Research Methods paper (Literature Review & State of problem)

AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL HYPNOSIS NOVEMBER 2017 | VOLUME 42 | PAGE 34

BACK TO

CONTENTS

Hypnosis defined: A resource therapy perspective

– Gordon Emmerson, PhD Victoria University, Melbourne Australia

Keywords: Definitions of Hypnosis, Resource Therapy

Hypnosis�is�more�than�a�‘procedure’,�as�defined�by�the�American� Psychological�Association�in�1993,�or�a�‘process’,�as�defined�by�Kihlstrom� in�1985.��While�the�2015�APA�‘state�of�consciousness’�definition�was� a�definite�step�forward,�literature�on�the�nature�of�hypnosis�has�been� vague�for�almost�two�hundred�years,�and�continues�to�be.��Definitions� of�hypnosis,�such�as�‘a�state�of�consciousness’,�are�akin�to�defining�fire� as�‘hot’,�without�elucidating�exactly�what�it�is.��The�last�40�years�has� seen�the�development�of�a�number�of�parts�therapies,�such�as�Ego�State� Therapy,�Parts�Therapy,�and�Resource�Therapy.��They�have�provided�a� deeper�dimension�to�our�understanding�of�personality.�As�a�contributor� to�Ego�State�Therapy�and�as�the�originator�of�Resource�Therapy,�my� work�with�parts�has�provided�a�perspective�on�what�exactly�brings�about� a�state�of�hypnosis,�and�about�its�fundamental�nature.�Hypnosis�is�not� an�‘altered�state’�and�is�not�a�‘therapeutic�technique�or�process’,�but�is� the�condition�that�results�when�a�single�state�of�consciousness�has�an� increased�awareness,�as�other�states�have�reduced�awareness.�Hypnotic� depth�aligns�directly�with�the�level�of�awareness�that�is�maintained� by�other�states.�Resource�Therapy�concepts�are�used�in�this�paper�to� illustrate�the�nature�of�hypnosis�and�hypnotic�induction.

AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL HYPNOSIS NOVEMBER 2017 | VOLUME 42 | PAGE 35

BACK TO

CONTENTS

Hypnosis Defined: A Resource Therapy Perspective

Since�Braid�first�coined�the�term,�‘Hypnosis’,� almost�200�years�ago,�there�have�been�literally� hundreds�of�attempts�to�define�it,�many�of� which�bear�little�resemblance�to�one�another.� Some�of�the�definitions�have�presented�accurate� features�of�hypnosis,�but�the�one�unfortunate� commonality,�in�the�long�line�of�attempts�to� define�and�describe�it,�is�that�the�definitions�have� been�cursory,�with�each�indicating�aspects�of� hypnosis,�rather�than�actually�telling�what�it�is,� and�explaining�why�it�holds�the�distinctions�it� does.�Hypnosis�is�important�and�there�is�value� in�having�a�more�thorough�and�thoughtful� understanding�of�its�nature.

Preceding Definitions of Hypnosis

Hypnosis was revealed, not invented, so getting its current name was merely a new way to describe a condition that had been known about for century’s. The Scottish physician who named it, James Braid, also made the first attempt to define it,

By�the�term�“Neuro-Hypnotism,”�then,�is�to�be� understood�“nervous�sleep,”�[…]�a�peculiar�state�of�the� nervous�system,�induced�by�a�fixed�and�abstracted� attention�of�the�mental�and�visual�eye,�on�one�object,� not�of�an�exciting�nature.�(Braid,�1843)

Freud, of course, moved away from hypnosis after his attempted therapeutic use of it. However, his views concerning hypnosis evolved over the years. In 1889 (1889/1966, p. 93) he stated that, “hypnosis, when�it�is�most�completely�successful,�is�nothing�other� than�ordinary�sleep…,” while in 1921 he indicated that the only similarity between hypnosis and sleep was a “withdrawal�of�interest�from�the�external�world” (Freud, 1921, p.127).

Probably the most well-known hypnotherapist of the 20th century, Milton Erickson said of hypnosis:

It�is�a�state�of�consciousness�–not�unconsciousness� or�sleep–�a�state�of�consciousness�or�awareness�in� which�there�is�a�marked�receptiveness�to�ideas�and� understandings�and�an�increased�willingness�to� respond�either�positively�or�negatively�to�those�ideas� (Rossi,�1980,�p.�174).

Erickson’s definition of hypnosis was accurate, although he, like others, merely described aspects of the condition. He did not indicate the components of hypnosis, or exactly how or why it can work as an adjunct to foster change.

