v

The Collected Works

MILTON H. ERICKSON

Volume 1 The Nature of

Therapeutic Hypnosis

The Milton H. Erickson Foundation Press Phoenix, Arizona

Edited by Ernest Lawrence Rossi, Ph.D., Roxanna Erickson-Klein, Ph.D.

and Kathryn Lane Rossi, Ph.D.

With a new foreword by the Editors and an updated introductory chapter by Ernest Lawrence Rossi, Ph.D.

vi

Copyright 2008 Ernest L. Rossi, Roxanna Erickson-Klein, Kathryn Lane Rossi

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced by any process whatsoever without

the written permission of the copyright owners.

Published by The Milton H. Erickson Foundation Press

3606 North 24th Street Phoenix, AZ 85016

Manufactured in the United States of America

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Rossi, Ernest Lawrence. Erickson-Klein, Roxanna. Rossi, Kathryn Lane. The collected works of Milton H. Erickson, M.D., volume 1: The nature of

therapeutic hypnosis / Ernest Lawrence Rossi. — 1st ed. p. cm. Includes bibliographic references. ISBN 978-1-932248-30-2 (alk. Paper) 1. Hypnotism — Therapeutic 2. Psychotherapy 3. Consciousness 4. Neuroscience I. Rossi, Ernest Lawrence II. Title RC497.R67 2007 616.89’162—dc19 2007937495

vii

Contents Foreword — Milton H. Erickson: An Introduction to the cheerful work ethic of an American farm boy .........................................................Page ix Editor’s Neuroscience Edition Preface ..........................................Page xiii Original foreword from The Collected Papers of Milton H. Erickson ...................................Page xv

I. Exploring the Nature of Consciousness and Hypnosis 1. The Neuroscience of Therapeutic Hypnosis, Psychotherapy,

and Rehabilitation ........................................................................Page 5 2. Initial experiments investigating the nature of hypnosis .........Page 73 3. Further experimental investigation of hypnosis: Hypnotic and non-hypnotic realities ...........................................Page 89 4. A special inquiry with Aldous Huxley into the nature and character of various states of consciousness ............................Page 161 5. Autohypnotic experiences of Milton H. Erickson .....................Page 189 II. Naturalistic and Utilization Approaches to Therapeutic Hypnosis 6. Historical note on the hand levitation and other ideomotor techniques ................................................Page 223 7. Deep hypnosis and its induction ...............................................Page 229 8. Naturalistic techniques of hypnosis ..........................................Page 261 9. Further clinical techniques of hypnosis: utilization techniques ................................................................Page 271

viii

III. Minimal Cues, Mirror Neurons, and Rapport in Therapeutic Hypnosis

10. Respiratory rhythm in trance induction: The role of minimal sensory cues in normal and trance behavior ........................................Page 307 11. An indirect induction of trance: Simulation and the role of indirect suggestion and minimal cues ..................................................Page 313 12. The "surprise" and "my-friend-John" techniques of hypnosis: Minimal cues and natural field experimentation ..................Page 321

IV. Observation and Training in Therapeutic Hypnosis 13. Expectancy and minimal sensory cues in hypnosis ...............Page 349 14. Notes on minimal cues in vocal dynamics and memory ........Page 353 15. Clinical and experimental trance: Hypnotic training and time required for their development ...............................................Page 359 16. Laboratory and clinical hypnosis: The same or different phenomena? .........................................Page 367 17. The experience of interviewing in the presence of observers ....................................................Page 375 Index ...............................................................................................Page 379

Clinical and Experimental Trance 359

Chapter Fifteen

Clinical and Experimental Trance: Hypnotic Training and Time Required

for their Development Milton H. Erickson Unpublished discussion, circa 1960.

My primary interest in this roundtable discussion today arises from

a certain unhappy conclusion that has been forced upon me repeatedly after reading reports of hypnotic experiments, discussing the problems of hypnotic experimentation with various workers interested in the field, witnessing the hypnotic techniques employed by various students of the subject, and after recalling the innumerable errors, oversights, and seri-ous mistakes committed by myself in the course of my own work. That unhappy conclusion, briefly stated, is that the whole field of hypnotic research is still so undeveloped that there is very little general under-standing either of how to hypnotize a subject satisfactorily for experi-mental purposes, or of how to elicit the hypnotic phenomena which are to be studied after the subject has been satisfactorily hypnotized. From all that I have gathered, except in a few carefully made studies the gen-eral tendency is to carry on experimental work in hypnosis by employing a type of trance that is suitable primarily for the purpose of clinical demonstrations intended to give a general comprehensive survey of the types of behavior that may be elicited in the trance state, but actually unsuitable for the detailed experimental investigation of a specific form of behavior. In support of this one need only to recall the contradictory, unsatisfactory, and unreliable results usually obtained in specific stud-ies of hypnotic manifestations.

