Creativity and Hypnotizability in Creati
Creativity and Hypnotizability in Creati
Creativity and Hypnotizability in Creati
net/publication/292966753
CITATIONS READS
0 214
1 author:
Scott Hoye
Chicago Psychology Services
8 PUBLICATIONS 2 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Scott Hoye on 03 February 2016.
BY
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
Di!ss0?t&iori P iiblist’Mlg
UMI 3578549
Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
ProQuest LLC
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
ABSTRACT
Creativity and hypnosis have been considered related traits since the 1960s. A great deal
of research supports this through the study of quantitative measures of both traits. This
hypnotizability, but among individuals considered more creative than the general
population. Thirty two subjects (n=32) involved in creative fields were administered a
battery of hypnosis and creativity measures consisting of the Harvard Group Scale of
Torrance Tests for Adults, and the O Index of the NEO-PI-R O Index. Six relationships
were hypothesized among the variables, and null was rejected only in one; there was a
by the Tellegen Absorption Scale, and the personality measure of creativity, the NEO-PI-
R O Index. The scores on these two tests individually were both one and two standard
deviations above population norms respectively. The sample means for the Harvard
Group Scale of Hypnotic Suggestibility Form A and were below the population norms,
and the samples means for the Abbreviated Torrance Test for Adults were average. It
was concluded that the extremely high scores on the Tellegen Absorption Scale and the O
Index skewed the results for correlations among all the scores. A main implication of the
results was that populations that rank extremely high in aspects of creativity might
individuals have assisted me and supported and encouraged me along the way and
Many thanks to Dr. Stephen Kahn for his diligence and perseverance in
continuing to guide the project as it moved along; at times tortoise like, at other
times like a hare. Were it not for his knowledge and skill in hypnosis and
creativity research, I would not have even noticed a starting gate from which to
proceed.
enthusiasm and interest in this study. Most especially, I must thank Kimberly
Darovec, Heather Leigh, and Stephanie Owens. Thank you kindly for you
assistance.
1 also would like to thank Eric Wilmarth for his assistance with procuring
the recording for the HGSHS: A. I thank John Kihlstrom, Edward Frischholz, and
Ron Pekala for their assistance with the information on hypnotizability measures,
and David Paul Smith for his encouragement and help along the way.
therapy Department: many thanks to Debra Paskind, Gail Roy, and Lariza Fenner
in when I needed help, and Dr. Henning for contributing her time, support, and
suggestions.
Teaching Experience
Research Experience
Publications
Smith, D.P., & Hoye, S. (Eds.), (2013). Special issue on
hypnosis and indigenous healing. The International
Journal of Health Promotion and Education. (In
press).
Professional Affiliations
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE 1
ABSTRACT 2
COMMITTEE PAGE i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii
CURRICULUM VITAE iv
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION 3
Conclusion 45
CHAPTER m. METHODOLOGY 47
CHAPTER V. DISCUSSION 61
REFFERENCES 67
LIST OF TABLES
(
3
Chapter 1
Introduction
The link between creativity and hypnosis has been explored since the
middle of the 20th century (Bowers, 1967; Bowers, 1978; Lynne & Sivec, 1992;
Shames & Bowers, 1992). A major similarity that has intrigued researchers is
from normal, waking consciousness into a more fluid state, with increased
concentration and absorption (Brown & Fromm, 1986). Creativity also has been
variety of studies (Lynne & Sivec, 1992). Results point to highly hypnotizable
subjects generally scoring higher on scales of creativity (Bowers & van der
Meullen, 1970; Bowers, 1967; Shames & Bowers 1992). There is also evidence
measures (Bowers, 1967). A number of case studies support this, and they mainly
entail the use of hypnosis to enhance products with individuals in creative fields,
such as artists, musicians, and actors, which have implications of the covariance
of these two traits; if the two are related, hypnotic procedures should be able to
4
& Singer, 1981; Fowler, 1988; Perri, 2003; Council, Bromley, Zabelina,
and cognitive measures should substantiate this. Hypnosis has been described as
a process but also has cognitive aspects to it (Yapko, 2003). For example, the
Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale (SHSS) and the HGSH: A have questions
that are designed to pull for process (motoric) and cognitive (internal experiences,
such as positive hallucinations) (Yapko). It also has been seen to correlate with
1974; Fromm & Kahn, 1990; Roche & McConkey, 1990). Measures of creativity
are also constructed based on cognitive (divergent thinking tests such as the
Guilford and Torrance Tests of Creativity) and personality traits, such as the O
Index of the NEO-PI-R Scale). Thus, if hypnosis and creativity were truly
related, the results of their comparative study with individuals who are presumed
Bowers, 1992). However, overall, there has been very little significant correlation
(Green, 2004), including the use of Five-factor personality model tests, such as
the NEO-PI-R. The studies using these measures will be elucidated in the
literature review.
and trait measures of hypnosis and cognitive and trait measures of creativity in an
effort to add to the existing literature. The sample population was assumed to be
high in both areas based on the overall assumptions in the literature (Shames &
Bowers, 1992; Lynne & Sivec, 1992) and expected, therefore, to produce results
higher than the population norms for the tests used in general, as well as higher
higher on measures of both creativity and hypnosis (Bowers, 1978; Lynne &
Sivec, 1992; Shames & Bowers, 1992; Green, 2004). This was initially posited
due to the belief that females would be more responsive to external stimuli in the
form of hypnotic suggestions. It would follow that there is a possibility that the
6
scores for female subjects in the current study would also follow a similar patter
Statement of Problem
studies that compare creativity, as measured by the Abbreviated Torrance Test for
Adults (ATTA) (Goff & Torrance, 2002) and hypnotizability, as measured by the
Ome, 1962) and the Tellegen Absorption Scale (TAS) (Tellegen & Atkinson,
(O) Index of the Neo Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R O Index) (Costa &
McRae, 1992) was utilized in an effort to further examine the constructs. By and
large, most studies only utilize divergent thinking measures. This study attempted
hypnotizability. In addition, the ATTA, and relatively new measure, has not
previously been administered in such studies, and its inclusion would add to the
literature.
individuals, as they are considered higher in creativity due to the nature of their
work in their fields and should yield higher scores on creativity measures.
Collecting data from this subgroup of the population was an attempt to ensure that
7
than the general population, score higher than the general population on measures
Scale)?
Hypotheses
score high on scales of creativity, and low hypnotizables will score low on
2. The creative population sample we are studying will have higher scores than
average on the tests of creativity and also on the tests of hypnotizability compared
to the population norms for the tests. Female subjects in our sample will produce
8
statistically significant higher scores on both creativity and hypnosis than male
subjects.
range.
high range.
