The Early Years – pre 1600
If we consider hypnosis in the context of the contemporary state of knowledge, medicine and social change, we can trace the importance of belief in healing right back to primitive cultures. Since early history priests and witch doctors have attempted to bring about healing by inducing an altered state of consciousness. This was often facilitated by rhythmic drum beats or chanting, dancing and drugs, superimposed upon an elaborate ritual. When man was searching for an explanation for the inconsistencies of life he believed disease to be a Divine manifestation. The Ancient Egyptians had their Temples of Sleep, and the Greeks their Shrines of Healing, where patients were given curative suggestion whilst in an induced sleep. Hippocrates (430 BC) was aware of the importance of harmony between mind and body, and described the mind as the ‘seat of emotion’. It is possible to ascribe to hypnosis many miracles described in the Bible, and later to the miracles and cures ascribed to holy men, relics and shrines. Between the times of the Romans and the sixteenth century medicine was based largely upon folklore and remedies having little scientific basis. As dissection was frowned upon it was not possible, except in a few notable cases (e.g., Leonardo da Vinci, circa 1500), to study detailed internal anatomy until well into the sixteenth century. Although Galen (170 AD) had described a circulatory system it was not until 1628 that Harvey published his work on the heart and the circulation of blood.Chemical anaesthesia did not appear on the scene until the mid-nineteenth century. Prior to this alcohol and opium had been used, but surgery had been brutal and, of necessity, carried out at high speed. (A British surgeon, William Cheseldon, is reported to have removed a stone from the bladder in 54 seconds !) The work of James Esdaile (see later) should be viewed in this context. In addition to physical trauma and shock, post operative infection almost invariably followed surgery and accounted for a huge mortality rate. Again we should view Esdaile’s extremely high recovery rate in this context, and bear in mind the fact that it was not until well into the nineteenth century that surgical asepsis became recognized as being fundamentally important.
Development of hypnosis – ongoing 1530
Paracelsus elaborated the theory that the heavenly bodies exerted an influence upon disease and healing, working through an all pervading universal magnetic fluid 1765 Franz Anton Mesmer, a Viennese doctor, stated that man could influence this magnetic fluid to bring about healing, and he established salons where patients applied magnets to afflicted parts of their body. Later he moved to Paris where he further developed his theory. It was thought that a convulsive crisis was necessary for a cure to take place.
Louis XVI set up a commission of investigation, which included Benjamin Franklin, M. La Guillotin, and La Voisier. Their conclusion was that magnetism with imagination produced a convulsive crisis, but magnetism alone did not. Mesmer was discredited, but his Society of Harmonies continued. Le Marquis de Puysegur, a member of the Society, found that a crisis was not necessary. He believed that the magnetic power was produced in his own mind and was transferred to the patient via his fingertips. He found that he could produce a sleep in which the patient would follow his commands – very authoritarian – and introduced the terms, “perfect crisis” and “profound sleep”.
John Elliotson, Professor of Medicine at UCH, London, organised public clinical demonstrations of a wide range of hypnotic phenomena, exhibiting effects on voluntary and involuntary muscle, analgaesia, somnambulism, hallucinations etc., which he attributed to the magnetism theory. On his forced resignation he edited a journal, The Zoist, in which he reported the work of. James Esdaile, a Scottish surgeon working in India, who had performed several hundred operations quite painlessly using hypnosis (mesmerism) alone as an anaesthetic. He or an assistant would produce a state akin to suspended animation, now known as the Esdaile State, by stroking the patient’s body for several hours. He recorded that fatal surgical shock or post operative infection occurred in only 5% of cases compared with the then norm of 50%. The British medical establishment rejected these claims.
James Braid, a Manchester doctor, saw a demonstration of mesmerism by a French man La Fontaine, and applied the methods within his practice. He found that patients having gazed at his bright lancet case would enter a profound sleep, and in this state would accept his suggestions aimed at cure. He assumed that staring at a bright object exhausted the nervous system, and that the phenomenon was not to do with magnetism.
In Nancy, France, Dr. Ambroise-August Liebeault, found that he could bring about cures in this state simply by suggestion.
1886 He was joined by Professor Bernheim, from Paris, and together they published ‘De La Suggestion’ in which they rejected the concept of magnetism. They established the Nancy School, and set up the Animalist Movement. Around this same time Jean Martin Charcot was demonstrating his views at the Salpetriere Hospital that hypnosis was a pathological state akin to hysteria, the two phenomena being interchangeable. Following conflict between the two schools, Bernheim’s view was accepted and Charcot discredited. However, two of Charcot’s pupils were to have a huge impact on psychological medicine.
