that may think of the spiral
technique as pure illusion, prior to going through the technique I first point out
that everything the subjects are going to see is naturally there but as a result of the
concentrating effect of the procedure everything will be seen that much more
clearly and strongly (which is true). I even tell the subjects afterwards that some
people do not experience any of these effects (which is also true for those not
paying attention or those determined not to respond).
Other SPC techniques making use of naturally-occurring phenomena are the
light bulb, the rapid deep breathing, and the hand levitation techniques. In the
light bulb technique, use is made of the after-image produced after staring into a
40-watt light bulb for a short while. In the initial steps the subject is told they will
see a yellow colored balloon after they close their eyes and that it will be
changing in color from yellow to red to magenta to blue (which would be the
natural color changes the after image would go through). Suggestions are also
given that the balloon will begin to float up and the head will also begin to float
up. The subject is told that the latter will occur with each breath they take in.
Because there is a natural tendency of the head to rise with each breath taken in
this suggestion is automatically reinforced. (Conversely, there is a natural
tendency of the head to sink with each breath let out so one can reinforce
suggestions of head sinking in a similar way.) The rapid deep breathing technique
(an adaptation of the hyperventilation method discussed by Kroger, 1977: 77-8)
takes advantage of such naturally-occurring responses to hyperventilation as
tingling, light-headedness, greater awareness of heart beating, etc.
In my adaptation of the hand levitation hypnotic technique, I have the
subjects begin by first pressing the hand as flat as possible against the surface,
with the fingers spread as far apart as possible. I tell them to push down as hard as
they can initially. Thus, when suggestions are given that the hand will start to rise
and the fingers will start to come together as the hand relaxes this is what would
naturally occur as they stop pushing down and relax, thus reinforcing the
suggestions.
These basic principles for increasing the effectiveness of hypnotic inductions
derived from the theory have been presented in such a way that one should be able
to extrapolate from them and develop other similar naturally reinforced
techniques.
MORE EFFECTIVE METHODS FOR

GIVING POSTHYPNOTIC SUGGESTION
How does the theory lead to ideas for increasing the probability of producing
positive behavioral changes via posthypnotic suggestion? The answer to this
question comes from Corollary 8 (following Hypothesis IV) of the theory, 'The
more compatible cognitive stimuli associated with the response evoked by the
suggestion, the stronger the response to the suggestion'. This basic concept
underlies the value of using imagery (visualization) to ensure the suggestion
would hold in a variety of situations and guidance to give the suggestion depth.
For example, let's say a patient was suffering from a deep depression due to a
poor self-image and a sense of being a failure in life. Compare the effectiveness of
(1) just giving the simple, general, suggestion 'You will no longer feel depressed'
to (2) giving this general positive suggestion followed by a series of more in-
depth suggestions that included proper guidance on how to become more
successful in life, more positive about oneself; and then having the patients
visualize themselves in a number of different typical situations responding in
these more positive ways.
Along the lines of enhancing posthypnotic suggestion with imagery, I have
developed five variations of visualization for effectively programming in one's
goals. These include: (1) the simple projection method; (2) the approximation
version; (3) the negative positive method; (4) the punishment reward method; and
(5) the success technique (see Barrios, 1985: 43-50).
Following along the lines of enhancing posthypnotic suggestion with positive
guidance, the second part of the book Towards Greater Freedom and Happiness
(Barrios, 1985: 57-196) offers a wide range of positive guidelines to choose from.
This includes positive guidance in the following areas: mental attitudes, emotions,
health and education.
Chapter 10
THE DEVELOPMENT OF SELF-PROGRAMMED

CONTROL AND ITS POSITIVE APPLICATION IN:
EDUCATION, WELFARE, MEDICINE, INDUSTRY
AND DRUG REHABILITATION
The combining of effective hypnosis (and self-hypnosis) techniques with
more effective methods of giving posthypnotic suggestions, including a
comprehensive guidance component, led to the development of a general program
for helping people achieve self-actualization which was christened self-
programmed control or SPC.
Although Maslow, in defining self-actualization, had done a magnificent job
of outlining the ultimate high goals one should strive for in life (Maslow, 1971), I
feel he never really outlined an effective systematic method of achieving these
goals. It is one thing to tell a person what he needs to strive for to feel more
fulfilled in life; it's another to get him to change in this direction. I feel the SPC
program by facilitating change provides this missing link to achieving self-
actualization.
This section of the book will further describe the essence of SPC and will
present some of the positive results achieved in its application in a number of
different areas: education, welfare, industry, medicine, and drug rehabilitation.
EDUCATION
After my PhD dissertation (Barrios, 1969), I developed a program to help
college students (primarily Mexican American) on scholastic probation avoid
dropping out. I used a three-pronged approach (see Barrios, 1973b). The first part
consisted of the set of self-hypnosis techniques I had developed from the theory
(see the techniques mentioned in the previous chapter). Soon after, the school
administration asked me if I could avoid using the term hypnosis because of all
the associated misconceptions. It was at this point that I came up with the term
“self-programmed control” (SPC) techniques in place of “self-hypnosis
techniques”. The SPC program eventually came to refer to the entire program of
SPC techniques plus guidance.
The main purpose of the SPC techniques was to help the students develop a
greater belief in the power of their minds. This combined with the other two parts
of the program leads to a greater belief in their capabilities. Eight years later,
Albert Bandura would coin the term 'self-efficacy' for such belief in one's
capabilities. As he at the time so correctly pointed out, without such a belief,
people would not even make the effort to help themselves. Or as he put it, 'It is
hypothesized that expectations [belief] of personal efficacy determine whether
coping behavior will be initiated, how much effort will be expended, and how
long it will be sustained in the face of obstacles and aversive experience'
(Bandura, 1977: 191). In a prior study by Losak (1972), the lack of belief in their
capabilities was felt to be the reason why remedial programs alone were found to
be of no help for students at risk of failing.
The second part of the three-pronged approach was aimed at helping
eliminate any school- or outside-of-school-related stress/anxiety problems that can
also often interfere with learning and test-taking capabilities. The SPC techniques
played a part here also by helping to program in an automatic relaxation response
in times of stress as well as program in stress-reducing positive attitudes. (The
book Psycho-Cybernetics [Maltz, 1960] was used initially to introduce the
students to these positive attitudes towards life.) In later years the term 'emotional
intelligence' was coined to describe the importance of learning to deal effectively
with anxiety and emotional problems in order to succeed in life (Goleman, 1995).
The third part of the program, the part especially geared for improving
students' scholastic abilities, was made up of study, problem solving, and test-
taking techniques many of which were taken from Studying Effectively (Wrenn
and Larsen, 1955).
Following from the theory, a basic theme underlying this three pronged
approach was to provide as much immediate positive feedback as possible to
increase the belief factor that much more. As previously indicated, the SPC
techniques had built-in immediate positive feedback as recommended from the
theory and this same immediate feedback approach was followed with the other
two components of the program thus further adding to the overall positive belief
The Development of Self-Programmed Control… 67
factor. For instance my invention, the stress control biofeedback card (originally
called the 'Colorimeter'), was used to immediately reinforce the relaxation
response. The card, the size of a credit card, is a simple thermal biofeedback
device. It has a liquid crystal rectangle in front that indicates fingertip temperature
in terms of color response and four relaxation techniques on the back. Seeing the
color changing as the fingertip temperature rises with increasing relaxation level
immediately reinforces these relaxation techniques. (For more on the Stress Card
go to www.stresscards.com.) And with regards to the learning skills section, I
started with two memory techniques that provided immediate feedback: (a) the
'numbers' technique where the students were amazed to see how quickly they
could memorize a 23 digit number using grouping and association techniques; and
(b) the 'names' technique where the students were equally amazed to find out how
easy it was to memorize the first names of all the students in the class using
association techniques. These techniques in turn whetted the students' appetites
for other even more practical techniques such as the 'SQ3R' study technique
which itself produced immediate positive results in the quizzes which quickly
followed.
Another source of immediate feedback was the progress reports, a form of
journal I asked the students to keep. On the first page of the progress report they
were to make a list of the goals they wanted to achieve and at the end of each
week they were to look back and note down any positive results they had already
achieved regarding these goals. At the beginning of each class meeting I would
ask for people to stand up and share any successes they had already achieved.
This was especially helpful in getting through to those in the group who for
whatever reason still found it hard to believe that SPC could produce results. (See
pages 200-7 in Barrios, 1985 for examples of these student progress reports; see
also testimonials section of www.stresscards.com.)
Similarities between SPC and Bandura's Self-Efficacy
What amazes me is how many similarities there are between the SPC
approach to helping these students and Bandura's overall approach to building self
efficacy. Bandura (1977: 195-200) refers to four basic ways in which self-efficacy
can be built: performance accomplishments, vicarious experience, verbal
persuasion and dealing with emotional arousal. Let's look at each of these areas as
it relates to some of the methods used in building the belief factor in the SPC
program:
Performance accomplishments: Examples of the use of positive performance

accomplishments in the SPC program to build belief in oneself, to build self-
efficacy, include: (1) the use of the stress control biofeedback card to reinforce the
effectiveness of relaxation techniques in a stressful/anxious situation; (2) the
demonstration of the 'numbers' and 'names' memory techniques as well as the
SQ3R studying techniques to instill belief in one's learning capabilities.
Vicarious experience: Bandura's discussion of the use of modeled successful
behavior to build self efficacy is similar to my having the students get up at the
beginning of each SPC session and share their successes with the class. As
Bandura puts it 'Seeing others perform threatening [difficult] activities without
adverse consequences can generate expectations in observance that they too will
improve if they intensify and persist in their efforts. They persuade themselves
that if others can do it, they should be able to achieve at least some improvement
in performance' (Bandura 1977: 199). One difference here is that Bandura is
referring to actually seeing the other person perform the threatening or difficult
task as what is helpful whereas I am saying that hearing the person relating that
he has successfully performed the task is also reinforcing.
Verbal persuasion: SPC is of course to a great extent founded on the potential
power of verbal persuasion (in the form of hypnosis). However, although Bandura
does acknowledge that suggestion can influence one's level of efficacy, he tends
to downplay it a bit. As Bandura puts it: 'People are led, through suggestion into
believing they can cope successfully with what has overwhelmed them in the
past.' However, Bandura then goes on to say: ‘Efficacy expectations induced in
this manner are also likely to be weaker than those arising from one's own
accomplishments ... In the face of distressing threats and a long history of failure
in coping with them, whatever mastery expectations are induced by suggestion
can be readily extinguished by disconfirming experiences ... Simply informing
participants that they will or will not benefit from treatment does not mean that
they necessarily believe what they are told, especially when it contradicts their
other personal experiences.’ (Bandura, 1977: 198)
Nowhere in his section on verbal persuasion does Bandura bring in the
potential usefulness of hypnosis in making verbal persuasion more effective. But
judging from the following statement of his, it would appear that he should agree
that heightening the state of belief(e.g. via an effective hypnotic induction) would
most likely make verbal persuasion more effective in building self-efficacy: 'The
impact of verbal persuasion on self-efficacy may vary substantially depending on
perceived credibility of the persuaders, their prestige, trustworthiness, expertise,
assuredness. The more believable the source of information, the more likely are
efficacy expectations to change' (Bandura 1977: 202).
There is one more important point that Bandura makes regarding the overall
effectiveness of verbal persuasion at building self-efficacy: 'However, to raise by
persuasion expectations of personal competence without arranging conditions to
facilitate effective performance will more likely lead to failures that discredit the
persuaders and further undermine the recipients' perceived self-efficacy' (1977:
198). This is of course why the SPC program for students also included giving
them effective study, problem solving and test-taking techniques (with lots of
immediate positive feedback) as well as a set of positive guidelines to life
(originally supplied via the book Psycho-Cybernetics, Maltz, 1960).
Emotional arousal: Bandura definitely agrees with the need of the students to
effectively deal with anxiety and emotional problems if they are to succeed in
school. The way he puts it is to say that self-efficacy level will definitely be
affected by emotional or anxiety problems. 'Because high arousal usually
debilitates performance, individuals are more likely to expect success when they
are not beset by aversive arousal than if they are tense and viscerally agitated'
(Bandura 1977: 198).
Results of the Application of SPC in Education for Reducing

