Les théories de l’hypnose

Abstract

Two major theoretical frameworks are proposed in the explanation of hypnosis and the mechanisms governing its idiosyncratic phenomenona: the psychosocial theory and the neo-dissociation theory. These two major paradigms conflicted with each other in the sixties and polarised on each other, the former emphasised the role of social influence in the hypnotic process, and the latter emphasised the cognitive mechanisms of the idiosyncratic response. The role of hypnosis in the production of hypnotic phenomena is disclaimed by those who hold the psychosocial perspective. If they were to recognise a psychic modulation, they would consider it to be artificially produced by the subject as a strategy inherent to taking on a role within the context of the administering of the suggestions, as well as by the motivation and expectations of the subjects. This interpretation leads them to deny that hypnosis can achieve an idiosyncratic response, and equally its existence. On the other hand, those adhering to the neodissociation perspective consider hypnosis to be at the origin of the hypnotic response and originating from a psychic dissociation inducing an involuntary response. If the existence of a dissociation mechanism is supported by certain experimental data, as proposed by those adhering to the neo-dissociation theory, it nonetheless remains hypothetical. On the other hand, given that psychic duality is found only in very good hypnotic subjects, it must be questioned if it is necessary for the achievement of all hypnotic phenomena or for only a category of very difficult items that call upon a special capacity. The two major theoretical models answer the question of the determinants of the hypnotic response only imperfectly. The question put forth precociously by hypnosis regarding the conscious or unconscious establishment of mental processes leading to the production of an action (which is in fact that of the links between consciousness and the cognitive unconsciousness), cannot be determined without an interdisciplinary approach, notably with the support of the neurosciences.