In 2015, the APA Division 30 Definition of Hypnosis changed from their imprecise 1993 ‘procedure’ (Kirsch, 1994, p. 143) definition to a much better definition. This new definition has been reviewed positively and negatively (Barabasz, A.F., & Barabasz, M., 2015; Steven et al., 2015). The 2015 APS definition presents hypnosis as a:

…state�of�consciousness�involving�focused�attention� and�reduced�peripheral�awareness�characterized�by� an�enhanced�capacity�for�response�to�suggestion”� (Elkins�et�al.,�2015,�p.�6).�

This definition was most likely based on an earlier definition by Spiegel, H., & Spiegel, D. (1987) where they presented hypnosis as:

…essentially�a�psychophysiological�state�of�aroused,� attentive,�receptive�focal�concentration�with�a� corresponding�diminution�in�peripheral�awareness� (p.�34).�

These last two definitions are quite accurate and some of the best presented to date, although they do little to elucidate the exact nature and causes of hypnosis.

Gaining the Perspective to Understand Hypnosis

The lack of common language relating to the component parts of hypnosis is one of the problems that has kept us from better understanding it. Therefore, it is important to learn some Resource Therapy terms that relate directly to the nature and use of hypnosis.

Resource Therapy

Resource Therapy (RT) (Emmerson, 2014a), like Parts Therapy (Hunter, 2005) and Ego State Therapy (Watkins, J., & Watkins, H., 1997), is a parts therapy based on the concept that the personality is not a homogenous whole, but is composed of parts. These parts are called Resource States, as when they are non-pathological, these states are our resources.

A childlike Resource State might help us enjoy play or a rainbow, while an intellectual Resource State might help with business planning. A pathological Resource State might conduct OCD behaviour, and a normal, healthy Resource State might regret that behaviour and wish it did not happen.

AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL HYPNOSIS NOVEMBER 2017 | VOLUME 42 | PAGE 36

BACK TO

CONTENTS

The goal of RT is to move pathological states into a healthy condition. RT is distinguished from other parts therapies both theoretically, and in that it has 8 specific pathological diagnostic categories, each with a structured regimen of Actions designed to help move the pathological state to a state of normality. For the purposes of this paper we only need to become aware of the RT terms, Resource State, Conscious, Surface State, and Underlying State.

Our Resource States, personality parts, were developed through performing the repetition of a coping skill. The over and over again practice of performing various coping skills creates our states with axon and dendrite growth and trained synaptic firings. A person might get a Resource State that is good at playing basketball by playing the sport over and over again. Clumsy procedures become agile and commonplace, and when the person wants to play the sport it would be important to play with the Resource State that learned it, not with an intellectual state or an emotionally reactive state.

At any time of awareness one Resource State is holding the conscious. Therefore, ‘Conscious’ is a key term in RT theory. While one Resource State holds the conscious the other states are either observing, Surface States, or dissociated from the Conscious State, Underlying States. These states can easily change their positions, with a different state becoming the Conscious State, or with a switch of position between Surface and Underlying States.

Surface States are observers of the current Conscious State. Any one of them will have some degree of recall following the interactions of the Conscious Resource State. The Underlying States will have no recall, as they are dissociated from the Conscious State. An example of a Conscious State becoming an Underlying State is the person who has just driven a few minutes then has no memory of driving. The new Conscious Resource State has no communication with the state that had been Conscious, and has become Underlying and dissociated from it.

A metaphor can illustrate these Resource State designations. There is a boat in water that is only large enough to hold a single person. That person who is in the boat and controlling it represents the single Resource State that holds the Conscious during any time of awareness. There are swimmers around the boat, watching the person in the boat. These observers are the current Surface States. They can observe and call out to the Conscious State, with thoughts like, ‘Don’t forget to check the meter for the car’, or ‘You need to pick up some bread on the way

home’. Sometimes it is difficult for the Conscious State to concentrate due to all the Surface States calling out. There are also some scuba divers under water who cannot see or hear the person in the boat. These scuba divers are the Underlying States.

A Conscious State trying to rest may be disturbed by a Surface State that believes work needs to be done. At the same time another Surface State may be aware of the time because something needs to be done at a certain time. This is an example of a normal, non- hypnotic Resource State configuration. An Underlying State may even come to the surface with unresolved emotion, and the person may be unaware of where these emotions came from.

It is easy to change the Conscious State. Parents learn to talk with children in a way that when a tired and upset state is holding the Conscious, the parent may start telling the child about a time at the beach to bring to the Conscious a state that had a good time there. Suddenly the child changes Conscious States from the state that was upset to the one that enjoyed the time at the beach. This creates an easier interaction for the parent.

