JSEMTS搜尋引擎
 

Binaural-Beat Induced Theta EEG ActivityBinaural-Beat Induced Theta EEG Activity
and Hypnotic Susceptibility
D. Brian Brady
Northern Arizona University
May 1997

ABSTRACT

Six participants varying in degree of hypnotizability (two lows, two mediums,
and two highs) were exposed to three sessions of a binaural-beat sound
stimulation protocol designed to enhance theta brainwave activity. The Stanford
Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C (SHSS:C) was used for pre and
post-stimulus measures of hypnotic susceptibility. Time-series analysis was used
to evaluate anterior theta activity in response to binaural-beat sound
stimulation over baseline and stimulus sessions. A protocol designed to increase
anterior theta activity resulted in a significant increase in theta measures (%
activity) between pre-stimulus baseline and stimulus observations for five of
six participants. Hypnotic susceptibility levels remained stable in the
high-susceptible group, and increased moderately in the low and medium
susceptible groups.

INTRODUCTION
Differential individual response to hypnosis, has, captured the attention of
hypnosis practitioners and researchers since the time of Mesmer, in the late
18th century. Despite the long recognized importance of individual variation in
hypnotizability, efforts to modify or increase individual hypnotic
susceptibility have proven to be problematic and controversial.
Part of the difficulty in addressing the nature of hypnotizability has been the
lack of consensus regarding the basic phenomena of hypnosis. The central issue
has been whether observed hypnotic responses are due to an altered stated of
consciousness or merely the product of psychosocial factors.
Considering hypnosis as either an altered state or as a purely psychosocial
phenomenon served to provide two opposing factions into which most theories of
hypnosis could be grouped. Contemporary hypnosis researchers tend to hold less
extreme positions, realizing the benefit of a perspective which is comprised of
the strengths of both the special-process (i.e., altered state of consciousness)
and the social-psychological theoretical domains.

Theoretical Perspectives of Hypnosis
The 1960's witnessed the advent of standardized hypnotic susceptibility
measurements. Reliable standardized instruments have been developed for use with
groups and individuals. Early work with the electroencephalogram (EEG) designed
to identify hypnotic susceptibility also began around this time. More recent EEG
/ hypnosis research has focused on electrocortical correlates of both the state
of, and differential individual response to, hypnosis. The concept of a reliable
electrocortical correlate of hypnotic susceptibility draws attention to the
recent applications of neurofeedback therapy, which has employed a number of
protocols designed for individual brainwave modification. Recent advances in the
application of binaural-beat technology and the associated EEG frequency
following response, which can be either relaxing or stimulating, have
demonstrated efficacy of brainwave modification in areas such as enriched
learning, improved sleep, and relaxation (Atwater, 1997). In consideration of
recent EEG / hypnosis research along with the recently demonstrated efficacy of
EEG neurofeedback training research and the binaural-beat technology
applications, it would seem that the lingering question of hypnotizability
modification can now be addressed by utilizing brainwave modification within a
systematic protocol.
As mentioned earlier, it has often been the case in the past to view the field
of hypnosis as being dominated, theoretically, by two opposing camps; the
special-process and the social-psychological. In general, the special-process
view holds that hypnosis induces a unique state of consciousness; whereas, the
social-psychological view maintains that hypnosis is not a distinct
physiological state.
Popular authors of the post-Mesmeric period (i.e., mid 19th century), such as
James Braid, proposed psychophysiological and sometimes neurophysiological
explanations for the hypnotic phenomenon (Sabourin, 1982). In fact, Braid
adopted the term "neuro-hypnology" to describe the phenomenon and is credited as
the originator of the term "hypnosis" (Bates, 1994, p. 27). The work of other
English physicians, such as John Elliotson and James Esdaile, on surgical
anesthesia and clinical pain relief in the mid-19th century (Soskis, 1986), are
indicative of the psychophysiological zeitgeist of hypnosis in that time. This
physiologically-oriented perspective is reflected in Hilgard's neodissociation
model (Hilgard, 1986), which suggests that hypnosis involves the activation of
hierarchically arranged subsystems of cognitive control. This dissociation of
consciousness is clearly manifested in the realm of hypnotically induced
analgesia. Hilgard's conception of a "hidden observer" (Hilgard, 1973) as a
dissociated part of consciousness, a part that is always aware of nonexperienced
pain and can be communicative with the therapist, is exemplified in his
description of a hypnotically analgesic individual whose hand and arm were
immersed in circulating ice water as follows:

All the while that she was insisting verbally that she felt no pain in hypnotic
analgesia, the dissociated part of herself was reporting through automatic
writing that she felt the pain just as in the normal nonhypnotic state. (p. 398)

In Hilgard's model, the hidden observer is the communication of the above
described subsystem not available to consciousness during hypnosis. It is
reasonable to assume, considering hypnosis research with pain control, that such
a dissociative effect of cognitive functioning (i.e., cortical inhibition) would
have, as a substrate, some neuropsychophysiological correlate.
Often the social-psychological or social-learning position sees hypnotic
behaviors as other complex social behaviors, the result of such factors as
ability, attitude, belief, expectancy, attribution, and interpretation of the
situation (Krisch & Lynn, 1995). The influence of such variables as learning
history and environmental influences are described by Barber (1969). In this
influential discourse, Barber presents a framework in which hypnotic responding
is related to antecedent stimuli, such as expectations, motivation, definition
of the situation, and the experimenter-subject relationship. Diamond (1989)
proposed a variation of the social-psychological view which emphasized the
cognitive functions associated with the experience of hypnosis, as described in
the following:

It may be most fruitful to think of hypnotizability as a set of cognitive skills
rather than a stable trait. Thus, it is conceivable that the so called
"insusceptibe" or refractory S [subject] is 'simply less adept at creating,
implementing, or utilizing the requisite cognitive skills in hypnotic test
situations. Similarly, what makes for a highly responsive or "virtuoso" S may
well be precisely the ability or skill to generate those cognitive processes
within the context of a unique relationship with a hypnotist. (p. 382)