Josef Breuer and Sigmund Freud developed the application of hypnosis beyond the mere suggesting away of symptoms, and changed the approach to the elimination of their apparent cause. Breuer found that in hypnosis patients would often recall past events and in talking about them would experience an emotional outpouring, subsequently losing their symptoms. This he called his talking cure, (we would now refer to this emotional state as an abreaction). Freud was also looking at the dynamics and history of illness, but after earlier work with Breuer he left hypnosis in favour of his work in what was later to give rise to psychoanalysis.
During the Great War the Germans realised that hypnosis was of value in the immediate treatment of shell-shock, allowing soldiers to be returned rapidly to the trenches. A formularised version of hypnosis, autogenic training, was devised by a German, Dr. Schultz. Post 1945 Milton Erickson, (1901-1980) brought up on a farm in Wisconsin, was doubly qualified in psychology and psychiatry. He was apparently dyslexic, tone deaf and colour blind, being able to see only the colour purple. Like Clark Hull before him, Erickson contracted polio as a very young man, and was immobilised for many months, and physically debilitated for the rest of his life. He is quoted as saying that his physical limitations had made him more observant, and certainly his powers of observation were legendary. It is not possible adequately to describe the life and impact of Milton Erickson in this short space. Literally thousands of books and papers have been written about him and his work, and his modus operandi has been copied and distorted by a plethora of practitioners under the guise of Ericksonian techniques. Erickson perceived from his own experience that, in contradiction to the then current view, people responded in individual ways to induction, and could also vary in their degree of trance and the extent to which they would follow the hypnotist´s suggestion. From this he developed the inspiration that the therapist should enter the patient´s world and let them slide into trance with whatever that patient presents at that time. He wrote with great authority on techniques of trance induction, experimental work exploring the possibilities and limits of the hypnotic experience, and investigations of the nature of the relationship between hypnotist and subject. A major innovation in Erickson´s therapeutic technique was that effective treatment was not necessarily dependent upon the formal induction of trance. He believed that his patients had problems because they were out of rapport with their unconscious minds, and that by using trance to reduce the demarcation between the conscious and unconscious minds the patient could regain rapport with his unconscious, and thus access his own resources. In addition, and crucially, his almost uncanny use of the power of language and imagery, of metaphors (often based on his own life), confusing statements, surprise and humour would cut instantaneously through to the patient´s own experience and comprise a major part of his vast range of therapeutic tools. The fact that Erickson became a cult figure would not have pleased him, any more than the fact that therapists attempting to use aspects of his technique within ´Ericksonian Therapy´ were often ignoring the intuitive and observational skills that the man had possessed which over-rode mere technique. Following Erickson, Richard Bandler and John Grinder, amongst others, have studied and codified his subtle techniques in the development of neurolinguistic programming, ( N.L.P. ) which currently has a very high profile not only within medicine, but also within business organisations and industry. Hypnosis is currently seen as a tool rather than as a cure in itself. It is used in simple relaxation techniques for nervous dental and medical patients; as an adjunct to chemical sedation and anaesthesia; as relaxation therapy in the handling of stress and related disorders; in obstetrics and antenatal care; in the management of intractable pain, cancer and terminal illness; as an adjunct to psychotherapy, and in the management of a wide range of phobic, anxiety and other medical and psychological problems. Hypnosis is a constantly evolving and ever changing field. Martin Orne was born in 1927 in Austria. His family moved to the USA and in due course Orne qualified as a psychologist before obtaining a medical degree and becoming a psychiatrist. As an undergraduate at Harvard he launched a bombshell with a paper dispelling many of the myths associated with the use of hypnosis for age regression. He proposed that the adult under hypnosis is not literally reliving his early childhood but presenting it from the perspective of adulthood. The repercussions of this were to continue to rage many years later in the controversy surrounding false memory syndrome. Further repercussions occurred from his conclusion that in crime investigation hypnosis could encourage witnesses to confabulate or "remember" things they could not actually have seen or experienced. As a result of his expertise in this field Orne was often called as an expert witness in high profile cases, for example testifying on behalf of Patricia Hearst, the heiress. Dr