5. The trait measure of creativity (NEO-PI-R O Index) will also produce a low to
Statement of Purpose
validity and reliability), the HGSHS: A and the TAS, and an abbreviated version
of an established creativity measure, also with strong validity and reliability, the
utilizing it with the current population (highly creative individuals) and add to the
correlation between the NEO-PI-R and hypnotizability (any where from .10-. 18,
across various facets of the test) (Green, 2004). The current study featured a
subsection of the population considered to be highly creative, and thus will show
a high score for them on this measure. It is hypothesized that this measure will
correlate with the TAS (Tellegen & Atkinson, 1974), due to similarities in their
question items. The TAS has been utilized to measure hypnotizability and
questions, and to the fact that the TAS is also a personality trait measure it is
likely that this correlation will be higher with the O Index of the NEO-PI-R. It
has also been shown to correlate significantly with the NEO-PI in earlier studies
hypothesized that the scores obtained from creative individuals on the HGSHS: A
(HGSHS: A) (Shor & Ome, 1962) may also be higher than those of the general
population, and will correlate more with the O Index than the scores based on a
Hypnotizability, also a variant of the SHSS, like the HGSH: A, showed some
correlation to facets of the Openness Scale of the Big Five Inventory, and early
version of the NEO-PI-R (Green, 2004). The Waterloo Objective and Subjective
correlation between the TAS to the O Index (Gilsky & Kihlstrom, 1993). It was
hypothesized that the TAS and the O Index would produce a significantly stronger
correlation to each other than the O Index to the HGSHS and the ATTA, due to
the above-mentioned similarities in their questions, and the previous studies that
hypnotizability. If the two are related, then discovering what distinguishes the
more creative person could give insight into the more hypnotizable individual.
This does not imply a causal relationship between the two. Creativity in an
individual does not cause them to also be hypnotizable, or vice versa; the two
understanding of the properties of both. The Torrance tests and the Openness
scale of the NEO-PI-R have been well established for validity and reliability. The
11
Torrance tests have not been used extensively in the study of creativity and
hypnotizability. The NEO-PI-R has, but not in conjunction with this battery of
tests. Both the TAS and HGSHS:A are well established in the literature. It was
assumed that combining these four assessments to study the two traits with the
chosen population would produce more variance between the measures, and
definition; others define it as a trait (Kerr & Gagliardi, 2003; Kaufman, Plucker &
employed cognitive measures; with some studies using trait measures, such as the
1976; Lynne & Sivec, 1992; Shames and Bowers, 1992), and the NEO-PI-R
interest in the positive psychology movement among those in the helping fields
2004). Hypnosis can be induced and taught to individuals to help them tap into
creative states on a more voluntary basis (Council, et al., 2007; Kahn & Delaney,
2010). Studying the similar aspects of hypnosis and creativity could be applied to
12
remedial and generative work with clients in the consulting room, and in other
This study is based upon the premise that psychological tests of the trait of
hypnotizability. Another assumption that this study makes is that the use of
This study has several limitations. For example, the use of a lengthy
battery of tests, administered over one sitting, could have confounded the results,
due to fatigue in the subjects. In addition, the general population carries many
myths about hypnosis, and this may have created certain unrealistic expectancies
of the power of hypnosis in the subject, which could confound results of the
were gathered via online advertising and debriefing to classrooms of art therapy
students. They were well aware of the nature of the study, and more likely to be
13
creativity and hypnosis, which could have skewed the data in a positive manner.
art therapy students enrolled in a graduate school program. The findings may not
or to other educational levels. The populations included in this study are assumed
to be more readily creative within and by the general culture, and thus may allow
Chapter 2
on what aspect of it that they are measuring (Shames & Bowers, 1992; Weisberg,
2006). Gilchrist (1972) cited several definitions, and noted that the creative
dropped, and, as it were “slept on,” in order for the unconscious to process
experience. Verification is the phase of the process whereby the new idea is
tested in light of sound reason. There is some evidence that process, or the time
just how creative a product will be (Getzels & Csikszentmihaly, 1976). Most
the process, due in large part the time consuming aspects of studying process.
use, and conscious volition and thought production (Gilchrist). Kris (as cited in
that serves the ego, rather than deters its healthy function. That is to say, a person
(Gilchrist).
(2004) state that the creative person must be capable of generating ideas or
behaviors that are novel, surprising and unusual. Those behaviors must make a
positive contribution to their life and to the lives of others, and must include
between “Big C” creativity (major achievements in art and science) and “small c”
study will, though focusing on artistic creativity, attend to the “small c” aspects of
16
products that have already been deemed as having highly creative significance for
Bheggeto, & Dow, 2004, as cited in Plucker, et al. 2008). Only 38 percent gave
explicit definitions. From these, the authors derived the following definition:
in 1961, and considered relevant in current research: product, process, person and
press (Kaufman, et al., 2008, Shames & Bowers, 1992). Product refers to the
via the use of measure of hypnotic susceptibility (Shames & Bowers). This is due
to the fact that hypnosis is a subjective state, and the aspect of creativity that is
measure of creativity. Press refers to the environment and systemic factors that
contribute to the creative act and influence the creative person and product. This
studies of creativity are based upon, and is, therefore, relevant to this one.
Kaufman, et al., 2008). General principles behind these measures constitute what
tests” that he and other researchers have developed. Divergence refers to the
refers to the lack of swift closure for an idea or production for a given answer
(Gilchrist). Elaboration refers to the ability to fill out ideas within a given idea or
The most common divergent thinking tests are Guilford batteries and the
Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. The Guilford measures are based upon his
model of the Structure of the Intellect (SOI) (Kaufman, et al., 2008). This model
delineated 24 types of divergent thinking, “One type for each combination of four
types of content (Figural, Symbol, Semantic, Behavioral) and six types of product
et al., pp. 20-21). The tests in the SOI battery ask questions to evoke divergent
thinking production across the above-mentioned content and product types. For
example, the Sketches test requires subjects to produce as many drawings as they
can from a simple figure such as a circle. The content in this instance is figural,
and the number of images produced measures fluency (Kaufman, et al.). The
Associations I test requires subjects to find a word that links two words in some
fashion, such as movie and fishing (Kaufman, et al.). The content of this test is
Semantics, and the product type is Transformations, and the creative facet
measured is originality (Kaufman, et al.). The answer for this particular example
E.P. Torrance’s Torrance Tests o f Creative Thinking (TTCT), are the most
widely used and studied tests of divergent thinking (Kaufman, et al., 2008). E.P.
Thinking (Gilchrist, 1972). They are typically used to distinguish gifted children
training programs in corporate settings (Kaufman, et al.). Giftedness has not been
well defined, and there is a great amount of disagreement as to its definition, and
they vary across school districts (Kaufman, et al.). Despite this, and the oft,
unstated aspects of divergent thinking in these definitions, the TTCT have been
utilized in various batteries by school districts in the United States. The TTCT
are based heavily upon the concepts of the SOI and Guilford’s original tests,
specifically verbal and figural fluency, and can be seen as a streamlined version.
The test consists of seven verbal and three figural components, and two different
Reliability and validity are considered robust, especially with the voluminous
amount of research with the TTCT, though construct validity of the test has been
al.). The ATTA is an abbreviated version of the TTCT that was utilized in this
study.
Though they have been coined “creativity tests,” there is some controversy
regarding what divergent thinking tests actually measure (Gilchrist, 1972). The
main controversy is that there is little evidence to suggest that divergent thinking
tests can predict creative outcome because studies point to a low correlation
critique cites the fact that creative individuals practice in domain specific areas
20
(plastic and visual arts, music, dance, etc.), and divergent thinking measures
aspects of the tests are also considered by some to limit the facilitation of the
creative process. Some researchers, such as Wallach and Kogan have developed
the creative process (Kaufman, et al.). But by and large, divergent thinking test
are timed.