According to the social-psychological paradigm, an individual's response to
hypnosis is related to a disposition toward hypnosis, expectations, and the use
of more effective cognitive strategies, not because the individual possesses a
certain level of hypnotic ability. An important implication of the social
psychological or social-learning theory is that an individual's level of
hypnotizability can be modified and thus enhanced with systematic strategies to
accommodate for individual deficiencies. These two positions can no longer be
perceived as a dichotomy, but more accurately as overlapping areas in a Venn
diagram. It is not difficult for one to recognize the role of both individual
characteristics (i.e., differential neurological activity) and contextual
variables (i.e., psychosocial constructs) in measuring and determining the
hypnotic response. In other words, the hypnotic response can be viewed as a
product of a trance-like state of altered consciousness, which is itself
moderated by psychosocial factors such as social influence, personal abilities,
and possibly the effects of modification strategies. Such a perspective allows
for a more complete investigation of the nature of hypnotic susceptibility by
taking into account the relevant issues within each position.
Importance of Individual Differences
In the middle 1960's the focus on hypnotic research was dominated by a trait, or
individual difference, approach. The use of standardized hypnotic susceptibility
measurements became common. Most practitioners today tend to view hypnotic
susceptibility as a relatively stable characteristic that varies across
individuals. This view, and the realization of individual variability in the
ability to experience hypnosis, are not new ideas, as Mesmer long ago emphasized
the individual's receptivity to hypnotic process (Laurence & Perry, 1988).
Braid, an English physician during the 19th century, described the remarkable
differences of different individuals in the degree of susceptibility to the
hypnotic experience (Waite, 1960). The importance of within-individual
variability in hypnotic susceptibility is also found in Braid's comments that
individuals are affected differently, and that even the same individual could
react differently at different times to hypnosis (Waite, 1960). Differential
responses to hypnosis were recognized by Freud in his attempts to determine
which patients would be the most responsive to hypnotic training. Freud, like
others at this time, was unable to identify reliable correlates of
hypnotizability. Freud's frustration is reflected in his observation that "We
can never tell in advance whether it VAII be possible to hypnotize a patient or
not, and the only way m have of discovering is by the attempt itself' (Freud,
1966, p. 106). This view is reflected in the methodology of current standardized
scales of hypnotizability which use direct measures of hypnotic responses to
determine level of hypnotizability.
Differential treatment outcome, associated with individual differences in the
way individuals respond to hypnosis, has been observed by practitioners for
centuries. Hypnotic susceptibility may also be a relevant factor in the practice
of health psychology / behavioral medicine. Bowers (1979) suggested that
hypnotic ability is important in the healing or improvement of various somatic
disorders. He has also provided evidence that therapeutic outcomes with
psychosomatic disorders "re correlated with hypnotic susceptibility, even Men
hypnotic procedures were not employed (Bowers, 1982). Significant relationships
have been found between hypnotizability and the reduction of chronic pain,
chronic facial pain, headaches, and skin disorders (e.g., warts, chronic
urticaria, and atopic eczema) with hypnotic techniques (Brown, 1992). Support
for the interaction of negative emotions and hypnotic ability as a mediator of
symptoms and disease has also been provided by recent research (Wickramasekera,
1979,1994; Wickramasekera, Pope, & Kolm, 1996). A recent article by
Ruzyla-Smith, Barabasz, Barabasz & Warner (1995), measuring the effects of
hypnosis on the immune response, found significant increases in B-cells and
helper T-cells only for the highly hypnotizable participants in the study. This
report not only suggests that hypnosis can modify the activity of components of
the immune system, but also highlights the importance of individual variability
in response to hypnosis.
In terms of modification of hypnotizability, initial hypnotic susceptibility
level may be a factor in the resulting degree of modification. In a paper
discussing the issue of hypnotizability modification, Perry (1977) presented a
number of studies employing a range of less susceptible individuals for
modification training. Overall, the attempts to modify hypnotizability were
unsuccessful in these studies. Perry suggested that successful modification
tends to be more common in medium susceptible individuals. It may be that the
medium susceptible individual, having already demonstrated a certain degree of
hypnotic ability, possesses the underlying cognitive framework essential to the
hypnotic experience. This line of reasoning could explain the differential
responses of low susceptible and medium susceptible individuals to
hypnotizability modification training. The high susceptible individual could
also prove to be less responsive to modification strategies compared to the
medium susceptible individual, as a potential exists for a ceiling effect with
the high susceptible individual.
Standardized Measures of Hypnotic Susceptibility
The long observed differences in individual response to hypnosis eventually led
to the development of the first viable measures of hypnotizability, the Stanford
Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Forms A and B (SHSS:A and SHSS:B) by
Weitzenhoffer and Hilgard (1959). The introduction of the Stanford Hypnotic
Susceptibility Scale, Form C (SHSS:C) by Weitzenhoffer and Hilgard (1962)
represented an improved version of the two earlier forms; it was comprised of a
greater proportion of more difficult cognitive items. The SHSS:C is still the
prevalent measure of hypnotic susceptibility in current use and is often the
criterion by which other measures of hypnotizability are evaluated (Perry,
Nadon, & Button, 1992). This instrument is essentially an ascending scale which
begins with relatively easy hypnotic induction procedures and progressively
moves to more difficult trance challenges.
A recent study by Kurtz & Strube (1996), comparing a number of hypnotic
measures, described the SHSS:C as the gold standard of susceptibility tests.
This study also addressed the idea of using multiple measures of hypnotic
susceptibility in order to improve predictive power over using a single
administered test. Kurtz & Strube (1996) concluded that the use of multiple
measures of susceptibility was not warranted, and that the "rational" choice for
a single measure of hypnotic susceptibility would be the SHSS:C.
Research with the EEG and Hypnotic Susceptibility
Brainwaves are the far-field electrical wave patterns set up by neurochemical
activity in the living brain. The electroencephalograph (EEG) is an instrument
which can measure this activity and determine its strength (higher or lower
amplitude) and speed (high or low frequency). Scientists have characterized
brainwaves into four broad categories: (a) beta, brainwaves above 13 cycles per
second (or hertz), indicative of active consciousness; (b) alpha, a slower
brainwave ranging from 8 to l2 hertz, characteristic of a relaxed conscious
state of awareness; (c) theta, the next slower waves ranging from 4 to 8 hertz,
often associated with dreamlike imagery and deep relaxation; (d) delta, the
slowest waves from 0 to 4 hertz which can predominate during dreamless sleep.

The majority of early research with hypnosis shared a common goal: the
development of a methodology to determine if, and when, an individual is
hypnotized. The majority of early EEG research with hypnosis focused on the
state of hypnosis, often attempting to distinguish the state of hypnosis from
the state of sleep (Sabourin, 1982). Weitzenhoffer's 1953 review of studies
utilizing the EEG with hypnosis concluded that hypnosis is perhaps more akin to
light sleep than either deep sleep or the waking state.
A shift occurred in the late 1960's as researchers began investigating possible
electrocortical correlates of hypnotic susceptibility using the EEG. The
predominant focus in hypnosis research from this time forward was on individual
differences rather that the hypnotic state per se. Much of the early research
focused on alpha wave indices of hypnotic susceptibility. A review by Dumas
(1977) found that no alpha-hypnotizability correlation existed in the general
population. Additionally, a recent critical review by Perlini & Spanos (1991)
offered little support for an alpha-hypnotizability relationship. Other early
studies found greater resting theta wave activity with highly susceptible
individuals (Galbraith, London, Leibovitz, Cooper & Hart, 1970; Tebecis,
Provins, Farnbach & Pentony, 1975; Akpinar, Ulett, and ltil, 1971). Overall, the
comparison of early EEG research proves difficult given the aggregate of
technologies and methodologies employed over a span of time characterized by
extreme variance in technological development.
Recent studies have reexamined the relationship between EEG measures and
hypnotic susceptibility based on rigorous subject screening and control, along
with enhanced recording and analytic techniques. Sabourin, Cutcomb, Crawford,
and Pribram (1990) found highly hypnotizable subjects to generate substantially
more mean theta power than did low hypnotizable subjects in frontal, central,
and occipital derivations during resting nonhypnotic baseline, with largest
differences observed in the frontal (F3, F4) locations. According to a review by
Crawford and Gruzeiler (1992), theta activity, which is strongly and positively
related to hypnotic susceptibility, is the most consistent EEG correlate of
hypnotic susceptibility. The results of a recent study by Graffin, Ray & Lundy
(1995) indicate that highly hypnotizable subjects demonstrate significantly more
theta activity in frontal (F3, F4) and temporal (T3, T4) areas in comparison to
low hypnotizable subjects at baseline measures. The studies by Sabourin et al.
(1990) and Graffin et al. (1995) are alike in that each employed fast Fourier
transformation (FFT) and power spectral analysis of monopolar EEG derivations,
which allows for the examination of activity within each component frequency of
each EEG epoch.
The position which is most supported in the contemporary literature is a
consistent pattern of EEG activity which can differentiate individuals according
to standardized hypnotic susceptibility scores. It is suggested that
high-susceptible individuals produce more anterior theta activity as compared to
low-susceptible individuals. This baseline individual difference is an important
neuropsychophysiological indicator of hypnotizability and could prove to be a
more stable individual difference measure than standard psychometric measures
(Graffin et al., 1995).