Dropout
A total of 194 students on scholastic probation (mostly Mexican-American

minority students) took part in the study at East Los Angeles Community College
(ELAC) in 1970. There were 105 enrolled in my (SPC) Psychology 22 class (the
experimental group) and 89 students taking the regular Psychology 22 class (the
control group) where only study skills were taught and by instructors other than
myself. The two main dependent variables compared between the two groups
were dropout rates and grade points (GPA x units completed) over one and a half
year period. During this period the dropout rate for the study skills only (control)
group was 56% (not surprising considering Losak's 1972 finding). The dropout
rate for the SPC class (the experimental group) was only 16%. As for the grade
points, there was an average increase of 3.80 grade points for the experimental
group and an actual average 5.45 grade points decrease in the control group (also
not surprising to Losak). The total difference of 9.25 grade points between the two
groups was statistically significant at the 0.02 level (Barrios, 1973c)
There was also an interesting side benefit to the program in terms of reduced
substance abuse and addictions (reduced habits of excess) amongst the students in
the SPC classes. The following results were obtained from an anonymous
questionnaire given to a total of 236 students at the end of the class (the above
original 105 SPC students plus an additional 131 that took subsequent SPC
classes). In those students indicating excess in the following areas these
percentages cut down:
Food 72% (65 of 90) marijuana 69% (22 of 32)

Cigarettes 70% (37 of 53) pills (‘uppers and downers’) 83% (10 of 12)
Alcohol 91% (48 of 53) LSD 100% (7 of 7)
TV 82% (84 of 102) heroin 100% (1 of 1)
Gambling 75% (9 of 12)
The interesting thing about this curtailment of excesses is that it occurred

primarily as a side benefit of the program. No concentrated attack had been made
on curtailing excesses. It is felt to have occurred mainly because of three major
changes resulting from the program: the general increase in the ability to relax;
the greater enjoyment of other areas of life; and the greater amount of self control.
Most excesses or addictions can usually be traced to a deficit in one or more of
these areas.
Corroborating the results achieved at ELAC were those achieved at UCLA in
1972 with 362 freshmen where the SPC program was introduced as part of an
overall program to help minority students (both Mexican-American and African-
American) survive at UCLA. Interestingly enough, one of the students benefiting
from this 1972 UCLA class, a former high school dropout prior to taking the
class, recently became Mayor of Los Angeles and having seen first hand the
benefits of the program has indicated plans to introduce it to the Los Angeles
School District as a means of reducing the current high dropout rate of Hispanics
and African Americans in the Los Angeles schools (55%).
WELFARE AND WORK INCENTIVE PROGRAMS

The positive results achieved with incorporating SPC into work incentive
programs to help get people off welfare (see Barrios, 1985: 32, 208, 209) tend to
support a hypothesis I have regarding welfare recipients:
Many feel that people on welfare are just plain lazy malingerers and don't
real1y want to work. I don't believe this. It's my theory that these people
remain on welfare not because they want to but because their low self-image [low
self-efficacy] makes them feel incapable of anything else. (Barrios 1985: 208)
The essence of what the program can do for these people was captured by the
comments of two CETA (Comprehensive Employment and Training Act)
instructors who saw the results of what SPC was able to do for their students. First
the comments of Maria-Luisa Lopez, CETA instructor in East Los Angeles. She
stated that after much searching, she had at last found (in SPC) a means of dealing
with the all important attitudes and fears of her students that had continued to
plague her ability to get through to them. In her own words:
In the past (prior to SPC exposure) many of our trainees who were sent out
on interviews by the staff Job Developer would not even show up, or if they did
they projected a negative or insecure attitude and were rejected in many
instances. Since SPC exposure, all have acquired a more positive, self-confident
attitude which has helped them during the interviews and subsequently while
learning their duties as new employees. Of the 18 trainees I had in my class when
I started using SPC, all have found jobs, ten of them completely on their own -
something unheard of before as in the past those who had found work found it as
a result of the Job Developer's efforts.
Needless to say, I am completely sold on the SPC concept. (Barrios, 1985:
32)
And in the words of CETA counselor Suzanne Bourg in Pasadena California:
After seeing the response of the students and hearing examples of their
applications of Dr. Barrios' concepts and techniques, I feel strongly that this is an
important part of job training that has never been previously recognized. CETA
can train a person to obtain job skil1s but if he has no self-confidence, no sense
of control over his own destiny, no previous pattern of success, he has great
difficulty getting and holding down a job. It is this strategic area of Dr. Barrios'
course which applies so directly to our CETA trainees. (Barrios, 1985: 209)
INDUSTRY
One can also see that there could also be a positive use for SPC in industry.
Inefficiency and absenteeism would be diminished; work morale would be higher;
there would be a definite lessening of friction among personnel; there would be
considerably fewer stress problems; absenteeism due to illness would be much
less. All these would result in increased productivity. That such results are
possible with SPC was borne out in a study done at Rockwell International and
reported in the Journal of Employee Recreation, Health and Education (Barrios,

1975; see also Barrios, 1985: 209-13):
The SPC class at Rockwell had a total of 11 participants - 3 women and 8

men - from all levels, including management, and met once a week for two hours
for a total of six weeks. Three simple measures were used to get some idea of the
effectiveness of the program: (1) The Willoughby test (Barrios, 1985 p. 224)
before and after, (2) A before and after self-rating of the goals chosen to be
worked on by each participant, using a scale of 0 to 10, and (3) Each participant's
own summary of his progress written at the end of the class.
The results of the Willoughby test indicated an overall improvement of from

the 75th to the 47th percentile. With regards to the changes in rating of goal-
reachability, the average self rating went up from 3.36 to 6.80, (see Barrios, 1985
p. 52-53) with each person working on an average of five to six of the following
goals (self-confidence being the most common one chosen):
1. Positive Thinking 10. Creativity

2. Excessive Drinking 11. Fears
3. Exercise 12. Physical Attractiveness
4. Self-Confidence 13. Weight Control
5. Smoking 14. Emotions
6. Eternal Youth 15. Leadership Ability
7. Learning Ability 16. Tension Control
8. Health 17. Sex
9. Headaches 18. Procrastination
Reading through the following summaries of progress (all 11 are included,

including the one failure) will give you a better feel for the type of results
achieved. In each case, after the initials of the participant, I have included the
before (B) and after (A) Willoughby percentile. (The lower the percentile the
better.)
J.B. B-62, A-53
Procrastination - Have done one or two extra chores every night instead of
putting it off until there is no time left. This includes paying bills, letters, etc.
Diet and Health - Started doing exercises at home. Have also done pretty well
with my meals. Have already lost a few pounds.
Smoking - Have cut down considerably. Have gone without one as much as
four hours at a time at work where the pressure is the greatest.
Work - Work running more smoothly now. Not as many redo's from frus-
tration or aggravation and the time element is no longer creating excessive
tension.
I am convinced the program works. For years I've read books oriented along
these lines, but this course seemed to show how to accomplish your goals.
E.B. B-60, A-5
This course has been helpful in many ways toward improving my self-image.
My confidence and positive thoughts have strengthened a great amount.
My life is a much happier one which gives off a glow of warm vibrations to
others around me. I'm able to concentrate on a positive thought whenever I desire.
Problems, large or small, at work or at home, no longer pose a threat of failure
because I am assured I can solve any.
Since my self-image has improved, I find that I like myself even more and am
able to do much more than I've done in the past. Now that I realize I have the
ability, I know I will be successful most of the time. I am confident I will
accomplish my goals, both short and long range. Without this course, I wonder
where would I be today?
R.O. B-30, A-12
I have greatly reduced tension. My sex life has improved considerably and I
feel I have a more positive attitude toward the future. My memory and reading
comprehension have improved. And I am able to shut out outside interference
when thinking.
While my problems were not as great as many people, I can see where
everyone could benefit from this course. I feel it was worth the time and money.
A.P. B-89, A-57
I have learned the techniques, I have the tools - now the rest is up to me.
The class has definitely helped me. For instance, no one could have hated a
job more than I did; I despised going to work in the mornings. Now, I really enjoy
my job - I don't mind getting up and going to work. I really like the people I work
with now. I just changed my attitude (after I started the class and started reading
“Psycho-Cybernetics”) and everything just seemed to shape up.
Also, I have lost 7 lbs. I have started and am continuing an exercise program
every day at noon. Have been running a mile at noon instead of eating lunch. I
have something light at dinner - absolutely no sweets and sweets were my
weakness.
So, I will have to say the class has been a success for me. My weight and
work problems seem to be going okay now so I think I'll start trying for self-confi-
dence (that will be a tough one but I know I’ll be able to make it).
D.P. B-85, A-52
This has opened my eyes to a lot of little things that are really big. Find
myself thinking clearly again and normal. Also, I've noticed that more done lately
in shorter time and with less effort. I find that I'm now able to get vivid blue on
the Stress Card more and more frequently. I'm definitely going to continue work-
ing with this program.
L.P. B-88, A-96 (The one apparent failure)
I do not feel that SPC has helped me a great deal, but who knows what seeds
have been planted.
R.P. B-81, A-41
I am convinced now I have made relaxation a habit. I am confident, too, that