Orne also had a particular interest in the study of multiple personality disorders, and again was able to display his skills as an expert witness in a number of nationally important cases. His high profile and his term as President of the International Society of Hypnosis were instrumental in promoting hypnosis as a respected and respectable skill within psychology and medicine as well as within the legal field. Ernest Ropiequit Hilgard (1904-2001) was appointed Professor of Psychology at Stanford California in 1933. His major early interests were in learning and motivation, and two of his textbooks, Theory of Learning (1948) and Introduction to Psychology (1953) became classics. In the 1950s he and his wife Josephine, Professor of Clinical Psychiatry at Stanford became pioneers in bringing to hypnosis the discipline of scientific study. Hilgard recognised a need in research for a standard by which to measure depth of hypnosis and hypnotic susceptibility, and the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale which he devised in 1959 is still in wide use today. In 1957 they established the Stanford Laboratory of Hypnosis Research. Here they experimented with hypnotic pain reduction and two books in particular, Hypnosis in the Relief of Pain (1975) and Divided Consciousness (1977), became landmarks in the objective study of hypnosis. Hilgard further developed Janet´s earlier work on dissociation into his theory of neodissociation, posing three stages of consciousness within hypnosis; the distorted reality, the hidden observer and the observing consciousness. This model, when brought together with the then contemporary Pain Gate Theory of Melzack and Wall, gave an elegant paradigm which remains just as fresh today, to explain the way in which hypnotic interventions can be so effective. John Hartland was a psychiatrist, a member of the BSMDH, and editor of the Journal of Medical Hypnosis. His comprehensive textbook on clinical hypnotherapy, Medical & Dental Hypnosis was published in 1966. Hartland described straightforward techniques for ego, employing direct suggestions of a general nature, aimed at increasing the patient´s self confidence. The book, now in its fourth edition, became a ´bible´ for the medical or dental student of hypnosis. The study of psycho-neuro-immunology (PNI), the conduits through which our emotions and thoughts may affect our health came into prominence in the 1980s, and a major influence in this study remain Dr Ernest Rossi. In his early years Rossi worked with and co-wrote many papers with Milton Erickson, and is editor of Erickson´s collected papers. In 1986 he published a major book, The Psychobiology of Mind-Body Healing. His painstaking research into psychobiology and state dependent learning has resulted in a large number of publications in which he describes the mind-body pathways, and applies hypnotic techniques in utilising these pathways to bring about healing.
A narrow view of hypnosis takes its history only from Mesmer in the eighteenth century. But it is important not to be medically parochial here, because behind hypnosis is the ancient use of trance and witchcraft, medicine and religion.
Hypnosis taps into a side of human nature which has not been adequately recognised by scientific Western thought, and for which contemporary pop culture has identified a need. Atheism has not worked well in the Soviet block, and people in our secular society have turned to Yoga, mysticism, fortune-telling, and the occult; looking for something beyond a materialistic, mechanistic view of life.
Modern Western medicine has been based on the nineteenth century concept of scientific method, as described by Karl Marx. Medical practice is based on a clinical diagnosis, made on the principles of scientific methodology. Generally this is a diagnosis of a physical condition, described in physical terms. Once in the realms of the mind, science becomes less precise, even for describing a problem. The traditional division of human life into body and mind is inadequate when investigating psychosomatic phenomena and the further division into body, mind and spirit has not been generally recognised in modern society.
The study of hypnosis may necessitate a fundamental rethink of these divisions.
The tripartite division of human nature behind Western culture stems from the Greeks, and comes down through the Judeo-Christian civilisations. Plato described the role of EROS in determining behaviour, the concept which we now associate with Freud. HIPPOCRATES and his followers first tried to classify mental illness in a scientific way. They were the first to describe hysteria, but they ascribed it only to women, caused by migration of the womb through the body. Mental illness was thus described first in terms of physical abnormality.
In the same Graeco-Roman tradition, the next notable attempt at classifying illness was by GALEN in the second century A.D. He said that the site of the emotions was the brain and not the heart. The rational soul was divided into external and internal parts, with the five senses being external, and the internal containing the qualities of imagination, judgement, perception and movement.
The scientific approach to mental illness was then lost until the eighteenth century.