(Kaufman, et al., 2008). These include self-reports of creativity style (such as the
Creative Domains Questionnaire), and personality assessment (as seen with the
assessment of creativity has been extensively utilized and studied, boasts a strong
reliability and validity, and pertains to this current study. It is 240-item scale,
based on the Five-Factor model of personality (Costa & McRae, 1992). The Five-
“found in English and other natural languages” (Costa & McRae, p. 1). The five
factors were grouped into five domains, with various facets of the factors totaled
to produce the total domain score (Costa & McRae). The five domains are:
21
feelings (excitability and emotionality), 04, actions (trying and being interest in
new n novel things), 05, ideas (enjoying challenges, intelligence), and 06, values
in the relationship between these scales and aspects creativity (Costa & McRae).
These are based on correlations with various other measurements across the six
facets, ranging from low to moderate (.39-.56). Some authors contend that some
of the concepts behind the facets are more obviously connected to creativity, such
as openness to fantasy and aesthetics, whereas others, such as actions, are less
Examples are the Creative Semantic Product Scale, the Teachers’ Evaluation of
al., 2008). These measures tend to use outside rater judging of the creative level
t
of the products. Product measures have not been as widely used, as they are more
The product measure rated drawings produced by the subjects (Getzels &
while the drawings were being produced. The authors formulated this process as
reaching of a solution” (p. 79). Each of the 31 subjects was observed while
drawing, with the observer remaining the same through the study (Getzels &
administered to the subjects post hoc, regarding various aspects of their activities
during the three problems solving phases. Experts and non-experts were selected
23
spent within the problem finding process of the artists and the value and
originality as deemed by all raters were higher than on the scale of craftsmanship
(Getzels & Csikszentmihalyi). Originality correlated the highest at .53 (p < .005).
substantial data surrounding its reliability and construct validity (Kaufman, et al.,
upon the ratings of experts in the respective field of the products; for example,
artists rate collages, poets rate poetry, and writers rate prose. A simple Likert
Scale from 1.0-5.0 is used to measure creativity of the finished products. Inter
average number of judges used among studies is ten, and the lowest number
would be two, with inter-rater reliability larger for larger number of raters
(Kaufman, et al.). Results range from .70-.90. Face validity is assumed based
upon the consistent inter-rater reliability. Predictive validity is seen in that CAT
A study using the CAT that included ten expert and 106 non-expert raters
found reliability inconsistent for non-expert ratings of reliability, but positive for
experts (Kaufman, Baer, Cole, & Sexton, 2008). This suggests that the use of
24
cheaper, more readily available non-experts for use a CAT raters is not a viable
option, and that the reliability of the CAT is predicated on the use of experts.
measuring creativity outside of psychometric batteries, and that they have strong,
general measure of creativity, as divergent thinking tests do, and thus why they
they are not utilitarian in the sense that they take considerably more time to
administer, and procure expert raters for, and were, therefore, not selected for use
in this study.
Definitions of hypnosis also vary depending on the author and the theory
attached to them (Shames & Bowers, 1992). There are several different models
of hypnosis (Yapko, 2003). These currently fall into two general categories:
focusing on the suggestive nature of hypnotic techniques and how it enhances the
relationship between the hypnotist and the subject (Lynn & Kirsch, 2006; Sylva &
Kirsch, 1992). There was a period of dissention regarding the idea of a special
state of hypnosis (Pekala & Kumar, 2000). Sarbin and Barber initially critiqued
25
continuum of opinions. On one end of the spectrum there are scholars who hold
from waking consciousness and from other altered states, such as daydreaming
and relaxation” (Kirsch and Lynn, in Pekala & Kumar, pp. 109). Some scholars
posit that hypnotic phenomena exist, but do not ascribe to it a special state or that
a special state produces such phenomena. Others still adamantly deny it (Pekala
& Kumar). The general trend, as noted above, has been to subsume the debate,
state, suggestibility and influence, and the element of the relationship. The
altered state refers to the shift from waking, or conscious response sets to a more
focused state of attenuated absorption upon internal of the mind. The domain of
suggestibility and influence refers to the use of suggestions on the part of the
operator or hypnotist to facilitate the altered state and suggestions within the
altered state. The relationship refers to the augmented relationship created by the
altered state. Transference is heightened, and the social distance between the
hypnotist and the subject is intensified due to both of them focusing on the
26
of hypnosis that researchers have defined and debated, and also adds to the aspect
a more encompassing definition. All three aspects are found in each hypnotic
domains of the altered state and responsiveness are of importance in the current
study.
1979; Bowers, 1979). This shift is considered a function that facilitates ego
mastery and psychic growth. During hypnosis, the ego is never fully overtaken
and able to work through the unconscious contents while primary process is
used as an explanation for both hypnosis and creativity, which makes them
relevant to this study. The shift can be seen in the domain of the altered state, and
has to do with the process measure chosen for this study the HGSHS: A.
three most widely used, and most studied scales of hypnotizability measurement
are the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scales (SHSS), the Harvard Group Scale
27
(Yapko).
Ernest Hilgard and Andre Weitzenhoffer first developed the SHSS, one of
The Scale has two forms, A and B that were developed to be used as repeated
measures without incurring practice effect or priming. The scales are made up of
twelve items based on motoric responses. A later version was released in 1962
administer. Scores range from 0-12 points, with the higher score correlating with
higher hypnotizability.
Emily Ome and Martin Shor developed the HGSHS in 1962, basing it
upon the SGSHS form A. (Shor & Ome, 1962; Yapko, 2003). This measure is
extremely popular among researchers, and is utilized more than the SHSS. Its
popularity stems from the fact that it can be administered to twenty subjects at a
time. It consists of both subjective and objective reports from the subject, of both
standardization (Yapko).
clinical use than the SHSS and the HGSHS: A (Yapko, 2003); that is to say, it can
score based on the amount of whites of the eyes visible with the eyes rolled
upward as the subject closes them. The eye role test is assumed to be based on
innate hypnotic ability, and the motoric and cognitive items on responsiveness to
settings, though it does not bear a high correlation to the SHSS or the HGSHS: A.
A recent study correlating the Stanford to the HIP noted that the response sets
correlation between the eye-role sign and a variation SHSS (Gritzalis, Oster, &
Frischholz, 2009). They concluded that the small magnitude of the significant
correlation indicates that the two tests do hold common variance, but still measure
study the phenomenological aspects of hypnosis (Pekala & Kumar, 2000). The
seven point Ukert scale (Pekala & Kumar). The HAP, a short induction, with
29
motoric and cognitive commands, similar to the HGHS and the SHSS, is
performed first, and the PCI is administered to the subject afterwards to assess the
subject’s experience (Pekala & Kumar). The PCI-HAP is a newer measure, and
not as popular as the above-mentioned tests, which have been studied over a
longer period of time, such as the SSHS and HGSHS: A, or have the speed of
instigation of the HIP. The PCI-HAP was not used specifically because this study
correlations that vary across studies with the HGSHS: A; 13-89 by some
& McConkey, 1990; Angelini, Kumar, & Chandler, 1999). The TAS is a self-test
concentration and fantasy involvement, and has been described as, “openness to
been developed by studying factors of other trait measures that were connected to
For the purposes of this study, the HGSHS: A was used. It can be
reliability (Shor & Ome, 1962). The TAS was chosen for this current study
administered swiftly, and correlates with the HGSHS (Tellegen & Atkinson,
1974). Being a trait measure it is also likely to correlate with the O Index of the
NEO-PI-R.