Theta Waves and Perceptual Variations
The relationship between theta activity and selective attentional processes
lends further support to a coexistent relationship with hypnotizability. The
concepts of Class I and Class 11 inhibition have been presented by Vogel,
Broverman, & Klaiber (1968). Class I inhibition is described as being correlated
with a general inactivity or drowsiness, whereas Class 11 inhibition is related
to more efficient and selective attentional processes. The Class 11 concept of
slow wave activity is described by Vogel et al. (1968) as "a selective
inactivation of particular responses so that a continuing excitatory state
becomes directed or patterned (p. 172)". Sabourin et al. (1990) suggested that
the theta activity observed in highly hypnotizable subjects reflects involvement
in greater absorptive attentional skills. As in the Sabourin et al. (1990)
study, Graffin et al. (1995) provide suggestions regarding the selective
attentional component of theta: " high hypnotiizables either possess, or can
manifest, a heightened state of attentional readiness and concentration of
attention" (p. 128). The relationship between greater attentional readiness and
frontal theta has also been suggested in psychophysiological studies (Bruneau et
al., 1993; Ishihara & Yoshii, 1972; Mizuki et al., 1980). Another possible
supportive line of research involves the examination of psychological absorption
and hypnotizability relationships. Studies have found absorption to be
consistently correlated with hypnotizability (Glisky, Tataryn, Tobias,
Kihlstrom, & McConkey, 1991; Nadon, Hoyt, Register, & Kihlstrom, 1991; Tellegen
& Atkinson, 1974). In a review of psychological correlates of theta, Schacter
(1977) described the relationship between the hypnagogic state and the presence
of low voltage theta activity. Green & Green (1977) described the theta state as
that of reverie and hypnogogic imagery. They employed theta neurofeedback
training to induce quietness of body, emotions, and mind, and to build a bridge
between the conscious and unconscious. In describing theta EEG brainwave
biofeedback, the Life Sciences Institute of Mind-Body Health (1995) associated
increased theta activity with "states of reverie that have been known to
creative people of all time" (p. 4).
Considering these findings related to theta activity, a relationship between
individual levels of hypnotizability, selective inhibition, hypnogogic reverie,
and theta activity is more easily understood. Relatively high theta activity may
be indicative of a characteristic brainwave pattern which reflects an underlying
cognitive mechanism that relates to a type of selective inhibition and
hypnogogic imagery.
Research with Neurofeedback Training
Neurofeedback training works on the brain's ability to produce certain
brainwaves the way exercise works to strengthen muscles. EEG biofeedback
instruments show the kinds of brainwaves an individual is producing, making it
possible for that individual to learn to manipulate the observed brainwaves.
Demonstrated individual success acquiring the ability to self-regulate
characteristic brainwave patterns is evident in the neurofeedback literature.
Various protocols have been employed by many practitioners to enhance both
relaxation (an increase in production of slow waves, such as theta, and a
decreased production of fast beta waves) and mental activity (a decrease
production of excessive slow wave, such as delta and lower frequency theta; with
an increase in the production of 'fast" beta waves). An impressive number of
recent studies have demonstrated the efficacy of brainwave neurofeedback
training. The work by Peniston and others with individuals with alcohol abuse
issues (Peniston & Kulkosky, 1989, 1990, 1991; Saxby and Peniston, 1995) has
provided remarkable results. Peniston has shown 13 month follow-up relapse rates
of 20% (compared to 80% using conventional medical training), significant
reductions in Beck Depression Inventory scores, and decreased levels of
beta-endorphin in subjects treated with Alpha-Theta brainwave training. The area
of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has received strong attention
from neurofeedback researchers (Barabasz & Barabasz, 1995; Lubar, 1991; Rossiter
& Vaque, 1995). Lubar's work has provided strong support for the effectiveness
of a protocol designed for Beta-training (16-20 Hz) and Theta inhibition (4-8Hz
), with 80% of 250 treated children showing grade point average improvements of
1.5 levels (range 0-3.5) (Lubar, 1991). Objective assessments of the efficacy of
neurofeedback training for ADHD have shown significant improvements on the Test
of Variables of Attention (T.O.V.A.) scales and Wechsler Intelligence Scale for
Children-Revised (WISC-R) IQ scores with subjects who demonstrated significant
decreases in theta activity across sessions (Lubar, Swaamod, Swartwood, &
O'Donnell, 1995). Additional studies with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)
with Vietnam veterans (Peniston, 1990; Peniston & Kulkosky, 1991; Peniston,
Marrinan & Deming, 1993) have provided unprecedented results with a condition
often very resistant to training with other interventions.
The work by Ochs (1994) with the use of light and sound feedback of EEG
frequencies, EEG disentrainment feedback (EDF), is also promising in terms of
modification of EEG patterns. However, unlike traditional EEG biofeedback, with
Dr. Ochs' device there is no need for the individual to be consciously involved
in the process. The visual and auditory stimuli respond to and match the
individual's brainwaves and these stimuli are in turn generated by the overall
frequency of the individual's brainwaves. The aptitude of this system is the
capacity for the clinician to alter the feedback frequencies upward or downward,
in effect, providing flexibility into a "set" or "characteristic" brainwave
pattern.
The flexibility of individual neurofeedback training is evident in the various
approaches designed to intensify certain types of EEG activity either by itself,
or to intensify certain types of EEG activity and decrease other types of EEG
activity occurring at the same time. Overall, the relatively high number of
recent neurofeedback training studies with consistent positive results strongly
demonstrate the changes in cognitive and behavioral variables resulting from the
alteration of individual brainwave patterns.
Research with Binaural-Beat Sound Stimulation
Binaural-beat stimulation is an important element of a patented auditory
guidance system developed by Robert A. Monroe. In fact, Robert Monroe has been
granted several patents for applications of psychophysical entrainment via sound
patterns in (Atwater, 1997). In the patented process referred to as Hemi-Sync
individuals are exposed to factors including breathing exercises, guided
relaxation, visualizations, and binaural beats. Extensive research within the
Monroe Institute of Applied Sciences, which has documented physiological changes
associated with Hemi-Sync use, along with consistent reports of thousands of
Hemi-Sync users, appears to support the theory that the Hemi-Sync process
encourages directed neuropsychophysiological variations (Atwater, 1997).
The underlying premise of the Hemi-Sync process is not unlike that adopted by
many EEG neurofeedback therapists, that an individuals' predominant state of
consciousness can be reflected as a homeostatic pattern of brain activity (i.e.,
an individual differential bandwidth activity within the EEG spectrum) and can
often be resistant to variation. Atwater (1997) reported that practitioners of
the Hemi-Sync process have observed a state of hypnagogia or experiences of a
kind of mind-awake/body asleep state associated with entrainment of the brain to
lower frequencies (delta and theta) and with slightly higher-frequency
entrainment associated with hyper suggestive states of consciousness (high theta
and low alpha). In line with current EEG research relating to ADHD (see
Lubar,1991), Hemi-Sync researchers have noted deep relaxation with entrainment
of the brain to lower frequencies and increased mental activity and alertness
with higher frequency entrainment. The Monroe Institute has been refining
binaural-beat technology for over thirty years and has developed a variety of
applications including enriched learning, improved sleep, relaxation, wellness,
and expanded mind-consciousness states (Atwater, 1997).
Binaural beat stimulation can be further understood by considering how we detect
sound sources in daily life. Incoming frequencies or sounds can be detected by
each ear as the wave curves around the skull by detraction. The brain perceives
this differential input as being "out of phase", and this waveform phase
difference allows for accurate location of sounds. Stated simply, less noise is
heard by one ear, and more by the other. The capacity of the brain to detect a
waveform phase difference also enables it to perceive binaural beats (Atwater,
1997). The presentation of waveform phase differences (different frequencies),
which normally is associated with directional information, can produce a
different phenomenon when heard with stereo headphones or speakers. The result
of presenting phase differences in this manner is a perceptual integration of
the signals; the sensation of a third "beat" frequency (Atwater, 1997). This
perception of the binaural-beat is at a frequency that is the difference between
the two auditory inputs.
Binaural beats can easily be heard at the low frequencies (<30 Hz) that are
characteristic of the EEG spectrum (Austere, 1973). This perception of the
binaural-beat is associated with an EEG frequency following response (FFR). This
phenomenon is described by Atwater (1997) as EEG activity which corresponds to
the fundamental frequency of the stimulus, such as binaural-beat stimulation.
The sensation of auditory binaural beating occurs when two coherent sounds of
nearly similar frequencies are presented one to each ear with stereo headphones
or speakers. Originating in the brainstem's superior olivary nucleus, the site
of contralateral integration of auditory input (Oster, 1973), the audio
sensation of binaural beating is neurologically conveyed to the reticular
formation (Swann, Bosanko, Cohen, Midgley & Seed, 1982) and the cortex where it
can be observed as a frequency-following response with EEG equipment. The word
reticular means 'net-like' and the neural reticular formation itself is a large,
net-like diffuse area of the brainstem (Anch, et al. 1988). The RAS regulates
cortical EEG (Swann et al. 1988) and controls arousal, attention, and awareness
- the elements of consciousness itself (Tice & Steinberg, 1989; Empson, 1986).
How we interpret, respond, and react to information (internal stimuli, feelings,
attitudes, and beliefs as well as external sensory stimuli) is managed by the
brain's reticular formation stimulating the thalamus and cortex, and controlling
attentiveness and level of arousal (Empson, 1986). Binaural beats can influence
ongoing brainwave states by providing information to the brain's reticular
activating system (RAS). If internal stimuli, feelings, attitudes, beliefs, and
external sensory stimuli are not in conflict with this information, the RAS will
alter brainwave states to match the binaural-beat provocation.
A recent study by Foster (1991) was conducted in an effort to determine the
effects of alpha-frequency binaural-beat stimulation combined with alpha
neurofeedback on alpha-frequency brainwave production. Foster found that the
combination of binaural-beat stimulation and alpha neurofeedback produced
significantly higher alpha production than that of neurofeedback alone, but that
the group which received only binaural-beat stimulation, produced significantly
higher alpha production than either group. In a review of three studies directed
towards the effects of Hemi-Sync tapes on electrocortical activity, Sadigh
(1994) reported increased brainwave activity in the desired direction after
virtually minutes of exposure to the Hemi-Sync signals.
Research to date, therefore, has suggested that the use of the binaural-beat
sound applications can contribute to the establishment of prescribed variation
in individual psychophysiological homeostatic patterns (brainwave patterns),
which can precipitate alterations in cognitive processes. The relationship
between individual patterns of cognitive variables and characteristic brainwave
patterns affords not only a methodology for change, but also an objective unit
for measure of change.
Purpose of the Present Study
The present study was an effort to develop, and to test the efficacy of,
techniques designed to increase anterior theta activity and susceptibility to
hypnosis as measured by currently employed standardized instruments.
Contemporary hypnosis / EEG research studies have found individual
electrocortical differences (anterior theta activity) to be reliable predictors
of hypnotic susceptibility. Clinicians and researchers within the field of
neurofeedback training have also demonstrated the efficacy of prescribed changes
in individual EEG patterns and behavioral variables, with a number of medical