By contrast, outside the Western world, Indian philosophy, Hinduism, Yoga and Buddhism, did not have the Greek subdivision of the person into body, mind and spirit. For Buddha, in 4th century BC, the chief end of man was not to glorify God, as in the Christian catechism, nor morality; but was to achieve KNOWLEDGE. The eight-fold pathway culminated in concentration, or mystical meditation, approximately equivalent to the Hindu Yoga. In this, the mind was fixated on a point or subject, and passed through stages of absorption, self-hypnotism or trance. This use of trance probably preceded Buddhism, but organised its use for the good of the disciple in ways which are reminiscent of our therapies.
The SAKHYA described the self as having a conscious – the spectator, and an unconscious – the active one.
YOGA emanating from this, concentrated on the need for discipline, and a return to theism. But this god was not a moral one who judged or punished; he was on the same level as the disciple. The object of Yoga was not to achieve oneness with the god, he did not create or reward or punish. The method was the suppression of mental activity, both conscious and unconscious, and the end was to become one with nature, where nature is the ultimate reality of the universe. The true light of the spirit will shine if the obscuring mental activities are suppressed. The eight-fold path of Yoga goes through abstention to observance, posture, controlling involuntary movement by breathing exercises, withdrawal inwards of the senses, with fixed attention and concentration. Through concentration, the disciple gets in touch with the inward reality.
All this is clearly using trance in a sophisticated system, bound up with religious observance, but in a way foreign to our own culture, until recent generations.
By contrast, our own Christian civilisation had its roots more in Eastern thought than in the Graeco-Roman philosophy. Hebrew religion was monotheistic, and the Hebrew god was primarily moral. But the chief end of their observance was not only moral perfection, but the word translated peace = SHALOM. The path to shalom was through meditation on the revealed character and law of God, and the history of his actions. A reading of the poetry-books of the Bible suggests that the Hebrews used trance just as much as did their Indian and Near-Eastern neighbours. Their concept of shalom then became borrowed widely throughout the world. For instance, it became SALAAM in Arabic. It was the concept of inner-health of the un-divided personality, body soul and spirit intertwined. (Compare the old-fashioned text “Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace (shalom) whose mind is stayed on thee” Is. 26.)
Primitive animistic societies have been using trance since ancient days, and still do as the basis of rituals in worshipping the spirits of the inanimate objects around them. Witch-doctors in Africa, use trance in conjunction with alcohol, betel-nuts and so on.
Modern History of Hypnosis
MESMER 1734-1815 – an Austrian physician, widely educated and a member of the Viennese society (he played the glass harmonica at soirees held by the Mozart family). He developed the use of trance to treat emotional illness. He used all the trappings of a magical presentation, with a wand and long flowing robes. He explained his treatment as harnessing a magnetic fluid in the body which was the cause of illness. His treatment was so successful that it fell foul of the authorities. Louis XVI set up a commission of enquiry and members included Lavoisier, Benjamin Franklin and Dr. Guillotine. He was discredited, and the treatment fell into disuse.
MARQUIS DE PUSEGUR – one of Mesmer’s followers – had described a state of “artificial somnambulism” in which the operator could influence the ideas of the person who had been “magnetised”.
ABBE JOSE Dl FARIA put this into clinical practice, and told the subject to go to sleep.
JOHN ELLIOTSON 1791-1868 – Prof. Medicine at UCH - (introduced stethoscope into UK) used mesmerism until official opposition stopped him. He maintained that it was useful in functional illness, and also said that hysteria was not confined to women.
JAMES ESDALE – in 1830s – a Scottish surgeon – reported on using trance for anaesthesia; 300 major operations had been performed and over 1000 minor ones. His ideas were not accepted in UK, and he died a disillusioned man.
JAMES BRAID – a Scottish surgeon in Manchester. In the 1840s, a French magnetiser, Lafontaine, gave a stage show. Braid strode onto the stage to expose the show as a fake, and discovered the subject was in a trance state. He set up experiments to investigate it, and coined the term HYPNOSIS. He developed induction through eye fixation, showed that the state was subjective, not due to any circulating magnetism and that the phenomena were due to suggestion.
A.A.LIEBAULT 1823-1904 – August Liebault was a country doctor in France. He had treated thousands of people using trance. He was so successful that he drew the attention of the local HYPPOLITE BERNHEIM Prof. Medicine at Nancy. Between them they laid the foundations of the Nancy school of hypnosis. Sigmund Freud visited Liebault’s clinic and saw the phenomena of hypnosis for the first time.