All hypnotic inductions provide a way to narrow focus; that is to maintain one state in the Conscious while more and more Surface States become Underlying States. The narrowing of focus results in thoughts being less scattered. There are fewer Surface States that are calling out to the Conscious State with their own thoughts.

During a light or medium state of hypnosis there will continue to be minimal Surface States observing the Conscious State, with the occasional thought, like, “Is this working?” or, “This is an interesting feeling.” Often this level of hypnosis is sufficient for therapeutic work.

A deep, or somnambulistic, level of hypnosis is one when only the Conscious State is aware, with all the other states being Underlying and dissociated from the Conscious State. If the state that holds the conscious during deep hypnosis assumes an Underlying State condition when the client returns to multiple Surface State awareness (comes out of hypnosis), then there will be no memory by the client of what was said during hypnosis.

Hypnosis Defined

Hypnosis occurs when a single Conscious State becomes more aware, with fewer and less active Surface States observing and interacting. The level of hypnosis corresponds directly with both the lack of other states that are still Surface and with their level

AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL HYPNOSIS NOVEMBER 2017 | VOLUME 42 | PAGE 37

BACK TO

CONTENTS

of awareness. During the deepest level of hypnosis, all other Resource States become Underlying and dissociated from the Conscious State, with no state being a Surface State.

Spontaneous Hypnosis

Spontaneous hypnosis (Barabasz, A. F., & Barabasz, M., 2015) can occur any time, without a formalised induction, when one state dominates the Conscious. This can be at a time of high or low arousal. A weight lifter preparing to lift a weight may breathe and focus intently and singularly within the state that is lifting the weight. At this time the weightlifter is in a state of hypnosis, while Surface States are not present and interfering with the lift. A person deep in tears, truly feeling the emotion, is also in a state of hypnosis, as the emotional state is dominating the Conscious. An athlete focusing intently within a single Resource State as other Surface States become underlying is experiencing spontaneous hypnosis. Later comments may be, ‘I was in a zone,’ ‘Everything just appeared like it slowed down. I could see everything so clearly,’ or ‘I just ran and became unaware of anything else.’

Just to clarify more, there can be only one Conscious State at any time, whether a person is hypnotised or not. During a non-hypnotic state there are a number of Surface States that observe and that can comment to the Conscious State with their ideas.

A person deciding whether or not to have a dessert will have one Conscious State considering the decision, and this state can hear from a number of Surface States, ‘Go ahead. It’s Friday,’ ‘You really shouldn’t’, ‘You think too much. Just do it.’ A normal waking state is like a committee meeting on a bus, with the Conscious State sitting in the driver’s seat able to hear all the passengers who are awake. Hypnosis occurs as more and more passengers nod off to sleep, leaving the bus driver in quiet.

Myths

It is a myth that hypnosis is sleep. During hypnosis there is always a Resource State conscious. A somnambulistic state is experienced when a state that is normally an Underlying Resource State holds the conscious during a time when no other state is Surface. At the later time a Conscious State may have no synaptic connections with the state that was Conscious during hypnosis. The client will not have an ability to recall the procedure, therefore it appears as though the client was asleep, although there was no sleep. The Underlying state was completely conscious during the procedure.

It is a myth that hypnosis is an altered state. Hypnosis is not an altered state, but a single state that is dominating the Conscious. It would be more accurate to say that hypnosis is an altered condition. It is a condition that has been altered from one Conscious State holding the Conscious with a number of Surface States observing and potentially interacting, to a condition where there is one Conscious State and fewer or no Surface States.

Communication between Resource States

Resource States communicate with each other through trained synaptic connections. Some states communicate often with each other, while others cannot communicate with each other at all due to a lack of axon-dendrite synaptic connections. When two states become accustomed to communicating often, the synaptic connections between them are trained to fire better.

When two Resource States stop communicating with each other the synaptic connections between them atrophies over time, and it becomes difficult or impossible for information to pass from one to the other. That is why it is difficult to remember events in childhood, such as our third birthday. Hypnotic regression may bring out the state that experienced the third birthday and that state may have detailed memories of events, but the normally Surface Adult states have stopped communicating often with that state, so the synaptic connections between those states have atrophied.

DID (Multiple Personality) is caused by childhood states refusing to revisit chronic trauma as a coping skill. Not thinking about what went on the night before can help children live through chronic trauma, but it can also allow the connections between states to atrophy at a time when they would normally be forming.