and psychological disorders. Practitioners and researchers utilizing the
binaural-beat technology developed by the Monroe Institute have produced
impressive changes in individual EEG patterns. Given the strong support of
brainwave modification, and the efficacy of the binaural-beat sound patterns to
modify brainwave patterns, it is logical and advantageous to make use of a
binaural-beat sound based protocol. Since theta activity is positively related
to individual level of hypnotic susceptibility, it follows that the employment
of a protocol designed to increase frontal theta activity could also mediate an
increase in hypnotic susceptibility. It was proposed that a binaural beat
protocol designed to increase anterior theta activity will result in a
significant increase in theta measure (% activity), and a related increase in
hypnotic susceptibility, as measured by standardized instruments. In
consideration of the previous association between hypnotic susceptibility and
anterior theta activity, the potential exists for differential increases in
theta activity relative to hypnotizability group. The examination of potential
differential changes in theta activity relative to initial level of
hypnotizability could provide further data supporting the association of theta
activity and hypnotic susceptibility.
Research Hypotheses
Hypothesis l. Increases in hypnotic susceptibility, after exposure to
binaural-beat sound stimulation protocol, will be observed for all participants
from pre to post-measures. The Significant Change Index (SCI) was used to
evaluate change between pre and post SHSS:C scores. Graphing was used to provide
visual interpretation of individual level of hypnotizability.
Hypothesis 2. Theta activity will increase in all individuals as a result of the
binaural beat sound stimulation protocol. The C Statistic was performed on the
time series of theta measures across baseline and stimulus sessions for each
individual.
Hypothesis 3. Increases in theta activity after exposure to binaural-beat sound
stimulation protocol YAII be of greatest significance in individuals in the
medium-hypnotizable group. The C Statistic was performed on the time series of
theta measures across baseline and stimulus sessions for each individual.
Hypothesis 4. Increases in theta activity after exposure to binaural-beat sound
stimulation protocol will be of least significance in individuals in the low
hypnotizable groups. The C Statistic was performed on the time series of theta
measures across baseline and stimulus sessions for each individual.
METHOD
Participants
Six participants were selected from a pool of Northern Arizona University (NAU)
undergraduates who were administered the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale,
Form C (SHSS:C, Weitzenhoffer & Hilgard, 1962). The six participants were
grouped according to varying degrees of hypnotizability (two lows, two mediums,
and two highs) for participation in the stimulus sessions. The variations in
hypnotic susceptibility within each group were minimal, assuring the
participants were relatively homogeneous in terms of initial hypnotic
susceptibility measures. To reduce the risk of attrition during this study,
participants were paid $40.00 each for participation in the study.
Instrument
Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C (SHSS:C). Each participant's
score on the SHSS:C served as a baseline measure of hypnotic susceptibility.
Also, after completion of the three stimulus sessions, raw scores were obtained
on the SHSS:C for each participant a second time. The raw scores obtained in
this post4reatment evaluation provided an index of each participants' hypnotic
susceptibility level after exposure to the binaural-beat stimulus protocol. The
following general hypnotizability level designation and raw-score ranges are
used with the SHSS:C: (a) low hypnotizable (0-4), (b) medium hypnotizable (5-7),
(c) high hypnotizable (8-10), and (d) very-high hypnotizable (1 1-12).
The Kuder-Richardson total scale reliability index, which provides a measure of
the degree of consistency of participants' responses, was reported by E. R.
Hilgard (1965) as .85, with retest reliability coefficients ranging from .60 to
.77 over the range of twelve items on the SHSS: C.
Apparatus
EEG-Recording. The NRS-2D (Lexicor Medical Technology, Inc.) is a miniaturized
two channel Electroencephalograph (EEG) system. The device is approximately one
inch tall, three inches wide, and six inches long and is connected directly to a
486 computer via the parallel port. It has a built in impedance meter and
operates with both BIOLEX (BLX) neurotherapy software and NeuroLex (NLX) EEG
acquisition software. The BLX and NLX systems comprise an array of tools
including an audio/visual display system, graphing and reporting features, fast
Fourier transformation and spectral analysis of complex wave forms, as well as
conventional EEG recordings. An artifact inhibit feature stops all recording
v,/hen the artifact (e.g., eye movement or other muscle signals) exceeds the
selected artifact inhibit amplitude threshold. The computerized system was used
to measure participants' theta activity for each 2-second epoch. In the EEG data
analysis, fast Fourier transformation was performed, and a power spectrum
calculated, for each epoch.
Binaural-Beat Sound Tapes. The audio cassette tapes used in this study were
produced by the Monroe Institute specifically for this study. Both a control
tape and experimental tape were used in this study. The binaural beats provided
in the experimental tape are unique in that they were designed to be complex
brain-wave-like patterns rather than simple sine waves. The right-left
differences in stereo audio signals on these tapes were assembled in a sequence
to produce a dynamic wave pattern (brain-wave-like) as compared to a static,
uniform sine wave pattern. Specifically, the experimental tape used in this
experiment was produced with a binaural-beat pattern that represents a theta
brainwave pattern of high hypnotic susceptibility. The Monroe Institute provided
objective data verifying the binaural-beat components imbedded in the
experimental tape, both in wave form and frequency spectra formats.
The experimental tape was produced with pink sound and theta binaural beats
imbedded in carrier tones. The control tape was produced with pink sound and
tones without binaural beats.
Procedures
General. For all participants, informed consent forms were provided. All
participants mere debriefed at the completion of the study. All participants, at
each stage of the study, were treated according to the ethical guidelines of the
American Psychological Association.
Participant EEG Setup. During all sessions earlobes and the forehead electrode
sites were cleaned with Ten-20 Abrasive EEG Prep Gel to decrease skin resistance
prior to attaching EEG electrodes. Ten-20 EEG conductive paste was used as a
conduction medium to fill the cups of silver-chloride electrodes. One monopolar
EEG derivation was used, located according to the 10-20 system (Jasper, 1958) at
FZ; the references were linked ears (R1, R2).
Participant Binaural-Beat Audio Setup. During all sessions participants wore
headphones, providing audio input of pink sound and tones (baseline) or pink
sound and theta binaural beats imbedded in carrier tones (stimulus).
Multiple Baseline EEG Recordings. The length of pre-stimulus session baseline
for participants within each category of hypnotizability varied as follows: the
duration of baseline recordings for Participant #1 was 5 minutes, Participant #2
was 10 minutes. For each category of hypnotizability, the two participants were
exposed to a baseline session of either 5 or 10 minutes, and three 20 minute
stimulus sessions. This procedure allowed participants to be exposed to the same
stimulus sessions under "time-lagged" conditions. This approach is the
foundation of the Multiple Baseline single-subject experimental design, which
allows for examination of changes in stimulus sessions relative to the varied
baseline periods.
Theta Measures. EEG measures of percent theta activity at frontal (FZ) placement
were recorded during all sessions. Data were recorded at each 2second epoch
during EEG recording. These data support trend analysis over time of baseline
and stimulus sessions.
Hypnotizability Measures. Pre-stimulus data for level of hypnotizability (SHSS:C
scores) were collected for each participant during the selection process.
Post-stimulus sessions data for level of hypnotizability (SHSS:C scores) were
collected following each participant's last stimulus session.
Baseline Session. During this session participants were given information
regarding-. (a) general understanding of theta binaural-beat sound stimulation
and (b) the purpose/protocol of stimulus sessions. Prior to recording of EEG
data, the experimenter instructed participants to close their eyes and to take
two to three minutes to allow themselves to become relaxed. The experimenter
instructed the participant to visualize herself as relaxed and comfortable and
still, to experience a feeling of inner quietness. This procedure was used to
allow the participant's brainwave activity to stabilize prior to baseline
recordings.
Binaural-Beat Stimulus sessions. The duration of each session was 20 minutes.
Prior to recording of EEG data, the participants were allowed 2-3 minutes for
stabilization of brainwave activity as previously described in the baseline
session procedures. Prior to exiting the room, the experimenter started the
cassette tape, the EEG recording function, and turned off the overhead light,
leaving a single table lamp as a source of illumination in the room. The
stimulus session was preset to terminate at 20 minutes. Each participant
completed three sessions over a period of one week.
Interviews. Following each stimulation session, each participant was asked about
her experience. This free-flow interview was used to assess the participants'
subjective experience of listening to the binaural-beat sound stimulation, and
to test for adverse effects or reactions on the part of each participant.
Schedule of Sessions. The four sessions (1 baseline and 3 stimulus) were
completed for each participant in two meetings within a five day period. During
the initial meeting, the participants completed the first two stimulus sessions
in addition to the baseline session. The sessions were scheduled in this manner
to reduce participant response cost and to decrease participant attrition.
Participants were allowed to take breaks of approximately 1 0 minutes between
each session. The second meeting took place on the second day following the
initial meeting. During this second meeting the participants completed the third
stimulus session.
Data Analysis
Data were analyzed in order to evaluate changes in theta activity across
sessions and changes in hypnotizability levels from pre-stimulus to
post-stimulus scale administrations (SHSS:C).
The EEG data of each 2-second epoch during the baseline sessions were averaged
to yield 10 data points for the 5-minute baseline recording and 20 data points
for the 1 0-minute baseline recording. The EEG data for each stimulus session
was averaged to yield 25 data points for each 20-minute recording.
In an effort to determine if the pretest to posttest change hypnotizability
scores on the SHSS:C exceeded that which would be expected on the basis of
measurement error, the Significant Change Index (SCI) as suggested by
Christensen & Mendoza (1 986) was used. Descriptive techniques (graphical
representations) were used to indicate the change in hypnotizability from pre to
post-measures.
The C statistic was used to analyze the series of theta activity data across
baseline and stimulus sessions. This approach was used to determine if a
statistically significant difference existed between baseline and stimulus
session observations of theta activity.
When comparing baseline and stimulus sessions observations, the C statistic
provides information about changes in the level and direction between the two
time series. In the determination of statistical significance of an obtained C
value, a Z value is obtained from the ratio of the C value to its standard error
of the mean. Graphical representations of the time series of theta activity
measures were used to allow confirmation of the statistical findings by visual
inspection of the data.
RESULTS
Participant Characteristics
The six participants in this study were female, ranging in age from 19 to 32. In
order to facilitate association of each participant with relevant data, the
following labels will be used in reference to the participants by
hypnotizability group ( LOW, MED, HIGH) and by duration of baseline (1 =
5-minute baseline, 2 = 1 0-minute baseline). The three participants (one from
each hypnotizability group) with 5-minute baselines are referred to as LOW1,
MED1 and HIGH1, the three participants (one from each hypnotizability group)
V,/ith 10 minute baselines are referred to as LOW2, MED2, and HIGH2. The
majority of participants reported having no previous experience with
relaxation-oriented experiences such as hypnosis, meditation, or formal
relaxation training.

