Felicitas Goodman (1990) observed that naive participants experienced unique trance states, characterized by specific visionary content, when they assumed particular postures and listened to monotonous rattling. Students (n = 284), enrolled in various sections of the course Introduction to Psychology, experienced one of four conditions with their eyes closed: Sitting Quietly with and without Drumming, Standing (Feather Serpent) Posture plus Drumming with and without Suggested Experiences. Participants completed the Phenomenology of Consciousness Inventory (Pekala 1982, 1991c) and wrote narratives following their (...) respective stimulus conditions. Participants reported less imagery, joy, and absorption, but more internal dialogue, self‐awareness, and muscular tension in the posture, compared to the sitting quietly, conditions. Goodman's results of specific posture (content‐related) effects with naive participants were not replicated. (shrink)

To examine the influence of hypnotic suggestibility testing as a source of individual differences in hypnotic responsiveness, we compared behavioral and subjective responses on three scales of hypnotic suggestibility: The Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A . Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility. Berlin: Consulting Psychologists Press); the Carleton University Responsiveness to Suggestion Scale . The Carleton University Responsiveness to Suggestion Scale: Normative data and psychometric properties. Psychological Reports, 53, 523–535); and the Group Scale of Hypnotic Ability . (...) The Group Scale of Hypnotic Ability and response booklet. Australian Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 27, 20–31). Behavioral and subjective responses to the CURSS were significantly different than those on the HGSHS: A and GSHA. More participants were classified as “low suggestible” on the CURSS and they reported subjective experiences more similar to everyday mentation. Attitudes and expectancies of participants who received the GSHA were less predictive of responding, but rates of responding and subjective experiences were similar on the GSHA and the HGSHS: A. Discussion focuses on implications for the use of group hypnotic suggestibility scales. (shrink)