Abstract
Abstract Posthypnotic responding was investigated as a function of experimenter surveillance and instructional set (hypnotic induction vs. task-motivational instructions). As predicted, posthypnotic behavior occurred with greater frequency under conditions of surveillance than nonsurveillance. However, replicating Orne et al. (1968), a few subjects did respond when not under surveillance and the likelihood of such responding was positively correlated with suggestibility level. Contrary to expectation, hypnosis, as opposed to task-motivational instructions did not uniquely facilitate responding in the nonsurveillance conditions. The implications of the findings for role and state conceptions of hypnosis are discussed.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