Test of Hypotheses

Hypothesis 1. Increases in hypnotic susceptibility, after exposure to
binaural-beat sound stimulation protocol, will be observed for all participants
from pre to post-measures. Both participants in the low-susceptibility group
(LOW1, LOW2) increased by a raw score of 1 from pre to post-measures. Both of
the participants in the medium-susceptibility group (MED1, MED2) increased to
the raw score of 8. MED1 increased from a raw score of 6 to a raw score of 8,
MED2 increased from a raw score of 7 to a raw score of 8. No changes in raw
score values were observed with the participants in the high-susceptibility
group (HIGH1, HIGH2) between pre and post- measures. A calculation of the
Significant Change Index (SCI) [used to assess pretest to posttest SHSS:C scores
considering the standard error of the difference (SD) between the two test
scores: SCI value > 1.65 denotes significance at p<.05 ] for each participant in
the low and medium susceptibility groups revealed the following values: LOW1 -
SCI = 1.96, SD =.51, p< .05; LOW2 - SCI = 1.96, SD = .51, p< .05, MED1 - SCI =
3.92, SD = .51, p< .05, MED2 - SCI = 1.96, SD =.51, p<.05. According to these
calculations, a change of .84 or greater in raw-score value was required to
establish a significantly different change in hypnotic susceptibility.
Therefore, these data suggest that this hypothesis was supported in participants
LOW1, LOW2, MED1, and MED2.