my new positive, winning attitude can accomplish the results I need to meet all
my realistic goals. This is true even though my age [around 65] is such that it is
easy to have serious doubts if I were to allow them to develop.
At work SPC has helped by teaching me to take a more deliberate and
analytical approach and therefore achieve more reasonable solutions to my
problems.
I think an SPC program is absolutely essential in a corporate organization in
order to develop maximum performance and output among its members.
Corporation work programs such as North American Rockwell have impos-
sible schedules, almost impossible goal requirements and a need for maximum
cooperation between all members. Almost all workers in such a situation will
develop an extremely tense personality where their creative output reaches
minimum because of the impossible schedules and goals. SPC will develop a
calmness in these individuals so that their efficiency is increased tremendously
and their awareness of the other person's point of view and his requirements are
greatly enhanced to the point where cooperation and efficiency of the overall
program results in a much better end result.
B.R. B-98, A-93
In the past, under pressure, I'd run. Now I don't. Example - In a night class I
am taking I have noticed a complete change of attitude. Before I would easily
become discouraged and be quick to give up and drop the class. Now I find
myself sticking to it and no longer so afraid of the teacher.
I find that SPC has also helped with my job - because I can keep calm long
enough to learn it. Previously I would be so upset during the learning period it
took twice as long. I use the quick count-down when I get in a tight spot and it
seems to help quite a bit. Also, there is an annoying person whom I work with - I
can for the most part, with the countdown, keep my feelings in control so as not to
upset the entire office.
R.R. B-86, A-63
I feel that I have learned the tools to help myself over the past six weeks. I
probably would not have read Psycho-Cybernetics at all. Now that I started the
book I feel I will complete the book within the month.
Before the course I rated myself low in self-confidence and positive thinking.
Now I find myself catching myself as soon as I become aware of the situation
and program in that I am confident in my abilities. When I think negatively I
immediately disregard the thought and think of a positive thought. I think I have
reversed my negative pattern.
As far as habits are concerned, I am working on one that has grown since
childhood. I recently have had success in controlling this habit for the first time in
approximately 30 years - three successes in a row. This has helped my ego and my
confidence to a great degree.
Also, I had trouble sleeping at times. Now when I go to bed I go through a
complete programming input and relax much more than before, thereby getting to
sleep earlier and more relaxed. As a result I am on time for work and more
relaxed during the day. And my mind is not as cluttered up with negative thoughts
and fears during the day. Therefore I am able to get more work accomplished.
I look forward to working hard on all areas with the tools learned in the class.
P.S. B-68, A-12

Have achieved positive results from the 6 week program; feel that this is only
the beginning. This course gave me the tools, now I must continue to use them to
continue the progress.
I was particularly impressed with my ability to remember names. This was
always a weak point with me. I find that I am also starting to gain confidence in
my handling of situations at work that bugged me before and am much more
relaxed when making presentations to a group of people.
I was quite pleased with the "before" and "after" results of the Willoughby
test.
I really "dig" the "positive thought" technique. I use this every day. This is the
basis of Maltz' book [Psycho-Cybernetics] but I didn't really get it until this class.
This is the biggest thing I have learned to date. I now try to concentrate on my
successes as much as possible.
A.S. B-82, A-40
I thought the course was well presented. I have obtained positive results in my
blood pressure reduction goal and find I am more relaxed now. I have also made
some slight progress in my weight reduction goal.
Thanks to the short-cut techniques I can automatically relax when problems
come up at work and find I can deal with others more easily.
MEDICINE
One can also see the possibilities of SPC in the area of medicine. Although no
study has been done with the specific purpose of testing the effectiveness of SPC
for improving health, one can see from many of the above reports as well as
others scattered throughout the book [Towards Greater Freedom and Happiness]
that SPC can be considerably effective with such health problems as: high blood
pressure, ulcers, arthritis, asthma, pain, headaches, insomnia, anxiety, depression,
smoking, obesity, diabetes, alcoholism, heart disease and cancer. (Barrios, 1985:
213; see also testimonials section of www.stresscards.com)
DRUG REHABILITATION
As has already been reported, one of the side benefits of the SPC program for
students was considerable reduction in a number of habits of excess including a
number of different drug addictions.
A more direct use of SPC with drug addicts and alcoholics was its application
at Bridgeback and the House of Uhuru in the predominately African-American
area of Los Angeles. Both are rehabilitative centers for hard-core drug and
alcoholic offenders many of whom had been sent to prison for drug-related
crimes. The types of results achieved are illustrated in the two letters presented on
pages 214-16 of Barrios, 1985.
The first was written by a resident at Bridgeback and addressed to-whom-it--
may-concern:
For many years (since 1959) I had been a drug-addict. Now I'm a resident at
Bridgeback.
For a long time I thought there was no hope. I had been told that once a
dope-fiend always a dope-fiend. Not having too much on the ball, as far as a
future, I let this saying make a nest in my subconscious. Because of this I would
not deal with anything. Through the years I tried several times to break the habit
but each time would go back. Well, I finally gave up and said it's time to get help.
I signed up for the Bridgeback Drug Program. There I thought that I could get
help by just grouping [note: this is a form of encounter group therapy and has
been the main form of therapy currently used by many drug rehabilitative
programs] but I couldn't. So along came Dr. A.A. Barrios. He had a very unique
program called SPC (self-program control).
At first I just sat in class and didn't get involved, then he started saying
things that sounded good. He said he could change a person's entire life if they
got involved. I didn't believe it at first. So, I said what can I lose.
I started out by using the Spiral Mind Technique. I began getting so
involved, I purchased a kit. Every morning I would use it. Then it started taking
effect. The next thing I know I had no desire whatsoever to use or even be around
dope.
Then I had this Mural to paint, 75 feet long and 25 feet high. I just knew I
wouldn't finish it. So I programmed in that I would complete the Mural, and now
it's one of the best in the city of L.A. and I'm always getting recognition for it.
Now, still using Dr. A. A. Barrios' SPC program, I'm enjoying life in a much
more rewarding way. I attend L.A. Business College where I'm studying
accounting. Upon completion, I hope to become an accounting clerk. Next, I
applied for a job for the State of California as a claim's examiner's assistant. My
application was accepted. I took the test and I found it was so easy; it was as if I
had taken it before. It's really something to see how these techniques work. I just
know I did well on it because I got under the Spiral that morning.
Oh yes, let me include this in this short story of my changed life-style. My
grades in high school were C's and D's; now they are, believe it or not, A's and
B's.
I'm going to close with these last few words. There was this young lady that
came to the program. I saw where I could help her with this new program. She
was like me at first, skeptical; now she's getting involved and she's really doing
fine now.
The following letter was written to the Director of the House of Uhuru by one
of the peer-counselors who had taken part in the pilot SPC study there:
I am writing concerning a program I feel would be of great interest to you

and which I highly recommend for incorporation into the House of Uhuru. First
of all Mr. Anderson, allow me to state that this program, Self-Program Control
(SPC), works! It is a truth, in that by means of it one can be in control of his life
and destiny.
Unhealthy habits, such as over-eating, excessive smoking and drinking, drug
taking and abuse and countless others can be minimized and eventually alleviated
by applying the techniques acquired and practiced until they become second
nature by believing you can do it. I know this is possible because I've seen the
program work not only with me but many others as well, thanks to being in the
SPC class Dr. Barrios taught here this past semester.
At the beginning of the class we were asked if there was anything that we
wanted to focus upon within ourselves. One of the goals I set was to become
adept at tension control. Before utilizing the SPC techniques I experienced
headaches often, lost my temper at the drop of a hat, and underwent mood
changes quite frequently (depression, despondency, self-pity, etc.). Now, as I'm
sure you are aware of, my temper and mood variations have displayed positive
movement toward a more balanced equilibrium, and my headaches are almost
non-existent.
In March of this year my husband was incarcerated, and would be away for
18 months. As a result of this occurrence, I felt afraid and completely alone. I
started drinking alcohol everyday. I'd get off from work, stop at a liquor store and
after getting home, would drink myself into a stupor. During this time I had
forgotten about SPC and just about everything else.
Then one evening after I had taken my first drink, I remembered the SPC 20
to 10 Countdown Technique for relaxation. I went through the technique twice,
programmed in the goal of not having to drink to deal with my fears, insecurities,
and poured the pint of bourbon down the kitchen drain. I felt and continue to feel
good about myself!
With the continued usage of the techniques learned through SPC, and
reading excerpts from the book Psycho-Cybernetics by Maxwell Maltz, I became
more confident and aware of my abilities to change and control my life as I deem
fit.
In regards to Self-Program Control being incorporated and implemented as
an on-going therapeutic phase of the Uhuru's philosophy, I am strongly in favor
of the idea. Not only have I seen the positive effects of the class on myself and
the others taking it, but I have also seen that we ourselves could very easily teach
it to others in turn.
During the last four classes ten clients participated who were from the
residential component. These ten clients were taught SPC by us without Dr.
Barrios. We, the class, introduced to them a few of the SPC techniques that were
ideal for tension control and relaxation. At the end of the very first session, all of
the residential clients were very enthused and expressed a desire to attend and
learn more from additional sessions.
At the conclusion of the fourth session, clients were relating to me how they
had used the Deep Breathing Technique to relax and had as a result stopped
taking sinnequans, a tranquilizing medication. Also while participating in the
regular intensive grouping sessions, by using the 20 to 10 Countdown Technique
the clients were able to control their tempers and display a more positive attitude
and behavior pattern. Many of the clients also reported that they were now able
to go to sleep at night without the aid of medication simply by using the
techniques learned in SPC. One client especially stated she had gotten so upset
one day that her blood pressure went up high enough for our doctor to feel
medication was necessary to restore it to normal. At this time the client went
through the techniques learned in SPC, and as a result her blood pressure
returned to normal without her having to be administered medication.
Each day SPC is being heralded by these ten residents who were fortunate
enough to be included in the SPC class, and they themselves are now teaching
the techniques of SPC to new residents.
These are some of the incidents that lend credence to the benefits that can be
acquired through SPC.
The above letter illustrates once again a major advantage of the SPC program
- how easy it is to teach. Please also note the chain reaction effect. The students I
taught in turn taught the program to ten other residents who in turn started
teaching the program to others. Again this is all in keeping with the
"demystification" approach of Ivey and Alshuler (1973) that says we don't have to
be Ph.D’s or so-called experts in order to help others. I believe strongly that we
need this chain reaction effect if we are going to help turn this world around in
time. As I alluded to in the beginning of this book [Towards Greater Freedom and
Happiness], we are currently in a life or death race, “... for at the phenomenally
fast rate at which technology has advanced during the past century, man now has
the means to totally destroy himself, and will unless we can get to him first”.
(Barrios, 1985:217)
CONCLUSIONS OF PART II
A significant number of benefits were derived from the theory. These include:
(1) a further understanding of the hallucinogens, schizophrenia and bipolar
disorder, biofeedback, higher–order conditioning, placebos and faith-based
phenomena including free will and faith healing; (2) development of more
effective methods of hypnotic induction; (3) development of more effective
methods of giving post-hypnotic suggestions; and (4) development of Self-
Programmed Control (SPC), a positive-oriented behavioral improvement program
which provides a systematic means of achieving self-actualization. Although
Maslow (1971) did an excellent job of introducing the concept, he never really
developed a systematic approach to achieving self-actualization. It is felt that
among other things, SPC can be the catalyst that provides the all important
missing link – a means of facilitating change and thus helping to achieve the goals
necessary for achieving self-actualization. Key factors in achieving self-
actualization in the SPC program are the greater levels of self-efficacy (Bandura,
1977) and emotional intelligence (Goleman, 1995) achieved. Positive results of
SPC’s application in a number of important areas were presented: education;
welfare; industry; medicine; and drug rehabilitation. This emphasis on a positive
psychological approach to behavioral improvement fits right in with the current
Positive Psychology Movement (Seligman, 2005).
APPENDIX
Appendix 85
Appendix 87
Appendix 89
Appendix 91
Appendix 93
Appendix 95
Appendix 97
Appendix 99
Appendix 101
Appendix 103
Appendix 105
Appendix 107
Appendix 109
Appendix 111
Appendix 113
Appendix 115
Appendix 117
Appendix 119
Appendix 121
Appendix 123
REFERENCES
Abrams S (1963) Short-term hypnotherapy of a schizophrenic patient, American
Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 5 , 237-247.
Abrams S (1964) The use of hypnotic techniques with psychotics. A critical
review, American Journal of Psychotherapy, pp. 79-94.
Alexander L (1965) Clinical experiences with hypnosis in psychiatric therapy,
American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 7, 190-206.
Alexander L (1966) Conditioned reflexes as related to hypnosis and hypnotic
induction techniques, American Society of Psychosomatic Dentistry and
Medicine, 13 , 35-53.
Bandura A (1977) Self-Efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review 84: 191-215.
Barber T X (1961) Physiological effects of ‘hypnosis,’ Psychological Bulletin, 58,
390-419.
Barber TX (1962) Experimental controls and the phenomena of “hypnosis”: A
critique of hypnotic research methodology. J.nerv.ment.Dis. 134: 493-505.
Barber TX (1964) Hypnotizability, suggestibility, and personality: A critical
review of research findings. Psychol. Rep. 14: Monogr. Suppl. 3.
Barber TX (1965) Physiological effects of ‘hypnotic suggestion’, Psychological
Bulletin, 63, 201-222.
Barber TX (1969a) An empirically-based formulation of hypnotism, American
Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 12.
Barber TX (1969b) Hypnosis: A Scientific Approach. New York: Van Nostrand
Reinhold.
Barber TX, Calverly DS (1964a) Empirical evidence for a theory of “hypnotic
behavior”: effects of pretest instructions on response to primary suggestion.
Psychological Record 14:457-467.
Barber TX, Calverley DS (1964b) Toward a theory of “hypnotic” behavior:

