Search

Three studies examined the influence of rapport on pseudomemory. Study I tested eight groups of 22 subjects in a 2 (level of susceptibility: high, low) x 2 (state instruction: hypnosis, waking) x (rapport: present, reduced) design, rapport being inhibited by the hypnotist criticizing subjects, performance. Pseudomemory was tested by a second experimenter who also criticized subjects. Study 2 varied level of susceptibility and rapport for 88 hypnotically instructed subjects where criticism was offered only by the second experimenter. Study 3 analyzed effects among 44 highly susceptible hypnotic subjects where the second experimenter refrained from criticizing subjects. Data indicated a significant association between rapport with the hypnotist and pseudomemory in cued recall, strength of pseudomemory being appreciably lowered when negative hypnotist rapport was reinforced by the person testing pseudomemory., A study to examine the importance of rapport in hypnotically induced pseudomemory was conducted. There were three studies made to explore the role rapport had in the study. Subjects for the entire study numbered 209 women and 99 men. Results indicate that rapport has great influence on cued recall. Rapport increases when subjects are positively reinforced and decreases when negatively reinforced. A number of alternative explanations are provided.

The phenomenon of pseudomemory, the recollection of an event that did not actually occur, has been the subject of much interest of late. In particular, the ability of hypnosis to distort memory has been examined. The mechanisms by which this may occur are not clear; genuine memory distortion, report bias, and perhaps a variety of other influences have been suggested to account for this phenomenon. Several studies have indicated that individuals who are highly or moderately suggestible to hypnosis are more inclined to report pseudomemory after a false memory is suggested while under hypnosis. The length of time that pseudomemory persists was examined in this study, which included 110 subjects. The individuals were grouped by their degree of susceptibility to hypnosis, including 36 highly, 26 moderately, and 48 minimally susceptible individuals. It was hypothesized that the effects of pseudomemory would persist for relatively long periods. The subjects were given suggestions while under hypnosis or while they were awake. A general memory performance test was administered after the suggested event (subjects had been shown a video). The subjects' memory of the suggested event was tested for recognition, structured recall, and free recall two weeks after the exposure. Those who were considered highly or moderately susceptible to hypnosis showed a persistence of pseudomemory over this time period. A variety of influences that may be involved in this observed effect are discussed. These results substantiate the fact that individuals who are highly or moderately susceptible to hypnosis are most inclined to develop pseudomemory, and that this pseudomemory may persist two weeks or longer. (Consumer Summary produced by Reliance Medical Information, Inc.)

Highly (n = 36), moderately (n = 26), and low (n = 48) susceptible subjects were administered either hypnosis or waking instruction to examine the hypothesis that pseudomemory will occur for hypnotic subjects as long as 2 weeks after suggestions are given for accepting false events. Accuracy and confidence of memory were measured for all subjects, and memory was examined for free recall, structured recall, and recognition. Results indicated persistence of pseudomemory for the 2-week period for both highly and moderately susceptible subjects. Data highlighted the multifaceted operation of skill, contextual, and state instruction factors, and an hypothesis that ambiguity of communication when suggestion is delivered plays a part in the maintenance of pseudomemory over time is offered for further testing.

This study examined the influence of several possible mediating variables affecting the incidence of pseudomemory reporting in the hypnotic setting. Each of 60 high, 60 low, and 48 medium susceptible subjects were shown a videotaped bank robbery and given either hypnosis or waking instructions followed by 3 falsea(pseudomemory) suggestions. Results for free recall and structured recall indicated main effects for level of susceptibility and state instruction and a significant interaction between these 2 factors; incidence of pseydomemory was very low in recognition. The reporting of pseudomemories was very sensitive to the influence of skill and stimulus features and type of memory test, and susceptible subjects given hypnosis instruction reliably indicated the greatest acceptance of false information.