Kihlstrom J F
Department of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720-1650, USA.
Psychol Bull. 1998 Mar;123(2):186-91. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.123.2.186.
I. Kirsch and S. J. Lynn's (1998) critique of the neodissociation theory of divided consciousness fails to consider evidence of dissociations between explicit and implicit memory and perception in hypnosis. Contrary to their conclusions, evidence that the rate of hidden observer response (like other hypnotic responses) varies with the wording of instructions does not contradict neodissociation theory; rather, it underscores the fact that hypnosis entails social interaction as well as alterations in conscious awareness. Neodissociation and sociocognitive theories of hypnosis complement each other. Each draws attention to aspects of the experience of hypnosis that the other neglects.
一、I. 基尔希和S. J. 林恩（1998年）对意识分裂的新解离理论的批评未能考虑到催眠中显性与隐性记忆及感知之间解离的证据。与他们的结论相反，隐藏观察者反应的速率（与其他催眠反应一样）随指令措辞而变化的证据并不与新解离理论相矛盾；相反，它强调了这样一个事实，即催眠既涉及社会互动，也涉及意识觉知的改变。催眠的新解离理论和社会认知理论相互补充。它们各自都关注到了对方所忽视的催眠体验的各个方面。