effects on suggestibility of defining suggestion as easy. Journal of Abnormal
and Social Psychology 68: 585- 592.
Barber TX, Calverly DS (1964c) Effect of E’s tone of voice on “hypnotic-like”
suggestibility. Psychol. Rep. 15: 139-144.
Barber TX, Calverly DS (1966) Effects on recall of hypnotic induction,
motivational suggestions, and suggested regression: A methodological and
experimental analysis. J. Abnormal Psychology 71: 169-180.
Barber TX, Calverley DS (1969) Multidimensional analysis of “hypnotic”
behavior. Journal of Abnormal Behavior 74: 209-220.
Barber TX, Spanos NP, Chavez JF (1974) Hypnosis, Imagination, and Human
Potentialities. New York: Pergamon.
Barrios AA (1965) an explanation of the behavioral and therapeutic effects of the
hallucinogens. International Journal of Neuropsychiatry 1: 574-92.
Barrios AA (1969) Toward Understanding the Effectiveness of Hypnotherapy: A
Combined Clinical, Theoretical and Experimental Approach. Doctoral
dissertation, University of California at Los Angeles.
Barrios AA (1970) Hypnotherapy: a reappraisal. Psychotherapy: Theory,
Research and Practice. 7: 2-7.
Barrios AA (1973a) Posthypnotic suggestion as higher-order conditioning: a
methodological and experimental analysis. The International Journal of
Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis 21: 32-50.
Barrios AA (1973b) Increasing the effectiveness of hypnotic induction. Paper
presented at the VIth International Congress for Hypnosis. July 3rd, 1973,
Upsala, Sweden.
Barrios AA (1973c) Self Programmed Control: A new approach to learning.
Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Conference of the Western College Reading
Association. (See also articles section of www.stresscards.com.)
Barrios AA (1975) Self Programmed Control: towards greater health happiness
and productivity. Recreation Management: The Journal of Employee Re-
creation, Health and Education, pp, 18-21.
Barrios AA (1985) Towards Greater Freedom and Happiness. Los Angeles, SPC
Press.
Barrios AA (2001) A theory of hypnosis based on principles of conditioning and
inhibition. Contemporary Hypnosis 18: 163-203.
Barrios AA (2002) Science in Support of Religion: From the Perspective of a
Behavioral Scientist. Banning, California, Cancer Federation Press. (This can
also be found in the articles section of www.stresscards.com)
References 127
Barrios AA (2006) The Concentration Spiral on DVD. See additional products

section, www.stresscards.com.
Barrios AA (2007a) Commentary on a theory of hypnosis based on principles of
conditioning and inhibition Part I: Contrasts with other perspectives and
supporting evidence. Contemporary Hypnosis 24: 109-122.
Barrios AA (2007b) Commentary on a theory of hypnosis based on principles of
conditioning and inhibition Part II: Benefits of the theory. Contemporary
Hypnosis 24: 123-138.
Baykushev SV (1969) Hyperventilation as an accelerated hypnotic induction
technique, International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 17,
20-24.
Biddle W E (1967) Hypnosis in the Psychoses. Springfield, Ill.: Charles .C
Thomas.
Chong Tong Mun (1964) Hypnosis in general medical practice in Singapore,
Chong Tong Mun (1966) Psychosomatic medicine and hypnosis, American
Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 8, 173-177.
Cousins N (1989) Head First: The Biology of Hope. New York: E.P. Dutton.
Dorcus RM (1963). Fallacies in predictions of susceptibility to hypnosis based on
personality characteristics. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis 5: 163-70.
Erickson MH, Rossi EL, Rossi SI (1976) Hypnotic Realities: The Induction of
Clinical Hypnosis and Forms of Indirect Suggestion. New York: Irvington.
Freud S (1955) The Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud. Volume
18. London: Hogarth Press.
Friedman M, Rosenman RH (1974) Type A Behavior and Your Heart. New York:
Fawcet Columbine Books.
Fromm E “Hypnoanalysis: theory and two case excerpts.” Psychotherapy, 2
(1965), 127-133.
Gliedman LH, Gantt WH, Teitelbaum HA (1957) Some implications of
conditional reflex studies for placebo research, American Journal of
Psychiatry 113: 1103-07.
Goleman D (1995) Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than I.Q.
Bantam Books.
Harlow H (1959) Learning set and error factor theory. In Koch, S (Ed.).
Psychology: A Study of a Science. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 492-537.
Hartland J (1966) The value of ‘ego-strengthening’ procedures prior to direct
symptom removal under hypnosis, American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 8,
89-93.
Hernstein R (1962) Placebo effect in the rat. Science 138: 677-8.
Hilgard ER (1965) Hypnotic Susceptibility. New York: Harcourt, Brace and

World.
Hilgard ER (1977) Divided Consciousness: Multiple Controls in Human Thought
and Action. New York: Wiley.
Hoskovec J, Svorad D (1966) Recent literature on hypnosis from the European
socialist countries, American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 8, 210-225.
Hussain A (1964) Behavior therapy using hypnosis, The Conditioning Therapies.
New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston, pp. 5-20.
Ivey AE, Alshuler AS (1973) An introduction to the field (Psychological
Education). Personnel and Guidance Journal 51: 591-597.
Jacobs L (1964) Emotional and behavioral problems in clinical pediatrics,
American Society of Psychosomatic Dentistry and Medicine, 11, 40-56.
Kirsch I (1985) Response expectancy as a determinant of experience and
behavior. American Psychologist 40: 1189-1202.
Kirsch I (1997a) Response expectancy theory and application: A decennial
review. Applied and Preventative Psychology 6: 69-79.
Kirsch I (1997b) Suggestibility or Hypnosis: What do our scales really measure?
The International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis 45: 212-
225.
Kirsch I (2000) The response set theory of hypnosis. American Journal of Clinical
Hypnosis 42: 274-292.
Kirsch I Lynn SJ (1998) Dissociation theories of hypnosis. Psychological Bulletin
123: 100-115.
Kirsch I Wickless C, Moffit K (1999) Expectancy and suggestibility: Are the
effects of environmental enhancement due to detection? The International
Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis 47: 40-45
Kline MV (1958) Freud and Hypnosis. New York: Julian Press.
Klinger BI (1968) The effects of peer model responsiveness and length of
induction procedure on hypnotic responsiveness. Paper presented at the
meeting of the East. Psychol. Assoc., Washington D.C., April.
Knowles JB (1963) Conditioning and the placebo effects of decaffeinated coffee
on simple reaction time in habitual coffee drinkers. Behavior Research and
Therapy 1: 151-7.
Kroger WS (1964) An analysis of valid and invalid objections to hypnotherapy,
Kroger WS (1963,1977) Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis. Philadelphia: J.B.
Lippincott.
Lazarus AA (1963) The results of behavior therapy in 126 cases of severe
neurosis. Behavior Research and Therapy 1: 68-80.
References 129
Losak J (1972) Do remedial programs really work? Personnel and Guidance