Hypothesis 2. Theta activity will increase in all individuals as a result of the
binaural-beat sound protocol. Evaluation of intersession theta activity relative
to baseline theta activity first required an analysis of baseline data to assure
stability for subsequent comparison. In the examination of baseline trends of
theta activity, the C statistic was calculated for each participant. LOW1
demonstrated no significant trend during the 5-minute baseline session (C = .18,
n=10, p>.05). LOW2 demonstrated a significant downward trend during the
10-minute baseline session (C =.75, n=20, p<.05). MED1 demonstrated no
significant trend during the 5-minute baseline session (C -.20, n=10, p>.05).
MED2 demonstrated no significant trend during the 10-minute baseline session (C
=.32, n=20, p>.05). HIGH1 demonstrated no significant trend during the 5-minute
baseline session (C = -.28, n=10, p>.05). HIGH2 demonstrated no significant
trend during the 10-minute baseline session (C = -.07, n=20, p>.05).
In five of six participants, the baseline time series of theta activity data did
not show a constant direction or trend, and indicated no departure from random
variation. One participant (LOW1) demonstrated a significant downward trend.
Therefore, the baseline data for all six participants provided adequate support
for subsequent comparisons.
In the examination of trends in theta activity across baseline and the three
binaural-beat stimulation sessions, the C statistic was calculated for each
participant. LOW1 demonstrated a significant upward trend (C = .36, n=85,
p<.01). LOW2 demonstrated a significant upward trend (C =.35, n=95, p<.01). MED1
demonstrated a significant downward trend (C =.74, n=85, p<.01). MED2
demonstrated a significant upward trend (C = .88, n=95, p<.01). HIGH1
demonstrated a significant upward trend (C =.70, n=85, p<.01). HIGH2
demonstrated a significant upward trend (C =.77, n=95, p<.01).
Thus, in five of six participants significant upward intersession trends in
theta activity were observed. This significant intersession activity in relation
to nonsignificant baseline activity provides support for this hypothesis in five
of six participants.

Hypothesis 3. Increases in theta activity will be of greatest significance in
the participants in the medium-hypnotizable group. An examination of the derived
C statistic values for each hypnotic susceptibility group provided data
regarding the relative significance of theta activity increases between groups.
Mean C values for each susceptibility group (LOW, MED, HIGH) were calculated.
The mean value for the medium-hypnotizable group does not include MED1, as this
participant demonstrated a decrease in theta activity across stimulus sessions.
Therefore, comparing the mean C value for the low and the high susceptible
groups with the single C value for the medium susceptibility group which
increased, the following values were obtained: LOW (M =.36), MED (M =.88), HIGH
(M =.74). This analysis indicates a supportive trend in the data, but without
inclusion of participant MED1, it does not provide support for this hypothesis.
Hypothesis 4. Increases in theta activity will be of least significance in the
participants in the low-hypnotizable group. An examination of the derived C
statistic values for each hypnotic susceptibility group provided data regarding
the relative significance of theta activity increases between groups. Mean C
values for each group of susceptibility (LOW, MED, HIGH) were calculated. The
mean value for the medium-hypnotizable group does not include MED1, as this
participant demonstrated a decrease in theta activity across stimulus sessions.
The mean C values for each group of susceptibility are as follows: LOW (M =.36),
MED (M = .88), HIGH (M = .74). Therefore, these data suggest support for this
hypothesis.

DISCUSSION
Hypothesis l.
Increases in hypnotic susceptibility, after exposure to binaural-beat sound
stimulation protocol, will be observed for all participants from pre to
postmeasures. As mentioned earlier, the participants who demonstrated a
significant increase in hypnotic susceptibility were Participants LOW1, LOW2,
MEDI, and MED2. The participants in the high-hypnotizable group did not change
in the measure of hypnotic susceptibility. Graphical analysis allowed for a
simplified examination of the changes in hypnotizability levels from the pre to
post binaural-beat stimulation administrations.
Inasmuch as no decreases in demonstrated raw-score values were observed across
the six participants, these data suggest support of previous data indicating the
relatively stable nature of hypnotic ability over time (Perry, Nadon & Button,
1992).
As previously mentioned, a potential ceiling effect may be present in the
SHSS:C. The items on the SHSS:C are presented in a progressively greater
difficulty. Data reported by Perry, Nadon & Button (1992) showed that 68% of the
normative sample passed the first four items, and only 16% passed the last four
items. The items begin relatively easy and become progressively more difficult
and therefore are rank-ordered and do not meet interval level requirements.
Thus, to accurately interpret of the findings of this study, the progressive
organization of the SHSS:C items must be taken into consideration. The obtained
changes in the medium-susceptible group may be more meaningful than observed
changes in the low-susceptible group, as a change of 1 raw-score point would be
a more difficult task in the medium-susceptible group than would a change of 1
raw-score point in the low-susceptible group. This indicates that the
application of the Significant Change Index may not reveal the true significance
of changes in hypnotic susceptibility with the SHSS:C. The organization of the
SHSS:C is also an important factor in the ceiling-effect phenomena observed in
the two participants in the high-susceptible group.
Low-Hypnotizable Group. The two participants in the low-hypnotizable group
demonstrated modest increases in SHSS:C raw score values. Both participants LOW1
and LOW2 increased 1 raw-score value from 2 to 3. As previously suggested, the
lack of initial hypnotic ability in less hypnotizable individuals often leads to
unsuccessful attempts at modification of hypnotizability with this population.
Although both participants in this group demonstrated only a single point
increase in raw-score values on the SHSS:C, a positive increase suggests that
modification of hypnotizability % with less susceptible individuals using
binaural-beat stimulation can lead to positive results.
Medium-Hypnotizable Group. Considering the previously mentioned hierarchy of
difficulty with the SHSS:C, it may be said that the two participants in the
medium-hypnotizable group demonstrated the greatest increase in SHSS:C raw score
values. Both participants MED1 and MED2 changed in general hypnotizability level
from medium to high, with raw-scores of 6 to 8 and 7 to 8, respectively. These
data also suggest support for Perry's (1977) findings, in which successful
modification of hypnotizability was most common in medium hypnotizable subjects.
These individuals appear to possess a certain essential cognitive framework or a
predisposition which provides for a variety of hypnotic experiences, as
demonstrated on the SHSS:C.
In relation to the effects of binaural-beat sound stimulation on hypnotic
susceptibility, these data reveal mixed conclusions. An interesting point is
that Participant MED1 demonstrated the largest increase in hypnotic
susceptibility and also a significant decrease in theta activity in response to
the binaural-beat sound stimulation. In contrast, Participant MED2 demonstrated
the most significant increase in theta activity in response to the binaural-beat
sound stimulation. Therefore, these data indicate that theta activity is not the
only contributing factor in hypnotic susceptibility, suggest that modification
of hypnotizability with medium susceptible individuals using binaural-beat
stimulation can be effective, and highlight the importance of individual
variation. These data can provide a meaningful direction for researchers and
practitioners of hypnosis interested in increasing hypnotic susceptibility.
High-Hypnotizable Group. The two participants in the high-hypnotizable group
demonstrated no change in SHSS:C raw-score values. The possibility exists for a
ceiling-effect with individuals scoring at the upper end of the SHSS:C scale.
Both participants HIGH1 and HIGH2 had the same pre and post raw-scores, 9 and
10, respectively. The items or skills an individual must demonstrate to increase
in raw score above 9 are cognitive items of greater difficulty including,
negative and positive hallucination tasks. This potential ceiling-effect is also
evident in Hilgard's (1965) report on relative item difficulty within the
SHSS:C, in which only nine percent of participants in the normative base passed
the positive and negative hallucination tasks. These data suggest that those who
are high in hypnotizability, in terms of the SHSS:C, may be less responsive to
binaural-beat stimulation relative to individuals who demonstrate less hypnotic
ability. Perhaps there is a ceiling effect on an individual's ability to produce
theta as well.