The reason for such a confusion in experimental results is the typi-cal utilization of a clinically satisfactory trance in experimental situa-tions. The induction of a clinically satisfactory trance leads directly to the development of a peculiar psychic state of passive responsiveness in which the subject automatically accepts and acts upon any suggestion

360 PART IV

given as a purely responsive form of behavior. This type of hypnotic re-sponse I regard as satisfactory for clinical work only. A further and much more difficult step lies in the utilization of the subject’s passive responsiveness to secure a spontaneous development of a pattern of be-havior merely initiated by the suggestions given; I regard this type of response as experimentally satisfactory.

To state this more explicitly, in the clinically satisfactory trance the subjects perform as instructed in accord with their understandings of what the hypnotist wants. Thus the hypnotist not only suggests the be-havior but also, though perhaps only indirectly, governs and controls the course and the extent of its development, thereby eliciting behavioral responses oriented primarily about the hypnotist. In the experimentally satisfactory trance the entire orientation of hypnotic responses is totally different. Suggestions given are accepted passively but are utilized only as initiating stimuli for the desired pattern of behavior, the development of which then occurs independently of the hypnotist and is in entire ac-cord with the subjects’ general reaction trends and their understanding of the behavior suggested. Thus their responses are oriented not about the hypnotist but about the behavior as a thing complete in itself, thereby rendering the behavior itself the primary issue and not the be-havior situation.

To illustrate these various points material may be cited from various experiments. In one instance an unpleasant artificial complex was sug-gested to a subject, who responded to it with every clinical evidence of having accepted it fully. However, when tested by a modified Luria tech-nique for objective experimental evidence of the acceptance of the com-plex, the findings indicated that the complex simply had not been ac-cepted and that it had not been a valid psychic experience. Investigation disclosed that, in giving the suggested complex, the subject had unwit-tingly been forced by the hypnotist’s instructions to mail an unfortunate letter around which the complex centered in the “mailbox on the street corner,” when the mailbox habitually used by the subject and the only one actually available to him in the suggested experience was located in the middle of the block. By thus limiting and restricting the subject to a performance of what the hypnotist wanted done and thereby precluding the subject’s own natural, self-determined development of the sugges-tions given, there resulted only a clinically satisfactory acceptance of the complex, but an acceptance not experimentally demonstrable. Correc-tion of the error to a mailing of the letter in the “regular” mailbox per-mitted an acceptance of the complex experimentally demonstrable through disturbances on the word-association test, involuntary motor responses, and respiratory changes. This is not an isolated instance, but it is a finding that has been made many times not only by myself but by

Clinical and Experimental Trance 361

others working on complex implantation. Another type of example concerns the processes involved in inducing

the reliving of an actual past experience. In one instance, later verified as to its accuracy, the subject was reliving his experience of driving a team of horses along the road. Quite unaccountably he suddenly stopped the team, and no explanation could be obtained except that he was “waiting.” Impatience with the delay led to the giving of repeated, insis-tent suggestions that he drive on, but without effect. Indirect sugges-tions that the horses had started again were perceived by the subject not as hypnotic suggestions but as an impatient starting up by the horses themselves, and were responded to by a jerking on the imaginary reins and a shouting of “Whoa.” Extensive inquiry finally disclosed the delay to be occasioned by a flock of geese impeding traffic, and not until the last one was safely out of the way would the subject proceed, regard-less of the insistence of the hypnotist’s suggestions. Thus the role of the hypnotist was limited strictly to the initiation of the process of reliving, and once started it continued in accord with the actual experiential pat-terns of response individual to the subject. Even when the hypnotist suc-ceeded in intruding into the situation by his attempt to direct and con-trol the course of developments, this was reacted to in a way appropriate only to the immediate psychic situation of the subject. This was an ex-perimentally satisfactory trance.