Journal 50: 383-386.
Lynn ST, Sherman SJ (2000) The clinical importance of sociocognitive models of
hypnosis: Response set theory and Milton Erickson’s strategic interventions.
American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis 43: 294-311.
Maltz M (1960) Psycho-Cybernetics. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, Inc.
Mann H (1963) Hypnosis comes of age, American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis,
5, 159-162.
Maslow A (1971) The Farthest Reaches of Human Nature. New York: Viking.
Montgomery GH (1995) Mechanisms of placebo analgesia: Expectancy theory
and classical conditioning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of
Connecticut, Storrs.
Mowrer OH (1960) Learning Theory and the Symbolic Processes. New York,
NY: John Wiley and Sons.
Orne MT (1959) The nature of hypnosis: Artifact and essence. Journal of
Abnormal Psychology 58: 277-99.
Osgood CE (1963) On understanding and creating sentences. American
Psychologist 18: 735-51.
Pascal CR, Salzberg MC (1959) A systematic approach to inducing hypnotic
behavior, International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 7,
161-167.
Pavlov IP (1960) Conditioned Reflexes. New York, NY: Dover.
Richardson TA (1963) Hypnotherapy in frigidity, American Journal of Clinical
Hypnosis, 5, 194-199.
Sachs LB, Anderson WL (1967) Modification of hypnotic susceptibility,
International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 15, 172-180.
Sanders RS, Rehyer J (1969) Sensory deprivation and the enhancement of
hypnotic susceptibility. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 74: 375-81.
Scharf B, Zamansky HS (1963) Reduction of word-recognition threshold under
hypnosis. Percept.mot.skills. 17: 499-510.
Seligman MEP (2005) Positive psychology, positive prevention, and positive
therapy. Handbook of Positive Psychology. Snyder, C.R. and Lopez, S. (Eds.)
Skinner BF (1957) Verbal Behavior. New York, NY: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Spanos NP, Rivers S, Ross S (1977) Experienced involuntariness in response to
hypnotic suggestions. In W.E. Edmonston, Jr. (Ed.), Conceptual and
investigative approaches to hypnosis and hypnotic phenomena. Annals of the
New York Academy of Sciences 296: 208-216.
Stein C (1963) The clenched fist technique as a hypnotic procedure in clinical
psychotherapy, American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 6, 113-119.
Sundberg ND, Tyler LE (1962) Clinical Psychology. New York, NY: Appleton-
Century-Crofts.
Temoshok L, Dreher H (1993) The Type C Connection. New York, NY: Random
House.
Van Pelt SJ (1958) Secrets of Hypnotism. Los Angeles, Wilshire Book Company.
Weitzenhoffer AM (1953). Hypnotism: An Objective Study in Suggestibility. New
York, N.Y.: John Wiley and Sons.
Wickless C, Kirsch I (1989) Effects of verbal and experiential expectancy
manipulations of hypnotic susceptibility. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology 57: 762-768.
Wickramasekera I (1969) The effects of sensory restriction on susceptibility to
hypnosis: A hypothesis, some preliminary data and theoretical speculation.
The International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis 17: 217-24.
Wickramasekera I (1970) Effects of sensory restriction on susceptibility to
hypnosis. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 76: 69-75.
Wickramasekera I (1973) Effects of electromyographic feedback on hypnotic
susceptibility. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 82: 74-77.
Wickramasekera I (1980) A conditioned response model of the placebo effect:
Predictions from the model. Biofeedback and Self-Regulation 5: 5-18.
Wilson DL (1967) The role of confirmation of expectancies in hypnotic induction.
Dissertation Abstracts International 28: 4787-B. (University Microfilms No.
66-6781).
Wolpe J (1958) Psychotherapy by Reciprocal Inhibition. Palo Alto, Calif.:
Stanford University Press.
Wolpe J, Saltzer A, Reyna LJ (1964) The Conditioning Therapies. New York,
NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Wrenn CG, Larsen RP (1955) Studying Effectively. Stanford University Press.
INDEX
A anger, 58
antecedent indicant of hypnosis, 40, 41
absenteeism, 71 anxiety reaction, 8
addiction to sweets, 74 anxiety state, 116
addiction, 47, 59, 69, 70, 77 anxiety, 8, 9, 46, 66, 69, 76
adult learning, 113 apathy towards hypnosis, 83
adventurous subjects, 102 approximation techniques, 64
adventurousness and hypnotic ahistorical approach in therapy, 11
susceptibility, 103 Armageddon, x, 80
African-Americans, 70, 77 arthritis, 76
age and hypnotic induction, 119 artificial situation technique, 9, 36
age and hypnotic susceptibility, 19, 20, artificially induced responses, 21, 36,
105 100
age regression, 9, 106, 107, 110 ascribing hypnotic phenomena to
age regression suggestions, 111 hypnotist, 102
aggravation, 73 assertiveness, 57
alcohol, 10, 78 association memory technique, 67
alcoholics, 77 asthma, 8, 76, 116
alcoholism, 8, 9, 70, 76, 116 attention factor in hypnotic induction,
allergic rhinitis, 8 101
altering accessibility, 21 attention, 27, 28, 84, 98
alternative medicine, 5 attitude towards hypnosis, 101
American Psychological Association, attitudes and hypnotic induction, 103
7, 49 attitudes, 9, 11, 15, 22, 49, 64, 66, 73,
amnesia, 108, 109 75, 85, 119
anesthesia, 108, 109 attractiveness, 72
132 Index
automatic behavior, ix, 28, 29, 37, 54, theory of hypnosis, 14, 17, 19-24,
55, 62 26, 31, 32, 35, 36, 37, 38, 41,
automaticity, 28 45, 48, 49, 50, 53, 54
automatons, ix, 29 the theory and biofeedback, 45, 48,
autonomy, 26 81
aversion therapy, 10 the theory and bipolar disorder, 45,
48, 81
the theory and the hallucinogens,
B 45, 81
the theory and learning, 45, 48, 81
Bandura, Albert, x, 4, 5, 66, 67, 68, 69, the theory and religious
81 phenomena, 18. 53, 81
Barber T.X., 13, 23, 24, 39, 40, 41, 88, the theory and schizophrenia, 45,
100, 103 46, 47, 81
Barber Suggestibility Scale, 36, 103 the theory and the placebo, 18, 45,
Barrios, Alfred A., 118 81
automatic behavior, 29 welfare and work incentive
clinical review of hypnosis programs, 70, 71
literature, 3, 8, 9, 10, 13 basal metabolism, 107
depth of hypnosis required, 12, 25 behavior therapy, 3, 8, 13
drug rehabilitation, 70, 77, 78, 79 behavioral change, 4, 23, 29, 64
education, 65, 66, 67, 69, 70 behavioral effect of the hallucinogens,
faith healing, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60 45
free will, 26, 54 behavioral effects of hypnosis, 45
hypnotic induction improvement, behaviour disorders of school children,
61, 62, 63, 64, 81 9, 117
industry, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76 belief in one’s capabilities, 66
medicine, 76 belief systems, 22, 23
methodological shortcomings of belief, ix, 14, 17, 18, 19, 22, 26, 29,
hypnosis experiments, 25, 39, 30-33, 37, 46, 50-53, 54, 55, 56,
40, 41, 42 57, 60, 62, 66, 68, 85, 91
placebo effect, 50, 51, 52, 56, 81 beliefs, 15, 19, 32, 46, 49, 52, 85
post hypnotic suggestion, 39, 61, belief, definition of, 54
64, 81 benefits of hypnosis, ix, 3, 5
self-efficacy, 67, 68, 69 benefits of SPC, 70, 77, 79
SPC program, 22, 37, 62-81 benefits of the theory, 43, 45, 81
the subconscious, ix, 28, 29, 54, 59 bible, 57, 58
biofeedback, 4, 5, 17, 35, 36, 37, 45,
48, 62, 67, 68, 81
Index 133
biofeedback as a form of hypnotic chemical imbalance and schizophrenia,

induction, 37 46
bipolar disorder, 4, 5, 45, 48, 81 chemotherapy, 57, 58, 59
blindness through suggestion, 108, Chevreul Pendulum, 37, 105
109, 117 childhood, 11, 75
blister formation through hypnosis, children, 19
107 cholesterol, 55
blocking of normal associations, 90 cigarette habit, 58
blocks, 60 classical condition, 31, 51, 52
blood pressure reduction, 76, 79 classical conditioning components in
blood pressure, 55, 76, 79 hypnotic induction, 93, 94
blood sugar level, 107 classical conditioning paradigm, 92
born again transformations, 54 clinical psychology, xi
breast cancer, 57, 58 cobalt therapy, 59
cognitive stimuli evoked by a word,
119
C cognitive stimuli, 17, 19, 20, 23, 25,
27, 28, 48, 49, 50, 51, 64, 85, 110,
cancer healed via hypnosis, 56-60, 76 113, 114, 119
at the base of the brain, 57 cognitive stimulus, 85, 90, 98, 109,
of the breast, 57, 58 110
of the intestines, 56 cognitive-cognitive (c-c) conditioning,
of the lungs, 59, 60 23, 49, 112
of the lymph glands, 57, 59, 60 compatible cognitive stimuli, 111
of the neck, 59 competing stimuli, 107
of the rib cage, 57 comprehensive theory of learning, 116
of the spine, 57 concealing reality, 27
of the testes, 59 concentration factor in hypnotic
of the tongue, 57 induction, 101, 119
cancer patients, 56, 57 concentration, ix, 15, 46, 54, 62, 118,
catalyst for facilitating change, x, 81 119
c-c conditioning, 112-114 concentration spiral, 62, 63, 77, 78
central control function, 26 conditioned inhibition, 89
change facilitated via hypnosis, ix, x, conditioned inhibitory response, 93, 94
4, 5, 14, 22, 29, 58, 59, 64, 77, 79, conditioned response (CR), 19, 35, 49,
81 50, 51, 83, 92
changing attitudes with PHS, 118 conditioned response evoked by words,
characteristic adult learning, 113 105
charlatanism, 14
134 Index
conditioned stimulus (CS), 40, 51, 83, D

