From the beginning of the experiment certain difficulties were encountered in relation to the experiement itself as well as the subjects. These problems, however, did not tend to invalidate the experiment, but in their significances they enhanced the findings.
The room;, in which the experiment was done constituted a problem, but only for waking state subjects. In formulating the experiment it was assumed that any room migh! be used for tests in both states of awareness. It was soon realized that since all subjects could not be tested in the hypnotic state, some rooms would be used only for waking subjects, especially since such subjects would be tested in various locations. However, the opportunity did arise frequently to test hypnotic state subjects in both waking and Irance states in rooms where only waking state subjects had first been tested. This served as an actual control, since only in certain regards to be discussed immediately were rooms a signifi- This special significance of rooms occurred only in relation to waking state subjects. All rooms had to be "reasonable" to them. When a room such as a library with all walls completely covered from floor to ceiling with bookshelves was used as the experimental room, waking state subjects, wondering and un- believing in their attitude toward the author's experimental sincerity, rejected the task as absurd. They simply could not believe that the experimenter was serious in his request, and special effort and persuasion had io be used to secure even a haif-hearted response from them. Yet (he hypnotic state subjects in a deep somnambulistic trance could be taken into such a room for the first ex- perimental testing and they would indicate as a suitable space for hanging the suggested picture an area above and to the rear of the reality object, even if it were a person leaning against a floor-to-ceil ing bookshelf, or a snapshot actually placed on the bookshelf, or a bowl of fruit placed on the floor at the base of the bookshelf. The only effect of such a floor placing was to cause the selection of a •'wall" area at the subjects'eye level. Yet these same somnambulistic subjects would later in the waking state show the (ypicai waking state behavior to such a room. These findings in themselves are of definite significance in confirming the experimental findings.
In relation to the subjects themselves the difficulties centered around two special types of subjects, (I) the argumentative, and (2) the overly conscientious. There were relatively few of these. and they enhanced rather than detracted from the experimental findings.
The argumentative subjects were those who took issue with both the experi- mental room and the experimental task. They were all waking state subjects, and they discredited the wall sapce and the room in relation to the picture or the picture in relation to the room size, the wall space, the use of the room, or the suitability of the pictures themselves. The task itself, as a mere //' proposition.
66 Nature of Hypnosis & Suggestion was completely disregarded and rejected. They wished to argue and to debate questions of "fittingness." Yet some of these subjects, who had to be rejected for this experiment because of their critical waking altitude, were subsequently used in other hypnotic work, and the excellence of their hypnotic beha\ior suggested that it would be of interest to test them for this experiment in the somnambulistic state. Fortunately 18 such subjects were used and tested, ome by the author, some by his assistants. In the somnambulistic state, regardle; of their previous adverse waking state behavior, they gave the typical hypnotic responses. Then later, when tested in rooms with which they could not take exception, they gave typical waking state responses, except that invariably they took issue with the hanging of at least one or two of the hypothetical pictures usually the picture of the bowl of fruit or of the snapshot of a bowl of fruit. The original testing room, accepted so easily in the somnambulistic state, would again be rejected in the waking state. In all instances the hypnotic testing was done at least six months after the original waking state test. Another six months later a retesting was done on 11 of these subjects, with entirely comparable results except for an omission of the originally rejected room. Three months later only seven of these subjects were available. They were tested in the waking state in the original test room. Four said in effect that because of the author's persistence they would abide by the unreasonable request and indicated possible wall areas, but two voiced general adverse criticisms of the task, and all four speculated aloud about why the experimenter had ever considered choosing so unsuitable a room. The other three summarily rejected Ihe task and reminded the author that they had once, many months before, rejected that room. These 18 subjects were included in the experimental findings for hypnotic state subjects but were not included among the waking state subjects because of their restive and selective attitudes toward the task and the special care needed to secure waking state responses
The over-conscientious subjects were troublesome in one or the olher or both states of awareness. In the wakine state they manifested much uncertainty, debated the suitability of the room, of the picture, of the wall space, of the v ntsge point for the viewer, the lighting effects, and changed their minds repeatedly for different reasons. Hence they were not considered suitable s waking state subjects. They were not accepting the experimental task but merely creating from it another task of troublesome decisions involving other consid- erations.