Still another example may be cited to illustrate the integrity of the subject’s own spontaneous development of the suggestions given in the experimentally satisfactory trance. In this instance the subject was known to be planning to attend for a second time a movie in which he was greatly interested. Accordingly hypnotic suggestions were given to the effect that he was actually doing so in the company of the hypnotist and that he was describing the movie fully as he watched it. After this process had been initiated and a sufficient account of the movie had been obtained, repeated attempts were made to interrupt his perform-ance. The subject, however, announced firmly his intention not only of sitting through the entire show but of attending the second show also, and all suggestions to the contrary were rejected until resort was made to the not uncommon experience of having the film break and the show interrupted. Suggestions to this effect permitted the initiation of an-other behavioral process entirely in accord with the subject’s experien-tial past and leading to the desired goal. An essentially identical experi-ence occurred on another occasion with a different subject, and the same type of behavior has been obtained from many subjects and in relation to a great variety of hypnotic manifestations. Yet in all of these subjects it was possible at any time to elicit the same type of behavior but at a purely responsive level, subject to the control and direction of the hypno-

362 PART IV

tist as is typical of the clinically satisfactory trance but lacking in that peculiar quality of subjective, experiential validity that obtains in the experimentally satisfactory trance.

Now the points I have raised so far serve to emphasize that hypnosis can be employed to elicit purely responsive behavior, which apparently constitutes a remarkable and vivid portrayal of memories, experiences, and understandings in a fashion adequate to permit a general compre-hensive survey of the various forms of hypnotic behavior, or that it may be employed to initiate by suggestion spontaneously developed forms of behavior comparable to those evoked by outer realities. It is my belief that the former type of hypnotic behavior serves best to demonstrate clinical possibilities, while the latter type offers an opportunity for the experimental investigation of specific forms of behavior.

However, if I have given the impression that the hypnotic trance in a given subject is always one or the other of these two forms, I wish to correct that misapprehension immediately. Because of the individual peculiarities of subjects one always finds admixtures of the types of hyp-notic responses I have characterized. In a total of approximately 500 individual subjects I have not found one who was simon-pure in either regard, but it is my experience that the majority of subjects can be trained to develop the more experimentally satisfactory trances.

Now that I have presented some views upon what constitutes a sat-isfactory experimental trance, I might summarize my remarks by an attempt at a definition of that trance state:

An adequate experimental trance state is one in which the passive responsiveness of the subject is utilized only to control and direct the se-lection of the general type of behavior desired, with the entire course of the development of the behavior once initiated dependent upon the indi-vidual reaction patterns of the subject.

The next consideration for discussion concerns the problem of the proper technique for experimental hypnotic work. This includes not only the technique of trance induction but the techniques of suggestion requi-site after the trance state has been induced. However, I have nothing to add to the general understanding of how to induce a trance except to stress the importance of making full provision for all individual differ-ences and peculiarities of the subject and the highly personal character of the hypnotic relationship. I also want to emphasize the absolute im-portance of the element of time itself in securing hypnotic phenomena. This consideration has been sadly neglected despite the general recogni-tion of the fact that time itself constitutes an absolute function of all forms of behavior and that the more complicated the form of behavior, the more significant is the time element. Hence I will limit my discus-sion to a consideration of this item.

Clinical and Experimental Trance 363

To present this point I will give material illustrative of the general attitude and the common practices prevalent in hypnotic work which ignore the importance of the time element, and which consequently lead to a misdirection, misinterpretation, and an inadequacy of experimental work. This general attitude and the attendant practices derive from an unrecognized tendency to look upon hypnosis as a miracle producer, a tendency that probably arises from the startling phenomenal character of hypnotic manifestations. Because of this tendency we find many ex-perimental investigations based upon techniques better adapted to the evocation of miracles than to the eliciting of hypnotic manifestations. Because of the oversight or neglect of the element of time, there is a marked confusion of the significance of the suggestions given with the processes of response and the actual behavior invoked. To illustrate, we find quantitative studies made of hypnotic phenomena by controlling the suggestions given by use of a certain phonograph record as if such a measure could control the nature and extent of the development of the response processes so aroused in different subjects; we find studies of amnesia accomplished by means of a simple direct command to forget chosen material followed by proper testing for evidence of amnesia; we find studies on dissociation based on the assignment of two tasks fol-lowed by a strict injunction that they are to be performed simultane-ously but independently of one another; we find experiments on regres-sion conducted by the simple measure of telling a 30-year-old subject that he is now 10 years old and promptly administering an intelligence test to secure evidence of the regression; we find experiments on hyp-notic anaesthesia performed by direct suggestion of it and a direct test-ing for it; in brief we find, despite our knowledge that behavior consti-tutes an end-product of a long process of complicated reactions, that in hypnotic work the assumption is made repeatedly that the process of hearing and understanding instructions is identical with the process of the development of the behavior the instructions are supposed to elicit.