The connection between hypnosis and creativity was bom out of the
effortful, strategic thinking that is goal directed and primarily ruled by language
Oberlander, 1972; Bowers, 1979). Thus hypnosis and creativity are considered
regressions to primary process in the service of the ego; the unconscious does not
subsume the ego, but rather its contents are utilized by the ego in an effort to
Bowers posits the concept of effortless experiencing (Shames and Bowers, 1992).
31
their own accord for an individual engaged in hypnosis or creativity (Shames &
primary process (Shames & Bowers). Bowers describes two distinct modes of
passive phase by fantasy, and which allows for an individual to experience the
contents of the mind as if they flow of their own accord, moving from verbal to
imagery cognitions (Bowers, 1979). For Bowers, this is the foundation of both
creativity and hypnosis, and thus the connecting element between them. It does
not seem altogether distant from the ideas of primary and secondary process, and
regression in the service of the ego, but is considered more of a distinct internal
(Bowers 1978; Bowers, 1979). It may also be reflected in other studies that show
that the ability to shift focus and flexibility in processing is what defines the
Hypnosis and creativity studies have been undertaken since the 1960s
(Shames & Bowers, 1992). A sizable number of studies provide evidence for
their moderate, and positive correlation (Lynn & Sivec, 1992; Shames and
Bowers).
32
(Bowers). Maslow and Rogers (as cited in Bowers) theorized that all individuals
are latently creative, and merely await the necessary conditions, a state of
Bowers’ study was an attempt to, “study the causative role of defensiveness by
Four hundred and fifty university students were administered the HGSHS:
A (Bowers, 1967). They were then distributed into either two waking relaxed
reducing instructions (WDR) or two groups who received Hypnosis, again with
(Bowers).
the Minnesota Clerical Test (MCT), a test of clerical achievement. The MCT was
used because the scores would likely not be affected by reduced defensiveness,
(HRD, HCS) than in the relaxed-waking groups (Bowers). Bowers stated that this
indicates, “those hypnotic conditions can increase divergent thinking above its
motivated subjects with instruction to be clever and creative” (p. 318-319). Thus,
results suggested that hypnosis is a distinct state or process aside from a normal
level of relaxation. The large sample size of this study is of merit, enhancing
statistical power. There is no control for expectancy effects with regards to the
hypnotizable subjects, and this may have factored into the results. Also, as is the
case with many research studies, university students were involved, so findings
In a 1970 study by Bowers and van der Muellen, 30 high and 30 low
Consequences Test, the Holtzman Inkblot Technique, and the free association
test, from which were developed nine items. Highly hypnotizable subjects
& van der Meullen, 1970). These include the Obvious task for the Consequences
p=.003); Free Associations Test productiveness (M= 128.54 high, M=72.61 low,
34
p=,02) and number of response units (M=27.80 high, M=17.60, low, p=.005).
Significance levels are for the main effect on F tests for the measures (Bowers, &
van der Meullen). Caveats for the test include the use of university students for
Lynn and Rhue (1986; Lynn & Sivec, 1992) administered scales of
females, median age 19.1 yrs.). Theses subjects were selected from a large pool
proneness that correlates to hypnotizability (Lynn & Rhue). Those who had
tested high for fantasy proneness displayed higher scores on absorption, hypnotic
creativity than those in the other groups (Lynn & Rhue). Overall, almost 80% of
Medium= M 7.95, SD 2.73; Low=M 7.58,1,84; high > medium (p=<.05) high >
low (p=>.01)) (Lynn & Sivec, 1992). Fantasizers performed significantly higher
across all tests compared to low and nonfatasizers, with p values ranging from
.01-.05 (Lynn & Rhue). There was no significance for scores based on gender
(Sex= F (7,49) = .51 ns\ Group X Sex interaction F (14,100) = .36, ns) (Lynn &
35
Rhue). Apparent caveats with the study include, again, the use of university
(Bowers, 1978, p. 195). The subjects, pooled from a larger group of university
volunteers who were administered the HGHS: A, were assigned to high, and low
administration was done blind to group placement, as they were previously tested
.001) and creativity, .62 (p < .001). Hypnotizability and creativity correlated at .55
(p < .0001). When factoring for effortless experiencing, the correlation between
hypnotizability and creativity dropped substantially to .27. The authors state that
significant results for gender across any of the dependent variables, as was
indicated in earlier studies where female subjects rated higher on both creativity
and hypnosis.
36
Again, the study utilized a sample of university students, chosen for being
distinctly high or low in hypnotizability, compared to the mean for the general
yield statistically robust correlations (Kirsch & Council, 1992; Green, 2004).
model was developed to break down personality factors used in older measures,
such as the 16pf of Home and Cattell, to distill them to their most basic aspects
Early studies with the of the five-factor model scales with hypnotizability
used shorter versions of five-factor inventories (Green, 2004). Malinosky & Lynn
students. However, two of the sub scales correlated significantly with subjective
involvement and involuntariness in hypnosis (A, r 0.23 & 0.24, p=.01), and
the 44-item Big-Five Inventory, a measure based upon the five-factor model. One
findings were noted between the O Index and the WSGSH’s behavioral and
subjective involvement scores (r 0.18 and 0.16, p =.05 two-tailed). The A scale
also yielded a significant correlation of 0.16 p=.05 two tailed) with subjective
correlations for the Olfacet (fantasy), 0.10,02 facet (aesthetics), 0.14, and 03
the absorption subscale of the O Index and the HGSHS: A. Six hundred and fifty
undergraduate students were used in the study. The subscale yielded a correlation
of 0.15 (Green). Unfortunately Green does not cite the probability level that was
set for this study, and this review of the literature did not yield a published
version.
A factor analysis run by Green yielded little variance between the NEO-
PI-R and the HGSHS: A (2004). This is the first study to utilize the entire
assessment, rather than a shorter version of a five-factor test. The study utilized
was produced for the total O Index and hypnotizability. When separate facets of
38
the index were observed, 06, “values,” yielded a correlation of 0.12 (p=.05), and
03, “feelings,” a correlation of 0.04 (p=.05). Females scored higher than males
on the HGSHS: A and on the scores for the N, O, and A indices (Green).
literature, but ranges from low to moderate across studies (Lynn & Sivec, 1992;
Shames & Bowers, 1992). This variability is due in part to differences between
process and trait aspects of hypnosis, and the cognitive and trait aspects of
significant findings that hypnosis can enhance creativity outside of the trance state
(Lynn & Sivec, 1992). Others indicate there are studies of hypnotic creative
Creative Thinking, but nothing that involves practical application outside of the
body of literature, though not scientifically robust, that points to the use of
hypnosis for the enhancement for creative activities. It also suggests some
A case study involving the use of Ego State Therapy hypnosis to enhance
fright and assisted the subject in song writing (Perri, 2003). The client reported
that he had recently stopped using drugs, and benefited from abstinence, but had
also noticed a decrease in song writing and an increase in stage fright (Perri,
2003).