Thirteen of these subjects were trained to develop somnambulistic trances. However, even in the trance state their personality attributes interfered. There was no ready simple compliance with the task. Forexample, when asked where the picture of the person present should be placed (standing beside a desk in the middle of the room), they would view him from various points of view, would perhaps ask him to change his position, or even move the desk in order to view him differently. Then they would reconsider the problem in relationship to his immediate spatial surroundings, or in relationship to the spatial relations of the
Further Experiments 67
desk beside which he had originally been standing, and then perhaps they would position the picture on the wall lo which the desk had been pushed. Also, they would request that the snapshot of the person or Ihe bowl of fruit or the picture of the bowl of fruil be placed in new positions while they considered other possible positionings of the suggested picture. Briefly, even in the trance they created new tasks instead of executing the one requested.
Fortunately two of these obsessive-compulsive persons were encountered early; this led the author to seek out others deliberately and to determine if such subjects could be used. Whether in the trance or the waking state they invariably manifested a need to alter and to change the experimental situation. Hence these subjects were not included in this experiment, and such personalities were avoided as possible subjects. However, it was noted that in the trance state they very definitely tried to position the suppositional pictures in relation to the spatid relationships of the object rather than in relationship to reality wall space even though they did not abide by the experiment as formulated.
e-de scribed difficulties and picture suitability, se the sex of the subjects concerned, but women did volunteer more readily than did men, so that the distribution was about 60 percent female and 40 percent male
Another type of expected experimental difficulty that occasioned much con- cern dt first and later was found to be of little importance was the question of intercommunication between subjects. One measure of control was the sugge tion of posthypnotic amnesia for all hypnotic work. This was found to be de
signific only in relationship to the ab More females than males took issue with room choi or argued issues and were overly conscientious. Other s unimportant so far as experimental findings
led for fear of remembering what w
ha been noted above we For waking state sub|i effect upon the expenm
iuffici
upposed to be forgotten '' These iinated a un uitable for both tate
ubjet
findings Ni made and later even direct inqu
However d in umme againsl intercommur forts to effect a mi direction of attention Thus in d single location with many ubjeds there much more interesting attention-Lompelhnt. t insure that discu ion would be on work not i
lbsequent rumination o ilthough careful indirect inquiry found to be without effect ti-k
cation there were intensive et when extensne w irk w s done would be performed other and k which were undertikcn to onnected with thi experiment For example automatic writing as a possibility in both waking and hypnotic
tales distracted one large college group effectively from the minor, unimportant picture-positioning request of the author, which was regarded as an incidental measure by which the author appraised the personality for the automatic writing Thus an experimental atmosphere could be created safely. Glove anaesthesia.
68 Nature of Hypnosis & Suggestion hypnotic and nonhypnotic, was another absorbing topic- So was the question of regression as a dream experience, or as one hypnotically induced.
As an additional check on this matter of intercommunication by subjects or spontaneous recollections and ruminations by both types of subject, indirect questioning and direct casual remarks proved to be non-provocative.
Also, postex peri mental disclosure in full of the experiment served only to remind the subjects that they had actually acted as experimental waking subjects without realizing the importance of that fact at the time. Disclosure (hat there had also been hypnotic experimentation by other subjects did not serve to awaken memories of their own hypnotic participation. Even when they were told that they had participated hypnotically, they did not recall spontaneously their mem- ories. Not until hypnotic suggestions by the aulhor, and sometimes only hypnotic suggestions by his assistants who had done the work with them, were given, would there be a recollection, and then a genuine interest would be manifested. Repeatedly the strong impression was gained that when subjects were first used hypnotically, the posthypnotic amnesia suggested about their task performance would radiate to their waking state experience.
Such postexperimental hypnotic recall was induced in scores of subjects, only to have them disclose bewilderment at the peculiar positioning of the picture they had done. They could nol explain this, and if they endeavored seriously to understand, they were decidedly likely to develop a spontaneous trance. In this trance (hey would reaffirm the "rightness"" of the position. If this were definitely debated with them, they would obediently position the picture (since the trance invariably was a revivification of the original trance) on the wall in accord with arguments offered. As they would spontaneously (usually) slowly come out of the trance, they would have a waking memory of the (ranee positioning, but would offer a "corrective" waking state position. But they would still be unable to explain their trance-posilioning of the picture. "It seemed to be all right then.1' This (ended to be the most imformative reply from about 150 subjects. Other replies were to the effect that "You see things differently in the trance," "Things get changed some way," "Things look different." and, "You just hang the picture the way things look, and it's right that way." Yet more than a score of subjects who were given a full postexperimental understanding of what they had done in both trance and waking states were used in anolher test to learn what positioning they would offer for actual landscape pictures. It was promptly learned that they would have (o be tested first in the trance state, otherwise a waking state test first would be affected by their sophistication and this would carry over into a subsequent trance-state performance. But if they were tested first in the somnambulistic slate, they would give a performance comparable to their response in the original experiment. Then, tested in the waking state, they would give a response in accord with their experimental waking state performance and expressed evidence of their sophistication.
