University of California, Berkeley, USA.
Int J Clin Exp Hypn. 2023;71(2):115-126. doi: 10.1080/00207144.2023.2185526. Epub 2023 Apr 11.
A recent international survey discovered that clinicians who use hypnosis in their practice rarely assess the hypnotizability of their patients or clients. This contrasts sharply with the practice in laboratory research. One reason offered for this discrepancy is that hypnotizability does not strongly predict clinical outcome. But a comparison of this relationship with similar correlations in other domains shows that this criticism is misleading-especially when the treatment capitalizes on the alterations in perception, memory, and voluntary control that characterize the domain of hypnosis. Routine assessment of hypnotizability improves clinical practice by enabling clinicians to select patients for whom hypnosis is appropriate; and it improves clinical research by providing important information about the mechanisms underlying hypnotic effects.
最近一项国际调查发现，在实践中使用催眠术的临床医生很少评估患者或客户的催眠易感性。这与实验室研究中的做法形成鲜明对比。对此差异的一个解释是，催眠易感性并不能很好地预测临床结果。但是，将这种关系与其他领域的类似相关性进行比较表明，这种批评是有误导性的——尤其是当治疗利用了催眠领域特有的感知、记忆和自愿控制的改变时。通过使临床医生能够选择适合催眠的患者，对催眠易感性进行常规评估可以改善临床实践；通过提供有关催眠效果背后机制的重要信息，它可以改善临床研究。