Hypothesis 2.
Theta activity will increase in all individuals as a result of the binaural-beat
sound protocol This hypothesis was supported in data from five of six
participants, each showing an upward intersession trend in theta activity across
stimulus periods. The subject in the medium hypnotizable group with the 5-minute
baseline (MED1) demonstrated a downward intersession trend in theta activity
across stimulus periods. The theta activity of Participant MED1 changed
significantly in session-3. No significant change or trend in theta activity was
observed for this participant prior to session-3. These data indicate that some
confounding factor(s) may have been in effect during the session-3
stimulation/recording period of participant MED1.
In a post-hoc analysis of intersession theta activity, the C statistic was
calculated for the five participants who demonstrated a significant increase in
theta activity over the three binaural-beat stimulation periods. This analysis
was employed to determine which of the three binaural-beat stimulation sessions
produced the most significant increase in theta activity relative to the
baseline measures. For all five participants, the data from the third
stimulation session (session-3) produced C values of the highest significance
relative to baseline. These third session C values follow. LOW1 (C =.49, n=35,
p<.01), LOW2 (C = .67, n=45, p<.01), MED2 (C = .89, n=45, p<.01), HIGH1 (C =
.62, n=35, p<.01, HIGH2 (C =.83, n=45, p<.01. These data suggest that continued
exposure to binaural-beat stimulation could have an incremental positive effect
on theta activity, and that in this study the most significant incremental
effect was observed in the third stimulus session.
In a post-hoc analysis of intersession theta activity, the C statistic was
calculated for all six participants using the combination of data from session-1
and session-2 relative to data from the baseline session. This comparison was
done to further evaluate the initial effects of the binaural-beat sound
stimulation. The following C values were revealed: LOW1 (C =.36, n=60, p<.01),
LOW2 (C .30, n=70, p<.01), MED1 (C .11, n=60, p>.05), MED2 (C = .74, n=70, p<.
01), HIGH1 (C =.18, n=60, p>.05), HIGH2 (C =.36, n=70, p<.01). These data
suggest that the binaural-beat stimulation effected an initial change (increase)
in four of the six participants (LOW1, LOW2, MED2, AND HIGH2).
The two participants who did not demonstrate a significant increase in theta
activity during the two initial sessions were MED1 and HIGH1. As mentioned
earlier, Participant MED1 demonstrated a significant downward intersession trend
across all three sessions, most obvious in session-3. The explanation of this
anomalous response is uncertain, but as described in the introductory section on
binaural-beat sound stimulation, a number of factors influence the EEG
frequency-following response. Factors of primary interest in relation to theta
activity are internal feelings, attitudes, beliefs, and overall mood-state. As
theta is related to an overall relaxed state, any negative affect related to
these factors could adversely affect theta production. Participant HIGH1 also
demonstrated the most significant response in session-3. Participant HIGHI
reported previous experience with head injury and EEG measurements. This
experience involved an automobile accident in which the participant was knocked
unconscious some ten years previous. Reported results of EEG at that time
indicated an "abnormal" pattern during the sleep state. The relationship of
possible brainwave abnormalities to measured theta activity in response to
binaural-beat stimulation is not known. However, there is the possibility that
the theta response of participant HIGH1 was affected by this head injury.
An additional post-hoc analysis was utilized to provide a precise evaluation of
the immediate effect of the binaural-beat sound stimulation within the framework
of the Multiple Baseline design. In this analysis, within each susceptibility
group, the 1 0-minute baseline recording periods of Participant LOW2, MED2, and
HIGH2 were compared to the 5-minute baseline recording periods appended with
5-minutes of the first stimulus session of Participants LOW1, MED1, and HIGH1.
As previously stated, the participants within each susceptibility group assigned
10-minute and 5-minute baseline recording periods all demonstrated no
significant upward trends in theta activity during baseline recordings. An
examination of the initial five-minute stimulation period following the baseline
period for the participants assigned the 5-minute baseline % within each
susceptibility group revealed the following C values; LOW1 (C =.72, n=16,
p<.05), MED1 (C =.27, n=16, p>.05), HIGH1 (C = .25, n=16, p>.05). The
corresponding Z values for each C value stated above follow. LOW1 (Z = 2.99);
MED1 (Z = 1.12); HIGH1 (Z = 1.02). Participant LOW1 demonstrated a significant
upward trend during the initial 5-minute stimulus period, and participants MED1
and HIGH1 did not demonstrate a significant trend during the initial 5-minute
stimulus period. As mentioned earlier, participants MED1 and HIGH1 did not
demonstrate a significant increase in theta activity during the two initial
sessions. In contrast, participant LOW1 demonstrated a significant increase in
theta activity during all three stimulus sessions. These data highlight the
power of individual differences in relation to theta brainwave activity. The
observation that the initial recording of stimulus data seemed predictive of a
differential theta activity response over time may be particularly important is
this analysis. It may be that the significance of an initial theta activity
response to binaural-beat sound stimulation is positively related to the
significance of the theta activity response over time.

Hypothesis 3.
Increases in theta activity will be of greatest significance in the participants
in the medium-hypnotizable group. The obtained unequal number of participants in
each group, due to the exclusion of participant MED1 (this participant
demonstrated a decrease in theta activity across stimulus sessions), presents
difficulties in providing support for this hypothesis.
Participant MED2 demonstrated the highest significant overall increase in theta
activity across the baseline and stimulus sessions primarily manifested in
session-2 and session-3. Further support for this hypothesis is also indicated
in the previously mentioned post-hoc analyses of (a) session-1 and session-2
combined relative to baseline, and (b) session-3 comparison to baseline. In both
analyses, participant MED2 demonstrated the highest significant overall increase
in theta activity.

Hypothesis 4.
Increases in theta activity will be of least significance in the participants in
the low-hypnotizable group, The observed unequal number of participants in each
group, due to the exclusion of participant MED1 (this participant demonstrated a
decrease in theta activity across stimulus sessions), also presents difficulties
in providing support for this hypothesis. Even with this consideration, the
observation that both participants LOW1 and LOW2 demonstrated the least
significant overall increase in theta activity across the baseline and stimulus
sessions suggests support for this hypothesis.