Two sessions were used. The first introduced the subject to hypnotherapy,
and the therapist suggested the client elicit the “creative part” of himself (Perri,
2003). The client was then able to create lyrics to a song, “different from any
other work he had produced” (Perri, 2003, p. 84). A second session involved the
provide relief for stage fright (Perri, 2003). The subject reported afterwards that
he, “felt the presence of this part, and was able to express himself more fully”
an artist to paint or sketch better after having received hypnotic treatment with
133-134). Seventeen patients, ages 29-62, from the author’s practice, were
block. The subjects were not tested for hypnotizability, but had been hypnotized
several times as part of therapy, and were not adverse to the process.
The procedure involved having the patient sketch an object. The patient
was then hypnotized and given the suggestions to “feel calmer, more self-
(Mellegren, 1976, p. 134). The patients were re-oriented and engaged in casual
experimental group that received the same procedure, but were given negative
suggestions were that “two of the sketchers drew a few lines, threw the pencil
away, and thereafter thoroughly abused me” (Mellegren, 1976, p. 134). The third
patient did not attempt to draw, but apparently became angry with the author.
Mellegren discontinued this aspect of the investigation, and noted that such
experiments could be dangerous and inhibiting for the patients’ ability to create,
and worried that they may attribute any creative blocks or impasses directly to the
hypnotic experience. It also points to the power of the intervention, and the need
Blind ratings by three established artists indicated that there was a marked
(Mellgren, 1976). Mellegren notes that the three who did not show any marked
improvement were not in treatment for anxiety related to a creative block, but
41
were suffering from somatic symptoms, suggesting that the subject needs to find
the intervention consistent with their needs in order for any effect to take place
(1976).
dreaming, rational discussion, and a control group that just allowed the subjects to
after treatment showed waking imagery and hypnotic dreaming groups were
Singer, p. 104). These surveys were done via telephone at one and two week
intervals. Subjects were asked to relate how satisfied they were with the status of
their project, and rate it on a 5-point Likert scale (Barrios & Singer). The
hypnotic dreaming group was given suggestions without the use of the word
hypnosis, an attempt to reduce expectancy effects. Both the waking imagery and
HGSHS a week prior to or after the treatment. Both of these precautions were
Singer).
combining famed actor and acting coach Michael Chekhov’s Centering technique
visualizations to “center” the actor for role development and sense training
p. 254).
(aged 18+ years), hypnosis may have facilitated Ss' apparent adoption of new
personae” (Fowler, 1988, p. 249). Details of the study indicate that the use of
hypnosis with highly hypnotizable actors can have results, such as the incident
quoted below, that indicate precautions should be taken with these subjects.
hallucinate that the rehearsal studio was a Greek palace and that
her fellow actor was Jason. What followed was terrifying. She
shrieked with grief, then in rage tore open a door and threw a chair
at the other actor. Luckily, she missed, and I had time to signal her
43
Though Fowler’s work was promising, apparently little work was followed in this
literature search specific to acting and hypnosis produced only this article.
Similar to Perri & Fowler’s work is the Raikov’s use of identification with
were asked to “step into the skin” of the likes of Rembrandt, Horowitz or
(Raikov).
psychology courses. They were selected randomly from a pool that had been
Demographic data (gender, age, and previous art experience) was gathered, and
the participants were administered the TAS. They were then randomly assigned
(Council, et al.). The subjects created two still life drawings, one used as baseline
measure of ability without hypnosis, and one after hypnosis or the task
professors and one art and psychology major, rated the drawings based on an
objective measure created by the second author, which was tested for reliability
(Council, et al.). The measure consisted of rating the drawings on a 4 point Likert
that the hypnotic procedure was “significantly more effective” than the
(Council, et al.). The TAS produced only two significant correlations (p< .05) pre
and post treatment with absorption and line quality in the hypnotic group, and
there was no significance for hypnosis as measured by the Waterloo. The authors
note that their experiment differed from past studies in that subjects did not
employ a standardized procedure, but were given the open ended task of creating
a drawing (Council et al.), and that their measure, compared to the CAT, was
more specific as to aspects of creativity. The authors compare their work to the
rating of the products (Council et al.). They had little in the way of explanation as
to why the use of hypnosis had a sizeable effect on products produced, but no
It is noted that the above studies were all small number studies, and many
may not generalize to the general population. The use of a new measure, lacking
vigorous and lengthy study to ascertain reliability and validity, is another problem
in the design.
Conclusion
(Lynn & Sivec, 1992; Shames & Bowers, 1992). According to some authors, this
reinforces the idea of unconscious processes involved in both, and adds support
higher. Lastly, weak results have been found regarding personality trait factors
with imaginative capacity and dissociation, and with the scores influenced by
participants knowledge of the use of hypnosis in the studies (Kirsch & Council,
1992). Most of the research on creativity and hypnosis has been done with
population. Case studies with creative types produce evidence that the use of
hypnosis can enhance creative output. The fluidity in shifts in mental processing
observed in the hypnotic state may elicit similar aspects of the creative state. This
46
The current study differs from earlier quantitative studies. For example, it
is considered to be more creative than the rest of the population, due to the type of
work in their field. It was hypothesized that this population’s scores on creativity
would be higher on divergent thinking measures and trait measures. Also, if there
is indeed a relationship between the two traits, then creative individuals would
likewise score higher on both trait and process measures of hypnotizability due to
Chapter 3
Methodology
Sample Employed
Subjects for this study were artists (n=17), art therapists (n=5), art therapy
students (n=9), dancers (n=2), writers (3), photographers (n=2), composers (n=l),
and musicians (n=2), based in a major, Midwestern, metropolitan area. All of the
subjects were voluntary participants. Three recruitment sources were used: art
therapists from an on-line, artists community resource, and art therapists through
(Appendix B). The art therapy students were recruited via an introductory lecture
(Appendix C) within their classrooms after written permission from their program
head was granted. The author lead researcher, the author of this paper, screened
all subjects prior to inclusion of the study via phone and email. Subjects recruited
from the art therapy association and the artist’s resource website were screened
via a phone interview. Criteria for inclusion included whether Inclusion criteria
was based upon whether they could some substantiation of activity in a creative
field (i.e., visual, performing, or written arts), or that they were a university
student in those fields. Art therapists recruited from the art therapy newsletter
met criteria due to inclusion on the newsletter; art therapy students were contacted
via a private school. Subjects recruited from on-line artists’ resource forwarded
48
email links to the primary researcher to verify the veracity of their statements
The sample for this study was 32 (n=32). Subjects were provided an
of Professional Psychology.
Instruments Used
This study employed the Tellegen Absorption Scale (TAS) (Tellegen and
(HGHS: A; Shor & Ome, 1962) was also used. The Abbreviated Torrance Tests
for Adults (ATTA; Goff & Torrance, 2002), and the Openness Index of the Neo-
with hypnosis, often with hypnotizability at ranges between .13-.89, and with the
HGSHS:A in particular from .00-.50, with a mean score of .20 (Roche &
McConkey, 1990; Angelini, et al., 1999). Validity is set at .66-.75, and reliability
at .85-.95 over various studies (Tellegen & Atkinson). It was incorporated into
eight content categories: (a) Imaginative and oblivious involvement; (b. Affective
stimuli; (d) Vivid re-experiencing of the past; (e) Expansion of awareness; (f)
was used to test the subjects for hypnotizability (Shor & Ome, 1962). It is a
standard test within the field of hypnosis research, with predictive validity of .74
and reliability of .80 (Shor & Ome). The HGSHS: A consists of two sets of
responses number 12 items; the subjective number 11. Items are divided into
Motoric questions require the client to produce physical movement in the arms,
such events as a fly buzzing around ones head, or to produce amnesia for the
questions (Shor & Ome). The normed sample is based on the objective items
score of hypnotizability (Shor & Ome). The highest score possible on the
HGSHS: A is 12; the lowest is 0. There is also a subjective set of questions that
can be used for reliability of the responses within subject. These range from 0-11.
