Compliance and the Modification of Hypnotizability

Abstract

This study compared compliance-induced reporting bias in subjects who attained high hypnotizability scores following skill training and subjects who obtained equivalent scores without benefit of skill training (naturals). Low hypnotizables in one condition were administered the Carleton Skills Training Package and later posttested for hypnotizability. Control subjects were posttested without benefit of skill training. As in previous studies, skill-trained subjects attained substantially higher posttest hypnotizability scores than controls. In a final session, skill trained subjects, untrained naturals matched against the skill trained subjects on hypnotizability scores, and low hypnotizable controls were tested in a suggested deafness paradigm designed to assess compliant responding. Skill-trained subjects and matched naturals reported significantly greater suggested deafness than did the controls. However, only the matched naturals exhibited significant levels of compliance-induced reporting bias. These findings indicate that skill-trained subjects exhibit no more compliant responding than do natural high hypnotizables.