CHARCOT 1825-1893 – anatomist and neurologist – Salpetriere School. His patients were hysterics. He devised tests of hypnosis, said that hypnosis is a pathological condition like hysteria, that only hysterics were susceptible to suggestion. There was bitter rivalry between him and the Nancy school and it was the Nancy view which prevailed. But one of his pupils had been Sigmund Freud.
MAUDESLEY in 1867 said that the preconscious and the unconscious had been established beyond any doubt.
BINET in 1890 described the unconscious in others than just hysterics.
WILLIAM JAMES in I870s popularised the concept of subconscious.
CHARLES RICHET in 1884 distinguished three divergent streams in the “intellectual existence of man” - personality, perception of outside events, and EGO - the notion of a being who both thinks and acts.
In 1887, the concept of DISSOCIATION had entered the writings of CHARCOT and MYERS. This term dissociation now becomes the important focus of attention. Following the description by Herbart about the “incomparatively small mass which occupies our conscious”.
PIERRE JANET in 1886 published his doctoral thesis on the subject. The concept of DISSOCIATION is an important alternative to Freud’s concept of REPRESSION, see below. He postulated the mind as comprising a series of lights, some on, some off. Those on comprise the conscious. An hysteric was someone in whom the range of the conscious has become narrowed, with material pushed down into the unconscious, the lights turned off. This part of the mind then becomes split off from the primary consciousness, a sort of separate personality, leaving the field of primary consciousness narrowed. Later, in 1909, he said it was necessary to see to what depth this dissociation goes, and was then able to differentiate DEMENTIAS in which there was dissociation of thought and motor functions, from HYSTERIA “in which the functions do not dissolve entirely”. Hysteria was then seen as “a malady of the personal synthesis”.
Others presumed from this that a person’s everyday persona was the normal one, but Janet described patients in whom their everyday state was the pathological one, and who under hypnosis reverted to a former happier state. Janet quoted Breuer and Freud of 1893 “the disposition of this dissociation ...and the states of consciousness which we propose to collect under the name of hypnoid states, constitute the fundamental phenomena of hysterical neurosis.” Freud and Breuer in turn quoted Janet and his work on dissociation during their report of the case of Anna-O.
During the case of Anna-O, Breuer had asked Freud to help. He had been using hypnosis for diagnosis. Freud then published in 1900 “THE INTERPRETATION OF DREAMS”. This publication appears as a watershed in the development of the subject. In this work, Freud set up a system of ideas which were opposite to his previous writings to the evidence of his past cases, and to the work on dissociation. He found he was unable to hypnotize subjects as well as Breuer and others could, and set up his alternative approach using what he termed
The fundamental differences which Freud suggested were:
In the following few years, Freud described the basic life-force as a gratification-seeking one; sexuality, and with it the psychodynamic view of development, including the Oedipus and Electra concepts, and the central position of REPRESSION, and the mental-defence-mechanisms. The conscious mind cannot by definition know what has been repressed into the subconscious, and so treatment is by the free association of ideas, and the interpretation of ideas by the therapist who interprets from this material what has been repressed. There is by definition no way of corroborating this as the answers are interpretative ones.
Note – as a sixth-former in Vienna, Freud had learned in Herbartian doctrine about the unconscious, at the same time as it had been made part of the intellectual pop-culture by William James in America. Even the concept of the EGO was part of that culture.
Many have since described Freud’s publication in 1900 and the strict set of ideas which he then imposed forcibly on his followers, as a major spanner thrown in the works of the development of the subject of the unconscious, which has dominated the subject world-wide until recent years. In the process, he abandoned hypnosis, which has been in comparative disuse ever since, or at least until the need for treating shell-shocked troops after the Second World War. (see Pederson 1994, p.91, Van der Hart and Horst 1979, Spiegel’s 1978 p.16)
Does this matter?
They found that therapists, who have become limited to a strictly Freudian psychodynamic approach, see the motivation of the unconscious only in terms of repressed infantile sexuality. They have found themselves stuck when what the patients display are dissociated ideas which have become fixated. They feel it is necessary to return to Janet’s ideas, in order to rethink the approach to therapy. Un-learning Freud, and all he stood for, and stopping the fragmentation of the field between people of opposing views and all the animosity which has accompanied it, is necessary. In other words, for them and others, Freud introduced something other than scientific objectivity - he demanded personal allegiance to his own ideas, and gave a gold ring to each of his close circle. Jung parted from him over the Oedipal conflict, which he then described as “the shibboleth which divides the adherents of psychoanalysis from its opponents”.