The Abbreviated Torrance Test for Adults (ATTA) (Goff & Torrance,
2002) is a brief, divergent thinking measure based on the earlier Torrance Tests of
50
based upon the original Torrance Tests of creative thinking; divergent thinking
tests with strong validity and reliability (Kaufman, et al., 2008). Criterion validity
is calculated at .63, and reliability at .89-.94 (Goff & Torrance). The ATTA
consists of three tests, each taking three minutes to administer, for a total
administration time of nine minutes. The first test is verbal, which corresponds to
a similar question from the Torrance Test, the second and third are figural. The
second test is an incomplete figure test; the third is a variation the Lines and
Circles test from the full battery of Torrance tests, in this case involving sets of
triangles to create pictures (Goff & Torrance; Kaufman, et al., 2008). Scoring
visual perspective, expressions of feelings and emotions, fantasy). The totals for
Creativity Index. This last score can be converted to a Creativity Level score; a
standardized 7-point sale that aids in describing where the subject falls within the
The use of a trait and a cognitive measure allows for variability in the
creativity measures. The Torrance tests have not been used extensively in
creativity and hypnosis research, and this version of the Torrance tests has never
administration, rather than using the other, lengthier versions of the test, in an
effort to control for test fatigue in an already lengthy battery of measures. It was
measure, extracted from the NEO-PI-R. (Costa & McRae). The 48 items of the O
Index were separated from the entire 240-item test to reduce the amount of time
spent on administration, which could have resulted in test fatigue and confounded
results.
Convergent validity of the NEO-PI-R is .66, and reliability has been calculated at
.86-.95 (Costa & McRae). The O Index has been found to correlate with
constituted of six separate facets. These are 01, openness to fantasy (the capacity
emotionality), 04, actions (trying and being interest in new n novel things), 05,
separate facet scores are combined in the domain or index score. Raw scores are
Procedures
The main researcher, the author of this paper, administered and scored the
groups as large as possible to finish the study in a timely fashion. The HGSHS: A
was difficult to create several large groups to gather data, and thus the collection
administered the battery was one; the largest number was ten. The data was
collected from 24 of the subject in the spring of 2012 and 8 from the fall of 2012.
Demographic data was obtained from the subjects at the time of administration.
The order was chosen based upon swiftness of execution, and to assure that any
lingering effects from the experience of hypnosis would not affect test taking
mp3 player and a portable, high quality sound system. The same sound system
and mp3 player was used in each administration for standardization. Consent was
informed that re-alerting from hypnosis could be a lengthy process, and were
slight possibility that some of the suggestions on the HGSHS: A could induce
discomfort in some of the subjects, it was planned to halt the administration and
moment, if such an event took place. The use of a re-alerting scale, such as the
second half of the Howard Alertness Scale (HAS), woiild also be used if such an
incident took place (Kluft, 2012). The HAS consists of questions regarding level
of alertness to a subject asked a priori and after hypnosis, and incorporates a 10-
point Likert scale. Only the second half of the test could be utilized in this
instance, as the a priori questions would have contaminated the test results. If
there were any adverse memories brought about by the induction, clients were to
be referred to a list of therapists to help them work through any issues. The
no such incident took place, and clients did not report any negative memories or
became more fully reoriented during the questionnaire, and were further checked
in with to make sure they were fully alert afterwards. A brief interview was held
to help the subjects further process their experience. Then, a debriefing took
place, and the purpose of the study was discussed in further detail, and questions
30 minutes with each group. This writer further checked in with the subjects to
verify they had attained full consciousness and there were no lingering effects of
hypnosis before they were dismissed from the room and left the building.
All data was collected, with strict confidentiality being taken into account.
Subjects were assigned a number upon entry into the study; personal information
that could identify the subjects was withheld. Hardcopies of the data were kept in
a locked file cabinet by the principal investigator at the Institute for Clinical
Hypnosis and Research. This is an institution founded by the late Dr. Erika
Fromm, and currently presided over by Stephen Kahn, PhD. All electronic data
was stored on a code-locked computer at the same office, to be held there for up
Data Analysis
rho) correlations were run for the results the four tests. Cronbach’s alpha
55
coefficient was used to measure the reliability of each test administered. The
HGSHS:A (hypnosis) was held as the independent variable against the other three
variables as the dependent variables. A scatter plot for each measure held against
the measure with the largest correlational effect (TAS) was generated to display
outlier scores. The effects of outliers were removed from the correlational matrix
and it was again run to test for increased statistical power. No change in results
difference between the scores based on gender, and to deduce any differences
Chapter 4
Results
the 32 subjects, 22 were female, 10 were men. An a-priori sample size calculator
as the minimum number for a multiple regression, with a medium effect size.
This measure would have been used to assess for a relationship between the
variables had there been significant correlations for all of them. The average age
of the subjects was 34.125, with a range of 64. Those identified as artists made
represented vocation was one composer (2. 3%). Art therapy students (n=9,
20.9%) and art therapists (n=5,11.6%) made up the other larger representative
Means and standard deviations for all measures produced in this study, as
well as those for the sample norms for the measures are shown in Table 2. The
results show that overall the subjects did remarkably better on the TAS and NEO-
PI O Index than those of the norm samples; the subjects performed approximately
one standard deviation above the mean for the TAS, and two standard deviations
for the O Index. Subjects performed slightly lower on the HGSHS: A (M 6.62,
SD 2.57) than the sample norms for the test (M 7.39 & 7.31, SD 2.71) (Shor &
57
Ome, 1962; Shor & Ome, 1963; Kihlstrom, & Evans, 1976), and about average
for the ATTA (M 70.9, SD 13.27) compared to the sample norms (M 69.43, SD
10.98). It was not possible to perform a t-test of independent means of the current
sample data with the population norms for the tests. However, appraising the
means and standard deviations does allow one to judge the current samples’
Significant reliability levels were produced for each of the instruments. The TAS
produced an alpha level of .703. The ATTA alpha level for the total score,
Creativity Index was .782, whereas the Figural and Verbal scores separated were
.60. The HGSHS: A produced an alpha level of .716. Lastly, the NEOPI-R O
measures. The null hypothesis was accepted for all but one of the hypotheses.
