Groth-Marnat G, Mitchell K
Curtin University of Technology, School of Psychology, Perth, Australia.
Int J Clin Exp Hypn. 1998 Oct;46(4):324-33. doi: 10.1080/00207149808410012.
Empirical research attempting to demonstrate that indirectly phrased hypnotic suggestions result in greater responsiveness than do direct approaches generally has not shown any differences on formal hypnotizability scales. However, empirical research in related areas along with clinical observation suggests that client resistance might be a crucial moderating variable. Specifically, participants with greater resistance would be expected to be more responsive to indirect approaches, whereas those with low levels of resistance would be more responsive to direct hypnotic procedures. To test this hypothesis, participants were given either a standardized test of hypnotic responsiveness that used direct suggestions (Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotizability) or a comparable indirect scale (Alman Wexler Indirect Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale) followed by administration of a measure of resistance (Therapeutic Reactance Scale). The hypothesis was not confirmed, in that those with higher (or lower) reactance/resistance did not score differently than those on either the indirect or direct hypnotizability measures.
试图证明间接表述的催眠暗示比直接方法能带来更高反应性的实证研究，在正式的催眠易感性量表上通常并未显示出任何差异。然而，相关领域的实证研究以及临床观察表明，来访者的抵触情绪可能是一个关键的调节变量。具体而言，预计抵触情绪较强的参与者对间接方法的反应会更敏感，而抵触情绪较弱的参与者对直接催眠程序的反应会更敏感。为了检验这一假设，参与者接受了一项使用直接暗示的催眠反应标准化测试（哈佛催眠易感性团体量表）或一个类似的间接量表（阿尔曼·韦克斯勒间接催眠易感性量表），随后进行了一项抵触情绪测量（治疗性抵触量表）。该假设未得到证实，因为反应性/抵触情绪较高（或较低）的参与者在间接或直接催眠易感性测量中的得分与其他参与者并无差异。