Another type of illustration which typifies an observation I have made repeatedly is the general belief that the induction of a sound hyp-notic trance requires only a relatively brief period of minutes. Thus one worker, representative of many I know, assured me most earnestly that it was never necessary, even with naive subjects, to spend more than 15 to 20 minutes in inducing profound trances and that the average length of time for him was five to 10 minutes. Also he assured me, as have many others, that once the subject was hypnotized, the induction of any specific type of complicated behavior was simply a matter of giving ap-propriate suggestions. While I am ready to concede that trances can be induced and experiments conducted by such techniques, I doubt if the trances are ever more than the type I have described as clinically satis-

364 PART IV

factory only; the experimental results are therefore nothing more than evidence of passive responsiveness oriented about the suggestions given.

Now the question arises, what is the proper length of time that should be spent in inducing an experimentally satisfactory trance or in eliciting hypnotic behavior adequate for experimental investigation? No definitive answer can be given, not only because of individual differ-ences between subjects but also because of differences within the subject in relation to various types of behavior. Hence the only safe procedure is to give suggestions in such fashion and sufficiently slowly that subjects have an opportunity not only to respond in a passively responsive fash-ion in accord with the hypnotist’s suggestions, but also an opportunity to respond in accord with their own understandings of the behavior desired and to develop their responses in accord with their own reaction pat-terns. Only the latter type of behavior is to be accepted as evidence of an experimentally satisfactory trance. This implies the need for extensive experience to enable the scientific investigator to discriminate between the types of the behavioral responses obtained, but I know of no easier way until sufficient experimental work has been done to discriminate more satisfactorily between clinical and experimentally satisfactory trances.

Returning to the question of the actual length of time required, I can speak only from my own experience, which is supported by that of cer-tain other workers, chiefly psychiatrists, interested in establishing in their subjects valid experiential processes by hypnotic techniques. My finding has been that on the average a total of three to eight hours, usu-ally in interrupted sittings, should be spent in training a good unsophis-ticated subject to develop a sound hypnotic trance before there can be any experimentally valid attempt to elicit the various forms of hypnotic behavior. Once the subject has been trained adequately to develop a sat-isfactory trance, a period of at least 20 minutes should be spent in in-ducing each new trance intended for experimental work, although this period can gradually be shortened to five or 10 minutes.

Next is the question of how much time is required to elicit any spe-cific form of behavior after a sound trance has been induced. For exam-ple, when it is desired to develop an amnesia for a series of nonsense syllables just learned, it is necessary to give the subject a period of 20 to 30 minutes and even longer to permit the development of an easily de-monstrable amnesia, as shown by a relearning of the amnesic material in the waking state. Or, if it is desired to have the hypnotized subject develop a psychic blindness, a period of 20 to 30 minutes must elapse after the suggestion has been given before any attempt should be made to secure and test that behavior. That period of waiting is best spent in casual conversation, unrelated activities, with an occasional reiteration

Clinical and Experimental Trance 365

of the suggestion that sooner or later the subject will experience the de-sired effect. Even the giving of a complicated, attention-compelling task to subjects to keep them busy will not militate against the development of the desired behavior. The essential consideration seems to be the pro-vision of a sufficient period of time to permit the development of a men-tal set conducive to the behavior. Unless this period of time is allowed, the subject’s response, while in accord with the suggestions given, will be marked to the critical observer by inhibitions, denials, avoidances, and blockings not in keeping with a valid experiential response. The fol-lowing example will serve to clarify this point.

Recently I suggested hypnotic blindness for two persons in the room. After a 20-minute wait I gave the same suggestions to two other persons and then proceeded to test the responses of all four subjects. The origi-nal two subjects demonstrated an entirely satisfactory blindness, but for the second two the psychic blindness was marked by avoidances, inhibi-tions, conflict reactions, and blockings which persisted for half an hour. After this time the psychic blindness for the second group became satis-factory. When we realize the importance of time in the evolution of be-havior in the ordinary life situation, its importance in hypnotic behavior can be more fully appreciated.

I will close with the statement that I believe hypnotic experimenta-tion constitutes one of the richest fields for research; it warrants every bit of time given to it; and, that as one’s experience grows, the amount of time required for specific investigative procedures diminishes.

366 PART IV