HI, “In general, individuals who score high on measures of hypnotizability will
score high on measures of creativity, and low hypnotizables will score low on
creativity,” produced insignificant, negative results for two of the scores. The
correlation between the HGSHS: A and the ATTA was slightly inversed (-.137,
p=.228) but insignificant. The correlation between the HGSHS: A and the O
Index was insignificant as well (.068, p=.356). However, there was a significant
58
low correlation between the O Index and the TAS (.356, p= .023). Thus, the null
can only be accepted on the grounds of the first measures, ATTA and HGSHS: A,
The null hypothesis was also accepted for the second hypothesis, “Female
subjects will produce higher scores on both creativity and hypnosis than male
subjects,” Table 5 illustrates the results for an independent means t-test for the
gender differences across all measures. The TAS produced insignificant t score
(.817, p=.434), but slightly higher results for males (M 31.10, SD 18.11) than
females (M 26.36, SD 4.08). The ATTA results, with females scoring slightly
higher (M 71.40, SD 10.63) than males (M 69.8, SD 18.46) with a t score of -.315
(p=.756). The HGSHS: A yielded slightly higher scores for males (M 6.9, SD
2.68) than females (M 6.50, SD 2.57) with a t score of .402 (p=.691). Lastly, the
O Index also produced slightly higher scores for males (M 74.1, SD 8.19) than
(t= -1.0,/?=.324). The means for the O Index and TAS were also significantly
2.
The null hypothesis was accepted for hypothesis three: “The, cognitive
(HGSHS: A) will correlate slightly.” As indicated above, the ATTA and the
The null hypothesis was also accepted for hypothesis four, “The
Null was also accepted for hypothesis 5, ‘The trait measure of creativity
(NEO-PI-R O Index) will also correlate slightly with the process measure of
Null was rejected for hypothesis 6, “The trait measure of creativity (NEO-
PI-R O Index) will correlate strongly with the trait measure of hypnotizability
objective ratings correlated significantly with its internal, subjective rating scale
(.876, p = .000). The ATTA results were insignificant and slightly negatively
correlated with the other measures. Due to the general lack of correlations, non-
parametric coefficients, Kendall’s Tau and Spearman’s Rho, were also executed
to take into account lack of homoscedasticty. The particularly high scores for the
TAS and O Index, one and two standard deviations above the normed sample
60
scores, and several other outliers in the other measures called for their use; it was
assumed that non-parametric measures, which use the median, rather than a mean
score as a central tendency, would help to give a more accurate picture of any
correlations. All the TAS and NEOPI-O Index interactions were significant
across coefficients, whereas the HGHS: A and ATTA results were again
insignificant.
The results for a test of an independent means for the spring and fall data
collection groups are listed in Table 6. This was done in order to distinguish any
significant variability between the scores of two groups. The TAS produced
slightly higher results for the Spring administrations (M 26.50, SD 4.62) than the
p=,623). The ATTA produced similar results with Spring scores again slightly
slightly higher scores for Spring (M 6.75, SD 2.64) than the Fall sample (M 6.55,
SD 2.68), which was also not statistically significant (t .47,p=.642). Lastly, the
O Index produced slightly higher scores for the Fall sample (M74.87, SD 4.67)
Chapter 5
Discussion
It was expected that this study would have produced results similar to
expected to produce higher results across all measures compared to the normed
sample scores for the tests, because highlighting higher creativity was assumed to
The general lack of correlation between high and low creativity and
hypnotizability on the HGSHS: A and ATTA was surprising, especially with the
subset of the population that was tested. The correlation between the HGSHS: A
and the O Index was insignificant as well. The scores for both the TAS and the O
Index were significantly higher than the population norms. There are several
possibilities for this. For example, this particular sample pool, though identifying
creativity ability. Also, the use of individuals who identified as only art therapists
problematic; they may not have been significantly higher in creative capacity.
The high scores and correlation of the TAS and O Index may point to a
indicated by the average scores on the ATTA and HGSHS: A. It may well be that
62
this is more important as an impetus and drive for such individuals in choice of
vocation. These extremely high scores also may account for why results for
What was perhaps most striking among the findings was the lack of
correlation between the HGSHS: A and the TAS. As per the literature, these two
measures were expected to at least produce significant, low correlations, and were
predicted to be higher due to the subset of the population studied (Roche &
studies, they do not produce a correlation, so the results here were not altogether
unexpected. Again, the small sample population of the study may have
contributed to the lack of significant correlation between these two tests. Most
studies use larger samples, and often with undergraduate populations, with a
difference in median age (Roche & McConkey, 1991). Three statistical outliers
within the population performed exceedingly low on the HGSHS: A, while two of
them performed well over the mean for the TAS. It is possible that larger number
The use of the recorded standardized induction with the HGSHS: A was
considered annoying and disruptive by some of the participants, and they felt
distracted by it, rather than able to fully experience the process. This is due to the
lengthy use of suggestions for individuals assumed to need more time to enter the
trance state. Some participants who had quickly felt relaxed became annoyed
63
with the continued commands. Had the induction been performed by one of the
However, the script itself is standardized, and this cannot be adjusted. The
recording too was used with the original sample norms. Thus it was felt that the
creativity, the ATTA, may not be applicable to observations of people who work
in a domain specific area. In other words, it may have not actually been the best
choice to measure creativity with such a specific population. Though one can
argue that output of the ATTTA are creative products, a domain specific measure,
such as the Consensual Assessment Technique, may have given a more accurate
estimation for the level of creativity within this population. However, time
creative fields would have been difficult for this study. The CAT is specific to
each domain tested; i.e., visual artists must produce a drawing or a painting, poets,
poetry, and so forth. This would have likely added more time constraints in
obtaining the sample, as the sample population would have been more specific,
puts the subject in the position of needing to perform under pressure, possibly
inducing performance anxiety, and may not actually be conducive to the creative
64
process. If, as Getzels and Csikszentmihalyi (1976) have pointed out, creativity is
best evoked through a lengthy period of exploration, then it would follow that
timed tests may be especially ineffective of measuring the trait with creative
the ATTA was deemed the best choice for this study.
based upon an earlier, shortened version of the Torrance test (Goff & Torrance,
2002). One finding of this study was that the alpha levels suggest good to inter
The lack of significant correlation between the O Index and the HGSHS:
extremely high mean for the O Index, which was expected. The HGSHS: A
between both tests, with varying use of versions of the NEO-PI-R and often
parsing out coefficients with separate subscales of the O Index (Gilsky, et al.,
1991; Green, 2004). Only one study yielded a significant correlation with the
entire O Index (Gilsky, et al.; Green). However, there were several differences
between the sample of that study, including the size being much larger, and the
use undergraduates, where the median age does not reflect that of the current
65
study (Gilsky, et al.). Sample differences with the other studies mentioned in the
two things. First, it suggests that there may no difference for scores on
and 68.6 percent). To have a more accurate, statistical view of this finding, a
the sample of creative types for this geographic location itself is higher in
females, and the population was accurately represented within the opportunity
sample.
number of subjects. A larger number would have provided more statistical power,
However, due to time constraints imposed because of slow collection speed, the
study utilized the current number. It is noted that some of the studies in the
literature utilized small number samples, but usually after collection of data from
larger sample pools, and utilizing high and low scorers for the more focused
The groups administered varied in size. This may have affected the results
as well. The larger groups may have influenced individuals to perform more
66
readily on the tests due to social desirability of the traits among the population.
Subjects may have also experienced more performance anxiety in social settings.
Conversely, administrations with only one or two subjects may have may
Having produced three or four larger groups, rather than the smaller (sometimes
with one individual in the administration) could have, perhaps, produced more
participation at any one time. Another problem with using this opportunity pool
booked for participation and agreed upon a time to meet, but then cancelled or did
Conclusion
The general trend in scores in this sample was that the TAS and O Index
were in the extremely high range, whereas the scores for the ATTA were average
and the HGSHS: A scores were insignificantly, slightly lower than average.
