Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorElkins, Gary Ray, 1952-
dc.contributor.authorKendrick, Cassie.
dc.date.accessioned2012-11-29T16:49:58Z
dc.date.available2012-11-29T16:49:58Z
dc.date.copyright2012-08
dc.date.issued2012-11-29
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2104/8551
dc.description.abstractResearch on the efficacy of hypnosis has been limited due to the lack of a sham hypnosis (placebo) for comparison to use as a control in randomized clinical trials. Instead, researchers have had to use a variety of controls, resulting in inconsistency that greatly limits researchers’ methodology and makes it difficult to compare study results or make aggregate statements regarding hypnosis’ efficacy. This study consisted of three primary aims: 1) to evaluate whether white noise can be considered an "inert" procedure; 2) to evaluate the credibility of a model of sham hypnosis that uses white noise as a potential form of "hypnosis" when presented within the hypnotic context; and 3) to explore the relationships between participant characteristics and specific outcome measures. Seventy-five undergraduate students were randomized to one of three groups: hypnosis; sham (white noise presented in the context of hypnosis); or control (white noise in the absence of hypnotic context). Measures of interest involved participants’ ratings of: 1) therapist’s professionalism; 2) the consistency of the environment with hypnosis; 3) subjects’ perception that they received hypnosis; 4) subjects' evaluation of the procedure as pleasant, relaxing, and beneficial 5) participants' perceived acceptability (evaluated by assessing perception of the procedure as acceptable, ethical, effective, of the procedure they received; and 6) shifts in relaxation resulting from each procedure. In each of the variables of interest, subjects who received sham hypnosis and those who received a hypnotic induction demonstrated significant differences from those assigned to the white noise control, with effect sizes ranging from .165 to .852. However, there were no significant differences between participants' ratings of the sham and hypnosis procedure in any of these domains. Taken together, results support the feasibility of using white noise as an inert procedure that, given the proper environmental context, can serve as a credible sham hypnosis.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisheren
dc.rightsBaylor University theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. Contact librarywebmaster@baylor.edu for inquiries about permission.en_US
dc.subjectHypnosis.en_US
dc.subjectPlacebo effect.en_US
dc.subjectPlacebo.en_US
dc.titleDevelopment of a model for the conduct of randomized clinical trials of hypnotic intervention.en_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.degreePsy.D.en_US
dc.rights.accessrightsWorldwide access.en_US
dc.rights.accessrightsAccess changed 1/14/14.
dc.contributor.departmentPsychology and Neuroscience.en_US
dc.contributor.schoolsBaylor University. Dept. of Psychology and Neuroscience.en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record