85, 87, 92
conditioning an inhibitory response, 88 damaged sensory organs and increased
conditioning an inhibitory set, 89 suggestibility, 111
conditioning paradigm, 83, 118 dangers of hypnosis, 11
conditioning salivation, 113 deafness produced via hypnosis, 117
conditioning trial in hypnotic deception in hypnotic induction, 101
induction, 93 deep breathing technique, 79
conditioning without drive reduction, deep hypnotic induction, 27
86 deep relaxation, 108
conditioning, 3, 12, 14, 15, 17, 23, 28, deep state of hypnosis, 94
35, 45, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 54, 62, definition of suggestion, 90
81, 83, 85-87, 114, 118 delusions, 45, 46, 47, 48
confidence, 14, 73, 75, 76 demand characteristics of hypnosis, 40
conflicting cognitive stimuli, 112 demons, 54
conscious awareness, 28 demystification approach, 79
consciousness, 24 depressed, 22, 59, 64
consequent indicant of hypnosis, 42 depression, 9, 22, 48, 55, 64, 76, 78
control of automatic behavior, 55 depressive disorder, 48
control of involuntary physiological dermatitis healed via hypnosis, 8, 116
response, 37 diabetes helped via SPC, 76
control of physiological responses, 107 diet improved via SPC, 72
control over involuntary responses, differences between the theory and
104, 107, 110, 111, 112 others, 4, 23-28, 30-33
control over ones destiny, 71 direct suggestions for controlling
control under pressure, 75 involuntary responses, 28, 110,
controlling ones feelings, 75 111
controlling the subconscious,29 direct symptom removal 8, 9
cortex and hypnosis, 14, 15, 51 dissociation theory of hypnosis, 3, 25,
counseling, 57 27
countdown technique, 75, 78, 79 dissociative experiences, 27
creativity, 72, 74 doctors and the placebo, 18, 50
credibility of hypnotherapy, 4 dreams, recall of, 109
credibility of the persuader, 68 drinking, 55, 78
curtailing excesses, 70 drive reduction in conditioning, 87
dropout from school, 66, 69, 70
drug abuse, 78
drug addiction, 77
drug offender, 77
Index 135
drug program, 77 error-factor theory, 50, 89, 95

drug rehabilitation, 4, 5, 65, 77, 81 eternal youth, 72
drug related crimes, 77 evil, 54
drug treatment, 47 evocation of emotional states by
drugs and hypersuggestibility, 112 suggestion, 111
drugs, 18, 46, 47 evocation of hallucinations by
drunken stupor, 78 suggestion, 111
dysmenorrhea, 8, 116 evoking involuntary responses by
suggestion, 107
excess stress and disease, 55
E excessive drinking, eating and smoking
and disease, 55
education and SPC, vi, 4, 64, 65, 69, excessive drinking, drugs, food and
81 smoking and disease and SPC, 70,
effectiveness of SPC, 72 73, 78
ego enhancement via SPC, 75 executive functions and Hilgard’s
ELAC, 69, 70 theory, 26
elimination of interfering stimuli, 115 exercise improved with hypnosis, 59,
EMG biofeedback, 36, 37 72, 74
emotion of anger evoked by exorcism, 54
suggestion, 107 expectation role of hypnotic induction,
emotion of fear evoked by suggestion, 103, 119
107 expectancy modification procedure, 32
emotional arousal’s effect on learning, experiments on post-hypnotic
67, 69 suggestion, 117
emotional intelligence, x, 4, 66, 81 explanation of hypnotic phenomena,
emotional states controlled by 109
suggestion, 64, 72, 107, 111 external stimuli and higher-order
emotional upheaval and cancer, 56, 57 conditioning, 87
emotional wellbeing and cancer, 59 extinction in learning, 35, 50, 52
emotions and immunity, 55 extinction and hypnosis, 94, 118
employee friction, 71 eyes tired suggestions, 21
employee training, 71
encounter group therapy, 77
endorphins, 50, 51 F
engrams, 28, 85, 106, 110
enzyme production via suggestion, 106 facilitating change, ix, 4, 5, 14, 22, 29,
Erickson, Milton, x, 3, 4, 20, 21, 22, 79, 81
33, 118 facilitating hypnotic induction, 97
136 Index
facilitating therapy, 14, 15 G

facilitation of c-c conditioning, 115
facilitation of conditioning, 87 Galvanic Skin Response (GSR), 36
facilitation of therapy via PHS, 116 garden technique, 57
faith healing, 22, 48, 51, 55-60, 81 gastric secretions produced via
faith, ix, 18, 22, 51, 53, 55, 56, 57, 59, suggestion, 106
60, 81, 83 goal directed fantasies (GDFs), 20
faith and hypnosis, 83 goal-directed theories, 103
fear of hypnosis, x, 24, 61, 102 goals, vii, ix, x, 22, 37, 60, 64, 65, 67,
fear of losing control, 61, 104 72, 73, 74, 78, 81
fear of revealing inner secrets and God, ix, 53, 54, 57, 58
hypnotic induction, 103 Goleman, D., x, 81
fear of the unknown and hypnotic GPA, 69, 78
induction, 93, 103 grades, 78
fears of hypnotic induction, 24, 61, 93, group therapy, 77, 79
103, 119 grouping memory technique, 67
fear response inhibited via hypnosis, GSR, 36
107 guidance, 22, 29, 56, 64, 65, 66
fears eliminated via hypnosis, 9, 10, guided belief, 56
58, 71, 75, 78 guideline for more effective hypnotic
fears of hypnosis, x induction techniques, 62, 64
feeling unloved, 9, 47 guidelines for positive guidance, 64, 69
feeling unwanted, 9 guilt, 9, 58, 85
feelings of inadequacy, 9
feelings of inferiority, 47
fingertip temperature biofeedback, 36, H
67
focus of attention and conditioning, 86, habits of excess, 55, 70, 77, 78
87, 94, 97, 98, 114 habits, 49, 55, 69, 75, 77, 78
free will, ix, 26, 29, 54, 55, 81 hallucinations, 45, 46, 47, 48, 106,
Freud, 11, 12 107, 111, 112
frigidity treated via hypnosis, 8, 117 hallucinogenic drugs, 46, 91
frustration at work, 73 hallucinogens, 4, 45, 46, 47, 81
fulfillment, ix, 53 hand levitation technique, 63
functional autonomy, 48, 49, 50, 52, happiness, ix, 54, 58
54, 116 Harlow, Harry, 50, 89, 95, 96, 116
functional autonomy of PHS, 115 headaches, 72, 76, 78
functionally autonomous, 116 health problems, 76
functionally autonomous response, 115 health, ix, 52, 55, 56, 58, 59, 64, 72, 76
Index 137
heart disease, 55, 76 hyper-responsiveness, 45, 46, 47

heart rate biofeedback, 36, 37 hypersuggestibility, 15, 25, 45, 46, 47,
heart rate controlled via hypnosis, 107, 91, 99
111 defined, 90
heart, 36, 37, 55, 63, 76 hyperventilation, 63
heightened state of belief, ix, 18, 26, hypnosis, iv, ix, x, xi, 3, 4, 5, 7-12, 14,
37, 46, 47, 50, 54, 62, 68 15, 18, 19, 22-30, 32, 35, 37-41,
Hernández-Peón, 84, 93, 97, 98, 109 45-50, 54, 55, 59, 60, 61, 65, 66,
heroin addiction cured via hypnosis, 68, 83, 91, 110
47, 70 hypnosis and faith, 83
high blood pressure caused by stress, hypnosis and suggestibility, 99
55 hypnosis as a conditioning
high blood pressure relieved by SPC, phenomenon, 118
76, 79 hypnosis as a habit phenomenon, 95,
higher order conditioning, xi, 15, 35, 96
49, 51, 52, 81, 83, 92, 112, 114, hypnosis as a state of heightened
119 belief, 31
Hilgard, Ernest, 25, 26, 27, 28, 33, 55, hypnosis as a state of sleep, 61
103 hypnosis defined, 91
Hispanics, 70 hypnosis experiments, 35, 39, 118
historical approach in therapy, 11 hypnosis facilitates c-c conditioning,
holistic approach to cancer, 58 114, 116-118
homicidal, 47 hypnosis facilitates change, ix, x, 4, 5,
homosexuality effectively treated by 14, 22, 29, 58, 59, 64, 77, 79, 81
hypnosis, 8 hypnosis facilitating conditioning, 115
hopefulness revives the immune hypnosis in the treatment of psychosis,
system, 51 46
hopelessness suppresses the immune hypnosis misconceptions, 7, 61, 66, 83,
system, 51, 55, 57 84
Hull, Clark, 87, 90, 92, 95, 96, 98, 99, hypnosis removes causes of symptoms,
115 10
human behavior and faith, 53 hypnotherapists, 4, 10, 11, 12
human behavior and the subconscious, hypnotherapy, x, 3, 4, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13,
28 29, 46, 49, 116
humans as automatons, 29 hypnotic anesthesia, 97
hunger contractions controlled with hypnotic conditioning, 94
hypnosis, 107 hypnotic depth, 25, 35, 118
hyperacuity through hypnosis, 108 hypnotic effects of
hyper-mania, 48 doctors of medicine, 91
138 Index
faith healers, 91 ideomotor movement, 37

lawyers, 91 imagery use of for PHS, 64
ministers, 91 images as cognitive stimuli, 85
politicians, 91 imaginary world, 109
psychotherapists, 91 imagination and hypnotic
salesmen, 91 susceptibility, 19, 20, 27, 28, 105,
hypnotic induction as conditioning 119
process, 91, 95 imaging techniques, 9, 56
hypnotic induction, 3, 4, 7, 8, 12-15, immediate feedback for increasing
17, 20-33, 36, 37, 39, 40, 41, 42, belief, 66, 67, 69
48, 50, 61-64, 68, 81, 83, 84, 91, immediate reinforcement and
92, 94, 95, 97, 100-104, 106, 107, biofeedback, 37, 67
118, 119 immune response, 51, 56
hypnotic induction failures, 12 immune system and hopefulness, 51,
hypnotic phenomena, 3, 12, 14, 41, 83, 55, 56
84, 105, 106, 108 immuno-suppressive, psychological
hypnotic regression, 9 factors 56
hypnotic responses, 24, 42 impotence cured via hypnosis, 9
hypnotic responsiveness, 42 improving appetite with PHS, 117
hypnotic state, 24, 33, 84, 90, 97, 100, improving hypnotic induction, 110,
109, 112, 113, 119 119
hypnotic suggestion, 90, 96 inattention and hypnosis, 27, 28
hypnotic susceptibility 12, 38, 39 incompatible stimuli, suppression of
hypnotizability, 11, 25, 32, 36 and learning, 95
hypnotization, 96 increase in general suggestibility, 98
hypophenomena produced via increasing concentration with PHS,
hypnosis, 118
amnesia, 108, 109 increasing learning with PHS, 118
anesthesia, 108, 109 increasing motivation with PHS, 118
blindness, 108, 109 increasing suggestibility via sensory
paralysis, 108, 109 deprivation, 111
hypotheses of the theory, 83 increasing vocabulary skills with PHS,
hysterical reactions healed via 118
hypnosis, 9, 117 indecisiveness cured via hypnosis, 9
indicants of hypnotic induction 40, 41,
42
I indirect suggestion, 109-111
ideas as cognitive stimuli, 85