Thus, the extreme range for the former scores contributed to the overall lack of
correlation. The findings suggest that the personality domain of creativity and
The variance between the scores may also be seen as parallel to a general
trend in creativity and intelligence scores. Getzels and Jackson (1962) indicated
that when scores fall closer to the highest percentile ranks for intelligence, the
correlation with divergent thinking dissipates. When their entire sample was
convergent or intelligence quotient tests, it may well be that a similar trend can be
across measures.
The purpose of the study was to replicate earlier studies relating hypnosis
and creativity, and combine older measures with newer ones. The hope was that
the findings could add to the body of knowledge regarding the two traits and that
this could lead to a better understanding of both. Further, this knowledge could
have provided a direction for the use of hypnosis in generative as well as clinical
research in this area should look to using a larger sample size, a more
homogenous population, likely excluding the use of art therapy as a criteria, and
obtaining BD-TTCT, the earlier, brief version of the Torrance Tests, with proper
could be a point of focus to consider for future research. The findings from
Council et al. (2008) suggest absorption as being the most salient factor in the
Csikszentmihalyi (1976) report that individuals who spent longer within the
problem finding phase of their study produced objects higher in originality and
aesthetic value. The extended period within this process may also indicate that
with the measures within this study, and the CAT (Kaufman et al., 2008), a more
robustly studied product measure of creativity than that of the newer measures of
the Council et al. study, could provide insight into the relation between hypnosis
References
Angelini, F. J., Kumar, V. K., & Chandler, L. (1999) The Harvard group scale of
Baer, J., Kaufman, J. C., & Gentile, C. A. (2004). Extension of the consensual
Barrios, M. V., & Singer, J.L. (1981). The treatment of creative blocks: A
109.
Bowers, K. S., & van der Meullen, S. J. (1970). Effect of hypnotic susceptibility
311-322.
Bowers, P. (1979). Hypnosis and creativity: The search for the missing link.
Council, J. R., Bromley, K. A., Zabelina, D. L., &Waters, C.G. (2007). Hypnotic
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised neo personality inventory (NEO-
Fromm, E., & Kahn, S. (1990). Self-hypnosis: The Chicago paradigm. New York:
Guilford.
Getzels, J. W., & Jackson, P.W. (1962). Creativity and intelligence: Explorations
University Press.
Gilsky, M. L., Tartaryn, D. J., Tobias, B. A., Kihlstrom, J. F., & McConkey, K.
112-123.
Goff, K, & Torrance, P. (2002). The Abbreviated Torrance Test for Adults.
Gritzalis, N., Oster, M., & Frischholz, E. J. (2009). A concurrent validity study
between the hypnotic induction profile (HIP) and the Stanford hypnotic
Gruenwald, D., Fromm, E, & Oberlander, M .1. (1972). Hypnosis and adaptive
Kahn, S., & Delaney, M. (2010, March). Hypnosis for creativity enhancement.
Kerr, B., & Gagliardi, C. (2003). Measuring creativity in research and practice.
Psychological Association.
Press.
Krippner, S. (1965). Hypnosis and creativity. Gifted Child Quarterly, 9 (3), 149-
155.
73
Lynn, S. J. & Kirsch, I. (2006). Contemporary theories and research. In: Lynn, S.
Association.
Perri, F. B. (2003). An investigation into the use of ego state therapy in enhancing
Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. (2004). Character strengths and virtues. Oxford,
148-155.
74
Shames, V. A., & Bowers, P. G. (1992). Hypnosis and creativity, In: Fromm, E.
Shor, R. E., & Ome, E. C. (1963). Norms on the Harvard group scale of hypnotic
http://www.danielsoper.com/statcalc3/calc.aspx?id=l
solving, science, invention, and the arts. Hoboken, New Jersey: John
Woody, E. Z., & Bamier, A. J. (2008). Hypnosis scales for the twentieth century:
what we need and how should we use them? In: Nash, M. & Bamier, A.J.
APPENDIX A
STUDY:
Statement of Purpose
You are being asked to participate in a research study that is being conducted by
Scott Hoye, a doctoral student at the Adler School of Professional Psychology.
This research is being done in fulfillment of his doctoral program at the school.
The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between creativity and
hypnotizability.
Benefits of Participation
It is hoped that the gathering of this information will provide important
information about the nature of both hypnotizability and creativity in creative
77
Confidentiality
All information gathered as part of this study is strictly confidential. Your name
will never be attached to the data, and a participant number will be issued instead
of a name. All raw data will be kept in a locked filing cabinet, in a locked office
of the Institute for Clinical Hypnosis and Research (ICHR) by the Principal
Investigators. All data entered into a computer for data analysis will be kept in a
code-locked computer in the same office.
Further Information
For further information regarding this project can be directed to Scott Hoye
([email protected]), or Dr. Jerry Westermeyer, chair of Scott Hoye’s
dissertation committee ([email protected]). Questions or concerns about your
rights as a research participant should be sent to Catherine McNeilly, Psy.D. at
312-662-4000 or, [email protected]. You will receive a copy of a consent
form for your records as well.
By signing below, you agree that you have read the above statements, you
understand and agree to the terms therein, and that you agree to participate in this
study.
APPENDIX B
APPENIX C
Hello. My name is Scott Hoye. I am a 3rd year Clinical Doctorate student here at
the Adler School of Professional Psychology. I am researching correlations
between the traits of creativity and hypnosis. 1 am specifically interested in
populations that are considered to be more creative by the culture at large. This,
of course, would include students in an art therapy program, such as all of you.
The study would benefit and be of interest to art therapists. How you could help
me, if you choose to consider being a part of it, would be to volunteer as a subject.
The Adler School of Professional Psychology Institutional Review Board has
approved this study. It will involve the administration of personality measures of
creativity and hypnotizability, lasting approximately an hour and fifteen minutes.
I am looking to set up small groups of participants, of somewhere from ten-20 per
group. If you participate, you will be reimbursed with a small stipend of $10.00
for your time. There will be disclosure regarding the nature the research to the
subjects after the tests have been administered. I would also like to offer
participants a chance to learn more in a small presentation and discussion
regarding the body of literature on this subject, and how my study relates to it,
and to your field.
I will be setting up times to run small groups and individual subjects in the Spring
2012 semester at the Adler School. These will take place throughout the year.
Please contact me at to let me know your interest and availability by signing up
on the sheet that I am passing around.
Table 1
Variable M Range SD
AGE
34.125 63 12.72
Variable n percent
GENDER
Female 22 68.6
Male 10 31.3
CREATIVE OCCUPTION
Artist 17 39.5
Art Therapy Student 9 20.9
Art Therapist 5 11.6
Writer 3 7.0
Dancer 2 4.7
Musician 2 4.7
Photographer 2 4.7
Actor 2 4.7
Composer 1 2.3
A
81
Table 2
26.28 4.26 20 6
72.5 7.73 50 10
82
Table 3
Table 4
Measure 1 2 3 4
Pearson Correlation
Kendall’s Tau
Spearman’s Rho
Table 5
NEO-PI-R O Index
Table 6
NEO-PI-R Q Index