It is true that while Freud’s ideas have become part of our culture, and his concepts are part of common parlance, there is now an anti-Freud fashion, and questions over whether his treatment through analysis really works. In America, it is part of the culture to have a personal analyst, and to see them over many years. In this country, a brief form of analysis comprises psychotherapy and psychodynamic counselling. Yet few consultant psychiatrists do this. And the clinical psychologists have largely abandoned it in favour of behaviour-therapy, or therapies based on learning theory - mainly because the analytical approach is not cost-effective within the NHS.
EYSENCK in 1952 made his famous critique of Freudian method showing that for the neuroses there is a 70% spontaneous recovery rate, which falls to 44% with psychoanalytic therapy, and 64% with other methods of therapy. Moreover, the longer the psychoanalytic therapy, the lower the success rate.
Recent publication and media programmes have re-examined the early work of Freud, and are fundamentally discrediting him. This has become the current “politically correct” approach, and no doubt the pendulum will swing back in his favour at a later date.
There is current debate over false-memory syndrome which flowed directly from Freud’s methods of telling the subject that they had a guilty secret in the subconscious of which they were unaware.
1993 Esterton -“Seductive Mirage”
1994 Wilcock -“Maelzel’s Chess Player - Sigmund Freud and the rhetoric of Deceit”
1995 Richard Webster” Why Freud was Wrong”, Articles 1995 in the Journal of Experimental Hypnosis, Counselling Psychologist, Counselling 5.96, etc.
PAVLOV – said that hypnosis is a form of classical conditioning – a conditioned response to suggestions given by the therapist. He used the words “damp- down the higher centres”, thus allowing the more primitive ones to take over. These are more susceptible to suggestion.
J.B.WATSON used this approach through conditioning to develop LEARNING THEORY. From this came BEHAVIORAL THERAPY.
JOSEPH WOLPE in 1958 amalgamated all this into treatment by DESENSITISATION in which the patient can be de-conditioned and re-conditioned.
1955: The Psychological Group of the BMA recommended that hypnosis training should be given to all medical students, to trainee psychiatrists, obstetricians and anaesthetists (BMJ 23.04.55). Recommendation not yet carried out.
1958: Parallel recommendation in USA.
1968: BSMDH formed (British Society of Medical and Dental Hypnosis) for medical and dental clinicians.
1970: incorporated into USA undergraduate medical school courses (D Ewin)
1978: British Society’ of Experimental and Clinical Hypnosis (BSECH) formed: a parallel society for clinical psychologists.
2000: BSMDH National Council approved training of all health professionals working as part of a medical team.
2007 BSMDH and BSECH amalgamated to become British Society of Clinical and Academic Hypnosis BSCAH.
HISTORY OF HYPNOSIS
GENERAL HISTORY Use of trance
FRANZ MESMER 1734 Lavoisier, Benjamin Franklin,
Dr. Guillotine, Mozart
ABBE JOSE DI FARIA 1800
JOHN ELLIOTSON 1817 Prof. medicine U.C.H stethoscope
JAMES ESDALE 1830s Anaesthetics in India
JAMES BRAID 1841 Manchester surgeon, coined the term “hypnosis”
A.A. LIEBAULT 1823-1904 Doctor in Nancy
PROF. BERNHEIM 1900 Nancy school of medicine
J.M.CHARCOT 1825-1893 Salpetriere school – only hysterics are susceptible to hypnosis.
HERBERT 1824 Described the unconscious
MAUDESLEY 1867 Concept of Unconscious established
BINET 1890 Unconscious not only in hysterics
WILLIAM JAMES 1870s Popularised concept of unconscious
CHARLES RICHET 1884 Personality, perception and ego.
JANET 1886 Dissociation – doctoral thesis
MYERS AND CHARCOT 1887 Dissociation – hysteria a malady of Personal synthesis
SIGMUND FREUD 1856-1939 Unconscious in everyone, repressed Infantile sexuality, abandoned hypnosis
PAVLOV 1849-1936 Hypnosis is a form of classical conditioning
J.B.WATSON 1878-1958 Learning theory, behavioural therapy
JOSEPH WOLPE 1958 Desensitisation therapy
BMA PSYCH GROUP 1955 Training should be given to students
Sitemap | (c) 2015 British Society of Academic Hypnosis | BSCAH Registered Charity No: 1108372 | Company Registration: England No 5120862 | T&Cs | Website by Consort Design