More on Conscious, Surface and Underlying States

While any state can become Underlying (not currently available to the Conscious), some states are almost constantly Underlying. It is these states that are predominately Underlying that, when Conscious during hypnosis, give the appearance of the deepest hypnotic trance. When a normally Surface State achieves a deep hypnotic trance the client will easily have access to the memory of the trance, even when the trance was very deep, i.e., all other Surface States were dissociated and Underlying. This is the case because our normal Surface States communicate well with each other. They have good synaptic connections between them because they are used often, as communication among Surface States is common.

AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL HYPNOSIS NOVEMBER 2017 | VOLUME 42 | PAGE 38

BACK TO

CONTENTS

It is common for Surface States to become Underlying. The woman who came home at night and put her keys away, then cannot remember where she put them the next morning is an example of this. The state that was Conscious when the keys were put away has become Underlying; not Conscious and not Surface. The morning Conscious State has no access to the memory of where the keys were put. This person may mentally retrace her steps from the night before and move that Underlying State, with the knowledge of where the keys are, to the Surface, “Oh, I remember. I laid them on the shelf.”

When a person studies for an exam that person will do better on the exam if the state that was Conscious during study is also Conscious while taking the exam. While studying, one Resource State will hold the Conscious, some other Resource States will be Surface States, and all other states will be Underlying.

Upon taking the exam, if the person draws a total blank, then the exam Conscious State was Underlying during study. If the exam Conscious State can remember some things, but realises that more was learned than can be remembered, then that exam Conscious State was a Surface State during the study time. When the same Resource State that was Conscious during study is the Conscious State during the exam, a maximum recall will be possible.

Implications for Inductions

Better understanding that a state of hypnosis relates directly to the dominance of one state in the conscious can assist therapists to ensure that clients are better able to achieve a therapeutic state of trance, when required. Inductions will work best when the phraseology they contain speaks to a single Resource State.

For example, a statement asking a client to experience a sensation or a feeling followed by a statement asking the client to think about something will be counterproductive. Resource States that are good at experiencing a sensation are most normally not intellectual, thinking states. Therefore, this is an example of engaging with two separate Resource States. This will result in maintaining at least these two states at a Surface Level. Actually, each time one hears a question asked of it, it will probably become the Conscious State, forcing the other state to a Surface position.

Hypnotic inductions should be administered in a way that speaks only to a single state. One way of doing this is to locate with the client a prominent time a state has held the Conscious, and vivify that time

in great detail, thus insuring that that single state is holding the Conscious.

Getting a name for a state and calling it by that name increases the depth of hypnosis, as it allows the state that is being interacted with to more fully comprehend that it is the state that is being spoken with. Continuing to use a state name further indicates to any other Surface States that are observing that they are not being spoken to, so they do not need to be ready to assume the Conscious. This allows them to more easily sink into an Underlying State status.

Once a client achieves a hypnotic condition the therapist can easily ask to speak with a different state. It may seem unusual at first, but getting a name for each state you speak with both helps hold it in the Conscious and allows an easy return to that Resource State at a later time. Clients also appreciate learning their resources, and getting a name for them.

One of the Resource Therapy Actions that helps to bring clients into a therapeutic condition is called Vivify Specific. It not only creates a hypnotic condition, but it ensures that a state that needs to change is in the Conscious. Too often therapists work directly with states that are reporting the unwanted emotions or unwanted behaviours of other states. It is much better for a therapist to Vivify a time that was problematic for the client in order to ensure that the state that needs help can be spoken with directly.

Addiction and Hypnosis

Addictions may be physical, psychological, or a combination of both. Psychological addictions are an escape from the emotions of an Underlying Resource State when another Resource State takes over the conscious and dominates it, often preventing other states from having input. This means that psychologically addictive behaviour is behaviour that is carried out during a level of hypnotic trance. This is a self-medicating trance created by a Resource State that believes it is helping.

This ‘helping’, addictive behaviour state (termed Retro Avoiding in Resource Therapy), while Conscious, dominates the personality in such a way that other states are no longer Surface. The person eating will report, ‘I did not even think about it. I just ate’. The person gambling may lose track of time while being highly focused as the Resource State that is gambling holds the Conscious.

Understanding the dynamic of addiction and hypnosis can be informing to therapists. Because a Retro Avoiding Resource State that carries out addictive

AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL HYPNOSIS NOVEMBER 2017 | VOLUME 42 | PAGE 39

BACK TO

CONTENTS

and OCD behaviour believes it is helping, it will resist attempts to stop the behaviour (Emmerson, 2014b). The best way to stop addictive behaviour is to bring the Retro Avoiding State into the Conscious and show it appreciation for helping (not for the behaviour), and find another way it can help in the future.