If a long, persistent, searching inquiry is made before a sophistication of the subjects, they may lose their ability lo develop a trance; or they may simply
Further Experiments 69 refuse to discuss the matter further; or they may refuse lo do any more hypnotic work. This author has lost a number of excellent subjects by questioning ihem too searchingly about hypnotic work. Some of these subjects, months or even years later, again became friendly with the author and would explain their pre- vious withdrawal of friendship as a sensing of a feeling of being unwarrantably imposed upon by the author for work performances, a feeling of being "just plain worked to death," or a feeling that the author was questioning their per sonal integrity. The reestablishment of ihc original friendship could result in further hypnotic work well done, but a searching inquiry would again promptly be rejected, sometimes again with the feeling that the author was unjustly ques tioning the earnestness and honesty of their work.
One other experimental difficulty arising not oui of ihe experiment itself as a procedure came from undue interest by some subjects in what work the ex- perimenter was doing, in relation to other work as well as to this experiment. They would seek to discover what work was being done with them, and they would question various persons whom they thought possibly might know. These subjects numbered less than 50, and they were discarded for both waking and hypnotic experimentation. This same "'busybody" trait was noted in other re- gards, and it always became apparent before the author concluded his studies with them in either state of awareness. Hence such subjects were avoided after a few experiences.
E X P E R I M E N T A L C O N T R O L S "'"' ' '""' ' Originally it was intended to use 300 subjects, of whom 100 would be capable of developing a somnambulistic trance with the eyes open and of having post- hypnotic amnesia. The experimental plan also included the use of assistant experimenters, some with knowledge of hypnosis, some without such know ledge, and some who could not recognize a somnambulistic trance state if the subjects were cued to conceal that fact and the assistant experimenter were limited in participation to the experiment istelf. Some of the assistant expen menters were actually not known to the author, but their participation was mon- itored by others who knew what should be done. Sometimes they too were monitored in their task of monitoring other assistanls. Some assistants knew that an experiment was being conducted, some did not. Some assistants thought that the actual experiment was no more than a preliminary "passing of time" in preparation for some "actual experiment." In brief every possible control was employed on experimenters, but it became evident progressively that very few controls were necessary. These were primarily that the experimental question be asked or read as a simple posing of a question in which the questioner had only the interest of knowing the subject's response, which was passively and unconcernedly accepted.
70 Nature of Hypnosis & Suggestion tirst to recognize hypnotic subjects who are capable of developing somnambu- listic slates in which various hallucinatory behaviors and post hypnotic amnesia tin develop. Experience since medical school days has progressively empha- sized to the author that personal needs are strongly correlated with the intensity of the hypnotic state development. Also the personality structure is of impor- tance. To illustrate, a school-dropout, cancer-afflicted patient with a history of poor occupational, economic, and social adjustments may develop a good som- nambulistic trance equal to that of another cancer-afflicted school-dropout pa- tient who is, however, occupationally, economically, and socially well-adjusted. They differ significantly in that the first type of patients do not continue to maintain within themselves the willingness to put forth their own effort in main- taining responsive hypnotic behavior, while these of the second type can and do maintain their own effort to benefit from therapeutic or palliative hypnotic
ugge tion
This same significant fact is true of normal experimental hypnotic subjects. Many more somnambulistic subjects develop better and deeper somnambulistic tales if some inner motivation can be given to them, a motivation experienced by the subjects as belonging to them and important to them and not recognized by the subjects as important to the operators. To illustrate, at an annual meeting of a society of anaesthesiologists at Newport Beach, California, in August, 1966, the author was asked to demonstrate various hypnotic phenomena on five subjects unknown to him personally. As the subjects came up to the foreground of the audience, the author said;
The girl in the white dress is to sit right there in the middle chair, and you sit right here in this chair, and you sit over there, and the girl in the white dress will sit right there in the middle chair, and you sit right there, and the girl in the white dress will sit right there in the middle chair, and you sit down own softly, gently, and you in the white dress just sit doing nothing. All you need to do is just sit there doing nothing, you do not need to see, to hear, not anything at all, just sit right there doing nothing at all, just sitting right there, and now I will go about my work while all of you sit in your chairs, even as the girl in the white dress sits in her chair, doing nothing at all until I ask her, and then she will do whatever needs to be done! And so will all of you
Further Experiments . 71 author wen! about '"my work."' And the girl in the white dress, instructed to sit in the chair doing nothing, not needing to hear or see or do anything at all but sit in the chair until told otherwise, was employed without further delay to