A Personalised Induction Will Always Be More Effective The WritePass Journal

A Personalised Induction Will Always Be More Effective Introduction A Personalised Induction Will Always Be More Effective , p.24). Based on this, it is clear that the authoritarian approach is not viable, and as a result, it is not logical to oppose the personalised approach based on Hulls perspective since he does not take into account preferences and expectations of the participants. In addition, Freud’s research asserts that the process of hypnosis would give better results when the subject was on deep trance. Like Hull, Freud adopted the authoritarian technique in a more assertive manner hoping that he would get better results (Sofroniou 2010, p.12). He was particularly interested in the technique because he believed that it was the perfect way of accessing forgotten events and emotions, a cathartic process, which gave relief to his clients. However, Freud became uncomfortable with hypnosis because his patients did not respond uniformly to the process. He was also afraid that the direct suggestion technique might do away with symptoms that were important for the clients to retain. In addition, Freud had worries over the sexual perceptions that surrounded the hypnotic process, which labelled a client as ‘giving herself’ emotionally to the psychiatrist. Because of these reasons, as well as lack of sufficient experience with hypnosis both throu gh research and clinically, Freud decided to quit hypnosis (Zeig Munion 1999, p.48-49). If Freud had adopted the permissive approach, he would have succeeded because the personalised approach relies on suggestions that are in line with the client’s expectations, desires and likes, and as a result, the clients could not lose any important symptom. The permissive technique would also help him to eliminate the ill-sexual perception, since it gives the client greater responsibility unlike the authoritarian technique. State and the role theory Advocates of the state theory, which asserts that hypnotic induction arouses a unique modified state of consciousness in the patient, base their argument on the notable changes that occur to the brain during hypnosis, and to the dramatic effects, which hypnosis can cause such as the disappearance of warts and insensitivity to pain. They also claim that sometimes, both hypnotised and non-hypnotised participants take instructions differently. For instance, in a certain study, both the hypnotised and non-hypnotised were told to run their hands through their hair once they heard the word ‘experiment. The pretenders carried out the suggestion only when the psychiatrist said the word, but the hypnotised participants complied regardless of who gave the suggestion (Coon, Mitterer, Talbot Vanchella, 2010, p.194). Based on this, opponents of the personalised induction claim that the authoritative approach is as effective as the permissive approach. They support their claim by asserting that participants who do not respond to the permissive technique can respond to the authoritarian technique effectively, particularly those who respect authoritarian figures in their life. Moreover, advocates of the role theory assert that hypnosis is not a special state of consciousness. They argue that some of the changes linked with hypnosis can also take place without it. They claim that hypnotised people just comply with the demands of the situation, and act in conformity with a special role. From this point of view, hypnosis provides a socially logical reason to comply with someone’s suggestions, in the same way as a physical exam, which provides a logical reason of removing clothes on request. Supporters of the role theory justify their claims by arguing that non-hypnotised participants sometimes exhibit behaviours that are usually linked with hypnosis (Bernstein Nash, 2008, p.153). Based on this, I disagree with the opponents of the personalised induction who adopt the role theory to support their stance, because the theory rejects the idea of hypnosis without providing concrete reasons. The dissociation theory The dissociation theory provides substantial reasons why the personalised inductions should be adopted during the hypnotic process. The theory suggests that hypnosis is not a single specific state, but the general condition, which temporarily reorganises our normal control over actions and thoughts. Dissociation allows body movements to occur under voluntary control and the involuntary processes to be controlled voluntarily. As Hilgard proposed this theory, he asserted that the relaxation of control occurs because of the social agreement between the hypnotist and the hypnotised person to share control (Bernstein Nash, 2008, p.153-154). In other words, the theory supports the idea that for the process to be effective, the participant should be an active participant, something advocated in the personalised induction approach. Modern hypnosis Based on contemporary hypnosis, a personalised induction seems to be the most effective approach in hypnosis. The approach takes into account the client’s values, desires, and it views the subjects as active participants. It also supports the idea that it is imperative to have the patient as relaxed as possible, get them involved in the in the process, and discuss the expectations and goals of attending the therapy with the client. Furthermore, the modern hypnotherapist starts the therapy session by establishing a rapport with their patients, which is a key aspect of the personalised induction approach (Gaschler 2009, p.21). In the course of the personalised induction, strong relationships between the clients and the therapist are necessary in order to ensure the client is fully involved in the process. Learning Modalities Overtime, personalised induction has stood out as the best because it takes into consideration learning modalities, which are key channels through which people receive, store, and give information. Modality is comprised of perception, sensation, and memory and the key senses include smell, taste, visual, auditory, and kinaesthetic. Knowledge of modalities enables therapists to personalise screeds for each client. When a patients modalities are ascertained, it becomes easy to discuss with them in a way that makes them feel comfortable and relaxed (Hogan LaBay 2007, p.226-239). As a result, it becomes easy to achieve the objective of the therapy. Conclusion The above discussion has suggested that personalised induction is more effective than the authoritarian approach. This is because we have different likes, dislikes, desires, perceptions, and we come from different cultural backgrounds. Consequently, to achieve remarkable results in the process of hypnosis, the hypnotist should take into consideration all this aspects. Although a standardized approach (authoritative approach) can be effective in some instances, it only works on subjects who respect the authoritative figures. Moreover, the authoritative technique assumes that all people react in the same manner to suggestions. However, this should not be the case since we possess different traits. Thus, the personalised induction or the permissive approach is the only method through which noteworthy results can be achieved during the hypnotic process, since it acknowledges that we have different likes, dislikes, perceptions and that we come from diverse cultural backgrounds. References Bernstein, D. A., Nash, P. W. (2008). Essentials of psychology. Boston, MA, Houghton Mifflin. Chapman, R. A. (2006). The clinical use of hypnosis in cognitive behavior therapy a practitioners casebook. New York, NY, Springer Pub. Coon, D., Mitterer, J. O., Talbot, S., Vanchella, C. M. (2010). Introduction to psychology: gateways to mind and behavior. Belmont, Calif, Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Erickson, M. H., Rossi, E. L., Ryan, M. O. (1998). Mind-body communication in hypnosis. London, Free Association. Gaschler, T. (2009). Modern hypnosis techniques Pt. 1. Pt. 1. [Bad Sachsa], Steiner. Hamill, D. (2012). An Introduction to Hypnosis Hypnotherapy. Bolton, MA, eBookIt.com. Hawkins, P. (2006). Hypnosis and stress a guide for clinicians. Chichester, England, Wiley. Hogan, K., LaBay, M. (2007). Through the Open Door: Secrets of Self-hypnosis. Gretna, Louisiana: Pelican Publishing. James, U. (2006). Clinical hypnosis textbook: a guide for practical intervention. Oxford, Radcliffe Publishing. Pintar, J., Lynn, S. J. (2009). Hypnosis a Brief History. Chichester, John Wiley Sons Sheehan, L. (2005). Basic Hypnosis Manual. Raleigh, North Carolina: Lulu. Simpkins, C. A. (2001). Self-Hypnosis: Plain and Simple. Tuttle Pub. Sofroniou, A. (2010). The misinterpretation of Sigmund Freud. [Raleigh, N.C. ], Lulu Com. Zeig, J. K., Munion, W. M. (1999). Milton H. Erickson. London, Sage Publications.