Hypnotic Hypermnesia: By What Criterion?

• NCJ Number: 121935
• Author(s): D F Dinges
• Date Published: 1987
• Length: 25 pages
• Grant Number(s): MH-19156; 82-IJ-CX-0007
• Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Mental Health; National Institute of Justice (NIJ); US Dept of Justice NIJ Pub; Institute for Experimental Psychiatry Research Foundation
• Publication Format: Document
• Publication Type: Issue Overview
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: Paper presented at 38th Annual Meeting of the Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, October 29-31, 1987, Los Angeles, California

Annotation

This paper examines the controversy over the legitimacy of hypermnesia (or memory recall) created by hypnosis.

Abstract

Fifty-four years ago, experimental psychologist Clark Hull pointed out that hypnosis seemed to bring about the recall of remote memories more effectively than it stimulated recall of recently acquired material. Since that time, experimental psychologists have been unable to establish effective criteria for identifying the effectiveness of hypnotic hypermnesia and have relied too heavily on clinical case reports, forensic anecdotes, or flawed laboratory studies. Research and laboratory studies are reviewed, with the observation that the criterion of "independent replication in well-controlled experimental studies" yields no definitive evidence of hypnotic hymermnesia. A study involving the use of forced recall procedures in order to assess the effects of hypnosis on memory is discussed in detail, with the conclusion that no evidence exists for a unique hypnotic hypermnesia. A second study, also reported in detail, yielded the conclusion that hypnosis provided no recall benefit when introduced after repeated non-hypnotic attempts at recall. Overall, little or no laboratory research exists to verify hypnotic hypermnesia.