argue that the highly responsive people in these experiments are told their
hidden observer is supposed to feel pain, and they consequently experiencethe pain they expect. When researchers told participants in one study that
their hidden observer would experience less pain, the hidden observers indeed
reported less, not more, pain (Spanos & Hewitt, 1980).
Sociocognitive theorists also argue that the psychoanalytic position some-
times can become circular. That is, if we ask why hypnosis participants run
around making chicken noises, we are told it is because they are hypnotized.But if we ask how we can tell that people are hypnotized, we are shown how
they run around making chicken noises. The concept becomes inarguable and
therefore useless in explaining the phenomenon.
Which side is correct? Despite decades of research and discussion, the de-
bate continues (Kallio & Revonsuo, 2003; Kirsch, 2005; Lynn, Kirsch, Knox,Fassler, & Lilienfeld, 2007; Raz, Kirsch, Pollard, & Nitkin-Kaner, 2006).Nonetheless, in recent years there has been a growing consensus among re-
searchers that the hypnotic trance notion alone does a poor job of explaining
why hypnosis participants act the way they do (Kirsch, 2000; Kirsch & Lynn,1998). Although psychoanalytic theorists point to unusual behavior under
hypnosis, such as pain analgesia, deafness, and age regression, sociocognitive
theorists counter with demonstrations of the same phenomena without hyp-
nosis, or they challenge the accuracy of the participants ’descriptions. For ex-
ample, people who claim to go back to an earlier age typically do a poor job
of re-creating what they were really like at that time (Nash, 1987).
Another example of how sociocognitive theorists have challenged seem-
ingly incredible behavior under hypnosis can be found in research on post-hypnotic amnesia. Hypnosis participants are often told they will not
remember what has happened during hypnosis until the hypnotist tells them
to. Indeed, many of these people recall little or nothing of the experience until
given permission. Posthypnotic amnesia has not escaped the attention of no-velists and scriptwriters, whose characters sometimes engage in all manner of
heinous acts while seemingly under the control of an evil hypnotist. Although
there is no evidence that hypnosis can be used this way, some people do claimto forget what they did when hypnotized. Why?
Psychoanalytically oriented theorists e xplain that the experience either has
been repressed out of consciousness or has been recorded in a part of the mindnot accessible to consciousness. For example, some psychologists maintain that in-
formation about the hypnotic experience is held in a pocket of the mind created by
the ego during the hypnosis (Gill & Brenman, 1967). This information is said toremain inaccessible until the ego allows it to enter awareness. However, sociocog-
nitive theorists argue that hypnosis participants expect not to recall what happensto them and therefore make no effort to remember (Coe, 1989; Sarbin & Coe,
1979; Spanos, Radtke, & Dubreuil, 1982). These researchers argue that under
the right circumstances people can be convinced to make the effort to recall. For
example, how long would posthypnotic amnesia continue if participants were of-fered $1,000 each to describe what happened while they were hypnotized?
A team of researchers found a less expensive way to test this possibility
(Howard & Coe, 1980; Schuyler & Coe, 1981). Some highly hypnotizableHypnosis 89