Scientific research has proven how valuable hypnosis is in relieving the symptoms of mental and physical ailments.
However, the open state of mind that hypnosis creates can be misused and abused. One area in which abuse is possible is in the planting of false memories. False memories are not always directly or deliberately planted. In some cases, the simple suggestion that some event might have occurred is enough for a client to believe that it did take place. Once the idea is formed, the person perceives that thought as a "memory."
Loftus outlines a series of case studies that show that hypnosis has been and still is used to coax "memories" out of people, usually women or children. Unscrupulous psychiatrists or hypnotherapists might plant memories of physical or sexual abuse. False memories can pose serious legal problems for defendants but also for psychiatrists. One woman sued a psychiatrist for planting false memories; the case was settled out of court for $2.4 million (Loftus). Even scarier is the possibility that false memories make their way into case evidence, used to convict someone of a crime they did not commit. The possibility that false memories might be misused in courts of law, any testimony recovered under hypnosis is taken lightly in courts of law or even banned. In 2007, the Canadian Supreme Court banned the use of testimony obtained under hypnosis because the information is "not scientifically reliable," (Tibbetts). Witnesses tend to strongly believe what they experience in the state of hypnosis, even if those "memories" are false or planted there by a therapist (Tibbetts). Loftus notes, "misinformation can change an individual's recollection in predictable and sometimes very powerful ways." Rather than negate the efficacy of hypnosis, such information substantiates claims that the procedure has clear clinical applications and should be researched more. More than one hundred years ago, Charcot understood that hypnosis could be misapplied and used in the creation of false memories (Waterfield). However, the misapplication of the practice in no way detracts from its validity.
Hypnosis is a Farce
Another anti-hypnosis argument is that the practice is not real. Some researchers claim that practitioners have fabricated data, "sensationalized treatment results," and made outlandish claims about the efficacy of hypnosis and its scientific potential (Yapko 5). This is true, but all fields of scientific research are subject to charlatans, which is why peer-reviewed journals and professional organizations like the American Psychological Association are stepping in to regulate and monitor hypnosis research. The "cheesy stage acts" that Yapko refers to are also to blame for the notion that hypnosis and hypnotherapy are false (5). Cheesy stage acts pretend to use hypnosis to make audience members act like chickens or perform silly acts. In the days of Mesmer and spiritualism, hypnosis was viewed as a sensationalist practice or a parlor game. In the worse cases, greedy performers would manipulate people into handing over money. Untrained hypnotherapists are guilty of the same practices, manipulating the public into believing that their ailments can be cured. A quack in hypnotherapy is no different from a quack in any other field. Hypnotherapy must be carefully distinguished from stage hypnosis, and research-based hypnosis must likewise be discerned from chicanery. Cheesy stage acts should not be confused with the genuine application of hypnosis in a clinical or laboratory setting.
Hypnosis is sometimes presented in the media as a "pseudo-science" (Tibbetts). In fact, the argument that hypnosis is a farce is sometimes issued directly from a scientific community. Not all clinicians or scientists support hypnosis or hypnotherapy as a valid treatment intervention. For example, strict behaviorists argue that the subjectivity of hypnosis automatically disqualifies it from empirical research (Fromm & Shor). Only by measuring observable behaviors can the technique be proven. Therefore, a behaviorist might agree that the practice of hypnosis -- regardless of what the state of mind represents -- is one that can lead to measurable effects such as smoking cessation. Research into hypnosis will show which areas the practice leads to measurable effects. Hypnosis has become integral to clinical research and counseling practices. Research-based, academic, and professional institutions endorse hypnosis when it is practiced correctly. Because of the credible scientific data backing up hypnosis and hypnotherapy, the claims that hypnosis is a pseudo-science are falling apart.
Only Certain People Can be Hypnotized
One of the arguments against the use of hypnosis is easily unsubstantiated. The argument is that hypnosis only works on certain people and is therefore not a valid practice. People who are fantasy-prone are easily hypnotized, whereas "those who think hypnosis is rubbish can't be hypnotized," (Carroll). Carroll also claims that "the usual personality traits measured on the typical personality inventory such as the Myers-Briggs or introversion/extraversion scales do not correlate well with hypnotizability." Indeed, this may be true. However, motivation is more important than personality....
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now