When a Resource State believes it is not liked or understood it becomes intransigent, but if it feels understood and appreciated it becomes much more cooperative. Resource Therapy provides a prescribed regimen of actions to help a Retro Avoiding State change its behaviour so it can still help, but in a preferred way (Emmerson, 2014a, 2015).

Concluding Remarks

Understanding hypnosis gives clarity on how it can foster change. Knowing about the changing dynamics during hypnosis among the Conscious State, the Surface States, and the Underlying States can assist therapists in a number of ways.

1. Hypnotic Inductions can become more precise and powerful when therapists understand the value of speaking only to a single state during an induction procedure.

2. Work with hypnotised clients can be based on understanding that at any one time a single Resource State is being spoken with, and other states can be called to replace that state in the Conscious.

3. Work with hypnotised clients can help ensure that the trance state is maintained, by getting a reference name for that Conscious State, such as ‘Work’, ‘Rest,’ or ‘Little’. The selection of name should be the result of a negotiation with the state.

4. Other therapeutic work can be enhanced by better understanding spontaneous hypnosis and how it relates to pathologies such as addiction.

5. Therapists can better ensure they refrain from inappropriately making suggestions to memory during any hypnotic state, induced or spontaneous, as they will better understand precisely when a client is experiencing a trance state.

Therapists will also have a greater potential to develop their own creative techniques as they learn that hypnosis and hypnotic depth relate directly to the number and level of Surface States. Readers interested in Resource Therapy techniques can refer to one of the RT books (Emmerson, 2015; Emmerson, 2014a; Emmerson 2014b; Arif, 2014), or to the website, ResourceTherapyInternational.com.

References

Arif, Antonius (2014). Resource Therapy (Indonesian), Jakarta: Spasi Media.

Barabasz, A. F., & Barabasz, M. (2015). The new APS definition of hypnosis: Spontaneous Hypnosis MIA. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 57(4), 459-463.

Braid, J., (1843). Neurypnology or the Rationale of Nervous Sleep Considered in Relation with Animal Magnetism. John Churchill, Soho; Adam & Charles Black, Edinbourgh.

Elkins, G. R., Barabasz, A., Council, J. R., & Spiegel, D. (2015). Advancing research and practice: the revised APA Division 30 definition of hypnosis. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 63, 1–9.

Emmerson, Gordon (2003, 2007, 2010). Ego state therapy. Carmarthen, Wales: Crown House Publishing.

Emmerson, Gordon (2014a). Resource Therapy. Blackwood, Australia: Old Golden Point Press.

Emmerson, Gordon (2014b). Resource Therapy Primer. Blackwood, Australia: Old Golden Point Press.

Emmerson, Gordon (2015). Learn Resource Therapy. Blackwood, Australia: Old Golden Point Press.

Freud, S. (1921/1955). In J. Strachey (Ed. and Trans.), The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 18, pp. 65-143). London: Hogarth Press (Original work published in 1921).

Hunter, Roy (2005). Hypnosis for Inner Conflict resolution: Including parts therapy. Carmarthen, Wales: Crown House Publishing.

Kihlstrom, J. F. (1985). Hypnosis. Annual Review of Psychology, 36, 385–418.

Kirsch, I. (1994). Defining hypnosis: A core of agreement in the apple of discord. Contemporary Hypnosis, 11, 160–162.

Lynn, S. J., Matthews, A., & Barns, S. (2015) Hypnosis and memory: From Bernheim to the present.

Lynn, S. J., Matthews, A., & Barns, S. (2009). In: Handbook of imagination and mental simulation. Markman, Keith D. (Ed); Klein, William M. P. (Ed); Suhr, Julie A. (Ed); Publisher: Psychology Press; 2009, pp. 103-118.

Rossi, E. (1980). Innovative hypnotherapy; The collected papers of Milton H. Erickson on hypnosis. Irvington Publishers: New York.

AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL HYPNOSIS NOVEMBER 2017 | VOLUME 42 | PAGE 40

BACK TO

CONTENTS

Spiegel, H., & Spiegel, D. (1987). Trance and treatment. Clinical uses of hypnosis. Washington, C: American Psychiatric Press.

Steven Jay Lynn, Joseph P. Green, Irving Kirsch, Antonio Capafons, Scott O. Lilienfeld, Jean-Roch Laurence & Guy H. Montgomery (2015) Grounding Hypnosis in Science: The “New” APA Division 30 Definition of Hypnosis as a Step Backward, American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 57(4), 390-401.

Watkins, J. G. & Watkins, H. H. (1997). Ego states: Theory and therapy. New York: W. W. Norton& Co.

Copyright of Australian Journal of Clinical & Experimental Hypnosis is the property of Copyright Agency Limited and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.