Index 139
individual difference factors involuntary functions responsive to

influencing hypnotic induction, 19, indirect suggestions, 111
24, 26, 33, 62, 101, 119 involuntary movement of a limb, 108
inducing emotions with PHS, 118 involuntary response, 111
industry applications of SPC, x, 4, 65,
71, 81
inferiority complex, 47 J
infertility cured via hypnosis, 8
inhibiting interfering stimuli, 108 Jesus, 57, 58
inhibition of competing stimuli, 87, 90, job interviews and SPC, 71
98 job skills and SPC, 71
inhibition principles and hypnosis, 3, job training and SPC, 71
15, 17, 20, 28, 45
inhibition principles and learning 50
inhibitory drugs, 18 K
inhibitory response may be
conditioned, 88 Kirsh, Irving, 24, 25, 30, 31, 32, 36, 52
inhibitory response, 93 94, 98 Kroger, William S., xi, 11, 12, 117
inhibitory set and hypnosis, 17, 20, 23,
26, 27, 28, 31, 45, 48, 49, 50, 51,
54, 84, 90, 91, 93-96, 98, 101, 103, L
104, 106-111, 115, 116, 118, 119
innate behavior patterns, 85 language ability and hypnosis, 19
insecure attitude helped via SPC, 71 language role in conditioning, 114
insomnia cured by hypnosis, 116 law of effect, 86
instant hypnosis, 95 lawyers’ hypnotic capabilities, 18
instant self-hypnosis, 95 leadership ability, 72
interference theory of extinction, 49 learned behavior, automatic 28
interfering stimuli and conditioning, learned patterns of behavior as
23, 49 cognitive stimuli, 85
internal stimuli and higher-order learned subconscious behavior, 28
conditioning, 87 learning as inhibition of error factors,
involuntary behavior controlled via 89
biofeedback, 37, 48, learning theory expanded by the theory
involuntary behavior and free will, 26, of hypnosis, 4, 48
27 learning skills in SPC education
involuntary behavior and the program, 67
subconscious, 28 learning theory and the symbolic
process, 114
140 Index
learning theory expanded by the theory memory, 21, 73, 76

of hypnosis, 5, 45, 48, 49, 52 mental illness, 47
learning, 28, 48, 49, 50, 52, 66, 71, 75, mental state, 51, 55
85, 86 metastasis, 57
life or death race to save the world, 79, metastatic cancer, 58
80 methodological shortcomings of
lifestyle and health, 55 hypnosis experiments, 39, 118
lifestyle changes needed to cure Mexican-American students, 65, 69, 70
cancer, 56, 57, 60 mind-body link, 55, 58, 59
lifestyle changes and SPC, 78 minority background and feelings of
light bulb technique, 63 inferiority, 47
long range goals, 60, 73 minority students, 69, 70
loss of control with hallucinogens, 45, miracles and power of belief, 53
46 misconceptions of hypnosis, 7, 61, 66,
love, vii, 47, 60 83, 104
LSD, 70, 91, 112 mistrust of the hypnotist, 103
lung cancer cured using hypnosis, 59, modifying behavior via conditioning,
60 85
lymph nodes cancer cured using mood changes helped by SPC, 78
hypnosis, 59, 60 morale at work and SPC, 71
Lynn, Steven, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27, 37 morphine placebo response, 51
motivation and hypnotic induction, 12,
19, 24, 103
M motivation to learn via hypnosis, 118
motor responses controlled via
macrophages, 51 hypnosis, 108
maladaptive behavior, 10 Mowrer, O.H., 15, 49, 114
management level, 72
mania, 48
manic-depressive, 48 N
marijuana, 70
marriage problems, 9 natural after image color changes, 63
masking symptoms, 47 natural defenses, 56
Maslow, A., x, 65, 81 natural explanation of religious
mastery expectations, 68 phenomena, 53
maximizing performance, 74 natural recurrence of hypnosis, 18
memories, 27, 28 naturally occurring responses as aid to
memory interference, 27 hypnosis, 21, 62, 63, 64
memory techniques, 67, 68 negative attitude to hypnosis, 104
Index 141
negative hypnosis experiments, 99 patients praying for recovery to no

negative response to suggestion, 100 avail, 60
negative thinking, 46 Pavlov, Ivan, 14, 15, 31, 87, 88, 97,
Neo-Dissociation theory, 25 113
Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP), peace of mind via belief of being
x, 4 healed, 56
nicotine addiction cured with SPC, 59 peer counselors, 78
nitrogen mustard therapy, 59 pendulum technique, 37, 47, 62
nocebo, 52 pepsin secretion produced via indirect
non-submissive attitude towards suggestion, 20
hypnosis, 104 perceived self-efficacy and SPC, 69
North American Rockwell and SPC, 74 perceptions, 15, 31, 32, 49
performance accomplishments for self-
efficacy, 67, 68, 69
O personal competence, 69
personal efficacy and SPC, 66
obesity and SPC, 76 personal lifestyle changes, 59
obsessive-compulsive treated via personal power to change, 58
hypnosis, 8 personal relationship with therapist as
one trial conditioning, 48, 49, 50, 54, hypnosis, 14
116 persuasability, hypnotic powers of
orgasms, 8 salesmen, 18, 91
Osgood, CE, 15, 49, 88, 96, 114 lawyers, 18, 91
outside of school stress, 66 politicians, 18, 91
overeating, 21, 74, 78 persuasion, 4, 18, 67, 68, 69, 83
persuasion and hypnosis, 83
PHS, 39, 40
P physiological effects of suggestion, 88
placebo effect and hypnosis, 83, 91
pain relief ,50, 51, 76 placebo healing, 51
pain, 97, 108 placebo, ix, 5, 18, 22, 45, 51, 52, 55,
paralysis produced via hypnosis, 108, 56, 81
109 Platinov, 107
paranoia, 46 PNI, 56, 57
paranoid schizophrenia cured via politicians and hypnosis, 18, 91
hypnosis, 46, 47, 49 poor hypnotic susceptibility, 19, 39
patient-therapist relationship, 11, 12 poor self image, 64
parent type of prestige effect, 102 poor subjects for hypnosis, 105
positive attitudes, 22, 66
142 Index
positive behaviors, ix prestige and hypnosis, 19, 20, 47, 50,

positive feedback, 66, 69 68
positive guidance, 64, 69 prestige factor in hypnotic induction,
positive psychology, x, 4, 81 101, 119
positive response to suggestion, 100 prestige and waking suggestion, 90, 95
positive thinking, 72, 75, 76 previous theories of hypnosis, 84
positive thoughts, 73 principles of conditioning, 83, 84
post-hypnotic amnesia, 117 principles of inhibition, 83, 84
post-hypnotic behavior changes, 83, 84 probability of responding to
post-hypnotic behavior, 29, 113 suggestion, 13, 20, 32, 37, 64
post-hypnotic phenomena, 83, 112, problem solving at school, 66, 69,
115 problem solving at work and home, 73
post-hypnotic response, 49, 50, 115, procrastination, 72
116 producing blindness with PHS, 117
post-hypnotic state, 113 producing deafness with PHS, 117
post-hypnotic suggestion duration, 118 productivity increased by SPC, 71
post-hypnotic suggestion in medicine, programming, ix, x, 4, 9, 29, 54, 64, 75
117 progress reports, 67
post-hypnotic suggestions (PHS), xi, 3, projection hierarchy technique, 9
4, 17, 22, 23, 35, 39, 40, 56, 61, projection technique, 9, 64
64, 65, 84, 95, 112, 113, 114, 116, prophecies, 53
118, 119 prostitution, 47
postulate I: reciprocal inhibition, 84 psychiatry, 10
postulate II: cognitive stimuli, 85 psychoanalysis, x, 3, 8, 13, 60, 101
postulate III: conditioning, 85 Psycho-Cybernetics, 66, 69, 73, 75, 76,
postulates of the theory, 83, 84, 85 79
power of belief, 26, 51, 52, 53, 55, 62 psychology, x, xi, 3, 4
power of faith, ix, 18, 53 psychoses, 8, 46
power of the mind, 63, 66 psychosomatic, 8, 9
power of the placebo, ix, 18, 52, 55 psychotherapy, 14
power of thoughts, 62 psychotic symptoms 46
power of words, 27, 28, 48, 62 psychotic, 11, 46, 47, 48
power to change, 58 public speaking, 70
power to choose, 54 punishment-reward technique, 21, 64
power to tap into the subconscious, 59
powers of persuasion, 18, 68
powers of religions’ prophets, 53
prayer, 53, 57, 60
pre-induction talk, 102, 103, 104
Index 143
Q religion, 4, 5, 26, 53, 54

religious belief, 54
quizzes following SQ3R technique, 67 religious experience, 54
religious guidelines, 53
religious phenomena, 53
R religious prophecies, 53
remedial programs, insufficiency of, 66
radiation treatment for cancer, 57, 58, reprogramming, ix, 22, 29
59 response expectancy, 3, 30-33, 52
rapid deep breathing technique, 64 responsiveness to suggestions, 104
reading comprehension, 73 responsiveness to hypnotic induction,
recall of meaningful material, 110 103
recall of nonsense material, 110 responsiveness to suggestion, 12, 13,
receptive mood for hypnosis, 37 17, 19, 24, 30, 32, 33, 36, 41, 42,
reciprocal inhibition of antagonistic 46, 47, 84, 91, 98, 104, 110-112,
reactions, 88 119
reciprocal inhibition postulate, 92 restructuring of the hierarchy of
reciprocal inhibition, 20, 84 automatic behavior, 29
reciprocal inhibitory response, 92 reversal learning, 95
reconditioning approach in hypnosis, risk of failing, 66
12 robots, lack of free will, 29
recovery and prayer, 60 role-playing theories, 103
recovery from breast cancer, 59
recovery rate for behavior (Wolpian)
therapy, 13 S
recovery rate for hypnotherapy, 13
recovery rate from psychoanalysis, 13 salesmen’s hypnotic capabilities, 18,
reduction of bad habits with SPC, 77 91
reduction of blood pressure with SPC, salivation response in hypnosis
76 experiments, 40, 62
reduction of pain with PHS, 117 salivation via suggestion, 106, 118
reeducating patients, 9 schizophrenia, 4, 5, 45, 46, 47, 49, 81
reframing, 22 school children behavior disorders, 9
reinforcement and learning, 87, 94 school dropout rates, 69
rejection of hypnosis, 7 school stress, 66
relaxation, 23, 27, 28, 30, 36, 37, 41, school success, 69, 78
62, 66, 67, 68, 74, 75, 76, 78, 79 scripts, 21
relaxation response via suggestion, 108 secretion of pepsin via suggestion, 107,
relaxation suggestions, 28, 41, 100 110
144 Index
selective attention and Hilgard’s sleep problems, 75, 79

