What is Hypnosis?
Woo Woo or Not?
There is more to hypnosis than swinging watches, swirling discs, and flickering candles.
Nowadays, it is commonly associated with advertising (Kaplan, 2007), crime investigation (McConkey & Jupp, 1985), Past Life Regression (Gravitz, 2002), Entertainment (Mackillop, 2004; Barrett, 2006), Addictions (Weiss, 2010), Memory (Lynn et al.,2015) and therapeutic use (Spiegal & Spiegal, 2008;Yapko, 2018).
Hypnosis has long been a subject of curiosity and misconception; the word itself is misleading, deriving from the Greek word ‘Hypnos’ meaning sleep as initially likened to a slumbered state (Upshaw, 2006, Green, 2011).
It has been over 150 years since the introduction of this phenomenon, and despite recognition by medical organisations, it still holds prevalent misconceptions by both the public and health professionals (Torem, 1992).
However, although being used successfully for many years, psychologists and researchers still debate exactly what hypnosis is.
Broadly speaking there are two main theories; State theories represent the earliest explanations of hypnosis, proposing that hypnosis involves a distinct or altered state of consciousness.
In contrast, Non-State theories emerged later and sought to explain hypnotic phenomena through ordinary psychological processes such as expectation, motivation, attention, and social influence.
The State Theory
The State Theory of Hypnosis suggests that hypnosis involves an altered or distinct state of consciousness that differs from ordinary waking awareness, often referred to as a trance state.
During hypnosis, individuals may experience heightened focus and concentration, increased responsiveness to suggestion, and a reduced awareness of external distractions.
Supporters of this theory propose that these changes reflect a genuine psychological and physiological state that enables hypnotic experiences to occur more readily than in ordinary consciousness.
One of the earliest and most influential proponents of this view was Ernest Hilgard, whose Neodissociation Theory proposed that hypnosis creates a division in consciousness, allowing certain thoughts, feelings, or behaviours to operate outside of normal conscious awareness (Hilgard, 1977)
More recent research suggests that hypnosis may be better understood not as a sleep-like state, but as a state of heightened awareness in which the individual becomes increasingly alert, focused, and attentive (Kroger et al., 2017; Spiegel & Spiegel, 2008).
Furthermore, hypnosis does not necessarily require the individual to have their eyes closed, as demonstrated by studies of active-alert hypnosis, in which participants enter hypnosis while physically active and with their eyes open (Bányai, Zseni, & Túry, 1993).
The Non-State Theory
The Non-State Theory of Hypnosis argues that hypnosis does not involve a special or altered state of consciousness. Instead, it proposes that hypnotic experiences can be explained through normal psychological processes such as focused attention, expectation, motivation, imagination, and responsiveness to suggestion.
From this perspective, individuals experiencing hypnosis are not in a fundamentally different state of mind; rather, they are engaging in cognitive processes and experiences that occur within the range of normal human functioning.
One of the most influential proponents of the Non-State perspective was Theodore X. Barber (1969), who suggested that hypnotic responses are influenced by factors such as attitudes, expectations, beliefs, and situational context, rather than by entering a unique hypnotic state.
Building on this perspective, socio-cognitive theories proposed that hypnosis is shaped by the interaction between the individual’s expectations, beliefs, motivation, social context, and active participation in the hypnotic process (Kirsch & Lynn, 1995).
From a clinical perspective, Yapko (1990) emphasised hypnosis as a process involving carefully constructed direct and indirect suggestions, alongside the skilful use of language, communication, and therapeutic interaction to facilitate change.
Similarly, Evans and Lynn (2021) highlight the importance of the individual’s engagement, expectations, and responsiveness in the hypnotic experience.
Therefore, Non-State approaches view hypnosis not as something that is done to an individual, but as a collaborative process in which the person’s cognitive abilities, willingness, and active involvement contribute to the effectiveness of hypnotic interventions.
Contemporary Perspective
The American Psychological Association Division 30 commissioned Elkins et al. (2015) to revise the definition of hypnosis as the previous definition had become outdated, controversial and no longer reflected development in hypnosis research and clinical practice.
In particular, the term “state of consciousness” had been criticised for appearing to favour State theories of hypnosis, while Non-State researchers argued that hypnotic phenomena could be explained through cognitive and social processes.
The revised definition aimed to provide a more inclusive framework that recognised focused attention, reduced peripheral awareness, and responsiveness to suggestion, while remaining theoretically neutral regarding the underlying mechanisms of hypnosis.
“A state of consciousness involving focused attention and reduced peripheral awareness characterised by an enhanced capacity for response to suggestion.” (APA, 2016)