theory, 27, 28 sleep suggestions, 28, 41, 91, 92, 97,
self hypnosis, 26, 27, 55, 61, 65, 66 100
self programmed control, x, 22, 56, 61, smoking cessation, 21, 59, 70, 72, 73,
65, 66, 77-79 76, 78
self-actualization, x, 4, 65, 81 Sociocognitive theory, 3, 19, 23, 28,
self-confidence, 15, 71-75 30, 32
self-control increased via hypnosis, sociopathic personality disorder, 117
104 sociopathic personality disturbance, 9
self-efficacy, x, 4, 66-70, 81 sodium pentothal, 112
self-hypnosis, , 95 104 SPC, x, 4, 9, 22, 48, 57, 58, 61, 62, 63,
self-image, 10, 15, 47, 59, 64, 70, 73 65-71, 74-79, 81
self-pity, 78 speech and Pavlov, 87
self-rating of goals, 72 spirit, mind and body, 58
self-reinforcement of the post-hypnotic spiritual faith healing approach, 60
response, 116 spontaneous abortions treated with
self-worth improved via hypnosis, 59 hypnosis, 8
sensory deprivation studies, 111 spontaneous amnesia after hypnosis,
sensory deprivation, 18, 35, 38, 91 109
sentence as a conditioning device, 15, spontaneous recovery in learning, 35
49, 112, 114 spontaneous trance in performing PHS,
series of suggestions as hypnotic 118
induction, 17, 20, 21, 26, 61, 62, SQ3R study technique, 68
64 s-s contiguity conditioning, 86
sets as cognitive stimuli, 85 standard 15 minute hypnotic induction,
sex, 72, 73, 85 41
sexual promiscuity, 9, 116 Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale,
sexual response, 85 37, 38
short and long range goals achieved via state vs. non-state issue, 24
SPC, 73 stimulation of the erogenous zones, 85
shortcomings of the S-R position, 86 stimulus dominance hierarchy, 17, 19,
sign-sign conditioning, 112, 114 20, 25, 26, 27, 29, 33, 45, 84, 85
silver lining attitude, 22 87, 93, 106, 107, 111
similarities of the theory to others, 19- strength of belief, 60
23, 25-28, 30-33 Stress Control Biofeedback Card, 67,
similarity of SPC and NLP, x 68, 74
skeptical attitude and hypnosis, 105 stress diseases, 55
skepticism, 93, 94, 104, 105 stress, 46, 55, 59, 66, 71
Skinner, B.F., 91 stroke, 55
Index 145
students helped by SPC, 65-70 supernatural explanations in religion,

students’ reduction in habits of excess, 53
70, 77 support of the theory, 109
students teaching SPC to others, 79 suppression of contradictory stimuli by
study skills, 66, 69 inhibitory set, 106
study techniques, 67 sweets controlled via SPC, 74
subconscious behavior, ix, 28, 29, 54, symbolic thought processes
59 suppressed, 92
subjects’ expectation of hypnosis, 102 symptom substitution, 9, 11
substance abuse reduced via SPC, 69 symptom removal, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 46,
subtle sensory reinforcement as aid to 47
hypnosis, 35, 36, 62
success rate of hypnotherapy, x, 3, 9,
13, 116 T
suggested amnesia, 108
suggested anesthesia, 108 task motivating instructions (TMI), 41
suggested blindness, 108 taste buds restored, 58
suggested paralysis, 108 t-cells released via placebo, 51
suggested response, 93 teaching SPC, 79
suggestibility test, 104 temper control via SPC, 78, 79
suggestibility, 91, 98, 103, 105, 111, temperature biofeedback, 36, 37, 67
112 tension control via SPC, 72, 73, 78, 79
suggestion definition, 89 testicular cancer cured via hypnosis, 59
suggestion evokes cognitive stimulus, testimonials of SPC success, 67
106, 110 test-taking capabilities, 66
suggestion evokes inhibitory set, 90, test-taking techniques, 69
106 The Secret, 5
suggestions in increasing order of the theory of hypnosis, v, ix, x, xi, 3, 4,
difficulty, 100 13, 14, 17-28, 30-39, 41, 48, 49,
suggestion of pepsin secretion, 110 50, 53, 55, 61, 62, 63, 64, 66, 81,
suggestion to salivate, 110 83, 91
suggestion, 91, 93 therapeutic change via hypnosis, 116
suggestion as blocking, 90 therapists’ hypnotic capabilities, 14,
suggestions of relaxation not necessary 30, 91
for hypnosis, 28, 41 thermal biofeedback, 37, 67
suggestions of relaxation, 92 thinking clearly again via SPC, 74
suggestions of sleep not necessary for thought evokes responses, 87
hypnosis, 28, 41 thoughts as a cognitive stimuli, 85
suicide prevention via hypnosis, 9 threat of failure eliminated via SPC, 73
146 Index
traditional hypnosis, 59 W
trance suggestions, 91
trance, 22, 24, 25, 91, 92 waking state, 25, 33, 36, 90, 112
transference, 101, 102 waking suggestions, 13, 88, 90, 91, 96,
trustworthiness and belief, 68 100, 101, 117
Type A behavior, 55 easy of execution prior to hypnotic
unconditioned response (UCR), 83, 92 induction, 99
unconditioned stimulus (USC), 83, 92 waking suggestions of:
allergic dermatitis, 88
analgesics, 88
U automatic changes, 88
color blindness, 88
UCLA, 70 deafness, 88
unconscious differentiated from heart acceleration, 88
subconscious, 28 heart deceleration, 88
uncontrolled hyper-responsive state, 48 salivation, 88
uncontrolled hypersuggestibility, 45, water metabolism controlled via
46 hypnosis, 107
unhealthy habits, 78 weight control, 70, 72, 74, 76
Weitzenhoffer, A. M., 103, 105, 107,
111, 112, 118
V welfare reform via SPC, 4, 65, 70, 81
Willoughby test, 72, 76
values as cognitive stimuli, 85 willpower, 26, 29, 55, 59
variations of hypnosis, 18 winning attitude via SPC, 74
verbal persuasion and self-efficacy, 4, Wolpe, J., 9, 12, 13, 88, 89
67, 68, 69 Wolpe’s desensitization technique, 9
visual hallucination, 109 words as conditioned stimuli, 87
visual hyperacuity, 108 work attitude improved via SPC, 73
visualization techniques, 22, 57, 59, 64 work capacity increased via SPC, 108
vocabulary skill increased via PHS, work efficiency increased via SPC, 74
118 work incentive programs, 70
voice of the hypnotist, 40 work morale and SPC, 71
voodoo, 52 work performance and SPC, 74
work pressure reduced via SPC, 73
Index 147
work problems reduced via SPC, 73, X

74, 76
work stress reduced via SPC, 74 x-rays, 60

Understanding Hypnosis - Theory, Scope and Potential (PDFDrive) PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Understanding Hypnosis - Theory, Scope and Potential (PDFDrive) PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNDERSTANDING HYPNOSIS:

THEORY, SCOPE AND POTENTIAL

Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

NOTICE TO THE READER

Independent verification should be sought for any data, advice or recommendations

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOGING-IN-PUBLICATION DATA

Published by Nova Science Publishers, Inc. 

Chapter 10 The Development of Self-Programmed Control and Its

John Steinbacher, CEO

Much of this book comes from my 1969 UCLA Ph.D. dissertation in

which presents ways of eliminating many of the methodological shortcomings of

tool, and to provide a rational explanation for its hard-to-believe therapeutic

OVERVIEW OF RECENT LITERATURE

THREE LARGE SCALE STUDIES

difficult. (There is no reason, however, why this hierarchy approach cannot be

CURRENT METHOD OF USING HYPNOSIS

Psychiatric hypnotherapy, as practiced today by the leading practitioners in

THE AHISTORICAL VS. THE

A COMMENT ON THE DANGERS ASCRIBED TO HYPNOSIS

Also, although Barrios’ [1973a] study indicated that conditioning could be

COMPARISON WITH PSYCHOANALYSIS

In Wolpe’s comparison of his and the psychoanalytic approaches (Wolpe,

THE NEED FOR A RATIONAL EXPLANATION

AN EXPLANATION BASED ON PRINCIPLES OF CONDITIONING

Now, according to principles of high-order conditioning we know that by

The command of the hypnotist, in correspondence with the general law,

As an illustration, let us say we wanted to change a patient’s self-image from

now become permanent by means of self-reinforcement, just as his old

OVERVIEW OF MY THEORY OF HYPNOSIS ∗

In the theory (Barrios, 2001) a hypnotic induction is defined as the giving of a

COMPARISON WITH OTHER THEORIES

Both perspectives discuss the importance of the part played by individual

to the 'reciprocal inhibition' or 'stimulus dominance hierarchy' postulate is that the

several visualization techniques for facilitating reprogramming, in the self-

Erickson's appreciation of the crucial role of response sets is further revealed

receptive to an experience of other patterns of association and modes of mental

Relative Importance of Hypnotic Inductions

State vs. Non-State

induction. In this sense there is no difference between states. But if we go on an

The Best Way to Measure Hypnotizability

A COMPARISON OF THE THEORY WITH HILGARD'S

(2) 'The stress on muscular relaxation, familiar in hypnotic inductions assists

INVOLUNTARY BEHAVIOR AND THE SUBCONSCIOUS

“The subconscious, or subconscious behavior, can be defined as behavior

the behavior is so automatic that it becomes difficult to change.” (Barrios, 2002,

A COMPARISON WITH THE RESPONSE SET AND RESPONSE

With respect to a particular speaker, the behavior of the listener is also a

There are three kinds of cognitions that ought to affect response

suggestions to which subjects are able to respond successfully is in turn a

SUMMARY OF THE ABOVE SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES

SUPPORT FOR THE THEORY

FURTHER SUPPORT FOR THE THEORY

(1) studies on the use of subtle sensory reinforcement;

Subtle Reinforcement Studies

Biofeedback can be defined as the use of special devices to amplify automatic

Sensory Deprivation Studies

Corollary 9 following Hypothesis V of the theory states that 'suggestibility

should be mentioned that still another often referred to shortcoming was

induced because of S's responsiveness to a set of test suggestions given after S is

HOW THE THEORY LEADS TO FURTHER

It is felt that the many cases of psychotic breakdowns reported as resulting

AN EXPLANATION AND POSSIBLE

A POSSIBLE EXPLANATION AND

Published by Nova Science Publishers, Inc.