Conclusions
The findings of this study provide support for the efficacy of the binaural-beat
sound stimulation process, pioneered by the Monroe Institute, in effecting an
increase in theta brainwave activity. As mentioned earlier, the baseline and
stimulus tapes differed only in the presence or absence of the binaural-beat
stimulation (i.e., both contained pink sound and tones). Each participant
demonstrated no significant upward trend in baseline recordings of theta
activity. Thus, the observed trends in theta activity following introduction of
the binaural-beat sounds allows one to state, with a good deal of certainty,
that it is the effect of the binaural-beat sounds and not merely the passage of
time, the measurement operation, or some other independent event that effected
the observed increases in theta activity. During the post-session interviews, no
descriptions of unpleasant experiences were reported, Individual reports of each
stimulation session varied from profoundly insightful to pleasant and relaxing.
The single-subject experimental design used in this study allowed for
examination of the effects of binaural beat stimulation on individual theta
activity over time. With single-subject methodology there is no need to
compromise the effects of stimulation on different subjects by averaging across
groups as is done with group designs.
The data in this study relative to hypnotizability suggest support for the
stability of hypnotic susceptibility over time and suggest support for previous
data showing differential response to modification of hypnotizability relative
to initial susceptibility level. This support is evident in the fact that no
participant decreased in hypnotic susceptibility over time and in the
differential participant responses across general hypnotic susceptibility
levels. Surprisingly, the most significant increase in hypnotic susceptibility
was observed in the participant with the most significant decrease in theta
activity in response to the binaural-beat sound stimulation. Even though the
significance of the decrease in theta activity for this participant was
explained entirely by third session recordings, it is difficult to draw
conclusions regarding the relationship of theta activity to hypnotic
susceptibility when reviewing the findings of this study. Overall, this study
indicates that theta activity is related to, but cannot uniquely explain, the
variation in hypnotic susceptibility.
Limitations. Although the single-subject experimental design used in this study
provided a direct examination of individual responses over time, the design of
this study is not without inherent limitations. For example, as the participants
in this study are not representative of the general population, it would be
difficult to generalize the findings of this study, even to a similar group of
females. It is worth noting, however, that the issue of external validity, which
often essentially relates to possible inconsistencies in the data due to small
sample sizes, is tempered somewhat in this study by the adequate number of
recorded data points within each subject.
The demographic data were collected post-hoc, and thus prevented the homogeneous
selection of subjects based on such variables as previous experience with EEG
recordings or head-injury. Also, data collected in intersession interviews was
not recorded for further analysis. This is unfortunate, as information regarding
the subjective experience of binaural-beat stimulation is meaningful not only in
and of itself but could have provided data relating to the differential
participant theta activity in response to binaural-beat sound stimulation
observed in this study.

Future Research.
In future related research with the use of binaural-beat stimulation, the time
of exposure could be increased. An increase in exposure time could provide
important data relating to modification of theta brainwave activity and hypnotic
susceptibility. This could be easily accomplished by using a home-practice
protocol, not unlike home-practice relaxation training commonly used in
behavioral medicine settings with disorders such as migraine headaches. This
type procedure would allow for extended stimulation periods in a true applied
setting. Another possible line of research could involve the use of
binaural-beat stimulation within background music during hypnotic procedures in
an effort to increase participant response to hypnotic susceptibility evaluation
measures. The use of "background support" via binaural-beat sound stimulation
could also prove a valuable asset to clinical practitioners as well. Data from
this study may also provide a foundation for subsequent group comparison designs
directed toward the generalization of stimulation effects across larger groups
of individuals.

References
Akpinar, S., Uleft, G. A., & Itil, T. M. (1971). Hypnotizability predicted by
computer-analyzed EEG pattern. Biological Psychiatry, 3, 387-392.
Anch, A. M., Browman, C. P., Mitier, M. M. & Walsh, J. K. (1988). Sleep: A
scientific perspective, 96-97. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Atwater, F. H. (1997). The Hemi-Sync Process. The Monroe Institute.
http://www.monroeinstitute.org/research
Barabasz, A. & Barabasz, M. (1995). Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder:
Neurological basis and training alternatives. Journal of Neurotherapy, Summer
1995.
Barber,T.X. (1969). Hypnosis: A scientific approach. New York: Van Nostrand
Reinhold.
Bates, B. L. (1994). Individual differences in response to hypnosis. In J. W.
Rhue, S. J. Lynn, & I. Kirsch (Eds.), Handbook of Clinical Hypnosis (pp. 23-54).
American Psychological Association, Washington D.C.
Bowers, K. S. (1979). Hypnosis and healing. Australian Journal of Clinical and
Experimental Hypnosis, 7(3), 261-277.
Bowers, K. S. (1982). The relevance of hypnosis for cognitive-behavioral
therapy. Clinical Psychology Review, 2(l), 67-78.
Brown, D. P. (1992). Clinical hypnosis research since 1986. In E. Fromm & M.
Nash (Eds.), Contemporary Hypnosis Research (pp. 427-486). New York: Guilford
Press.
Bruneau, N., Sylvie, R., Guerin, P., Garreau, B., & Lelord, G. (1993). Auditory
stimulus intensity responses and frontal midline theta rhythm.
Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 186, 213-316.
Christensen, L. & Mendoza, J. (1 986). A method of assessing change in a single
subject: An alteration of the RC index. Behavior Therapy, 17, 305-308.
Crawford, H., & Gruzelier, J. (1 992). A midstream view of the
neuropsychophysiology of hypnosis: Recent research and future direction. In E.
Fromm & M. Nash (Eds.), Contemporary Hypnosis Research (pp. 227-266). New York:
Guilford Press.
Dumas, R. A. (1977). EEG alpha-hypnotizability correlations: A review.
Psychophysiology, 14, 431438
Diamond, M. J. (1989). The cognitive skills model: An emerging paradigm for
investigating hypnotic phenomena. In N. P. Spanos & J. F. Chaves, Hypnosis: The
cognitive-behavioral perspective (pp. 380-399). New York: Prometheus Books.
Empson, J. (1986). Human brainwaves: The psychological significance of the
electroencephalogram. London: The Macmillan Press Ltd.
Freud, S. (1966). Hypnosis. In J. Strachery (Ed. and Trans.), The standard
edition of the complete Psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 1, pp.
103-114).
Galbraith, G. C., London, P., Leibovitz, M. P., Cooper, L. M., & Hart, J. T.
(1970). EEG and hypnotic susceptibility. Journal of Comparative and
Physiological Psychology, 72, 125-131.
Glisky, M., Tataryn, D., Tobias, B., Kihistrom, J., & McConkey, K. (1991).
Absorption, openness to experience, and hypnotizability. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 60, 262-272.
Graffin, N. F., Ray, W. J., Lundy, R. (1995). EEG concomitants of hypnosis and
hypnotic susceptibility. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 104(l), 123-131.
Hilgard, E.R. (1965). Hypnotic Susceptibility. New York: Harcourt, Brace &
World.
Green, E., & Green, A. (1977). Beyond Biofeedback. Delacorte Press, Seymour
Lawrence.
Hilgard, E. R. (1965). Hypnotic Susceptibility. New York: Harcourt, Brace &
World.
Hilgard, E. R. (1973). A neodissociation interpetation of pain reduction in
hypnosis. Psychological Review, 80, 396-411.

Hilgard, E. R. (1975). Hypnosis in the Relief of Pain. Los Altos, California:
William Kaufman, Inc.
Hilgard, E.R. (1986). Divided consciousness: Multiple controls in human thought
and action. (expanded ed.). New York: Wiley.
Ishihara, T., & Yoshii, N. (1972). Multivariate analytic study of EEG and mental
activity in juvenile delinquents. Electroencephalography and Clinical
Neurophysiology, 33, 71-80.
Jasper, H. H. (1958). Report of the committee on methods of clinical examination
in electroencephalography. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology,
10, 370-375.
Kirsch, I., & Council, J. (1992). Situational and personality correlates of
hypnotic responsiveness. In E. Fromm & M. Nash (Eds.), Contemporary hypnosis
research (pp. 267-291). New York: Guilford Press.
Kirsch, I., & Lynn, S.J. (1995). The altered state of hypnosis: Changes in
theoretical landscape. American Psychologist, 50(10), 846-858.
Krishef, C. H. (1991). Fundamental approaches to single subjects testing and
analysis. Malabar, Florida: Krieger Publishing company.
Kurtz, R. M. & Strube, M. J. (1996). Multiple Susceptibility Testing: Is it
Helpful? American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 38(3), 172-184.
Laurence, J. & Perry, C. (1988). Hypnosis, will, and memory: A psychological
history. New York: Guilford Press.
Life Sciences Institute of Mind-Body Health (1995).
http://www.cjnetworks.com/~Iifesci/index.html.
Lubar, J. F. (1991). Discourse on the development of EEG diagnostics and
biofeedback for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorders. Biofeedback and
Self-Regulation, 10(8), 201-225.
Lubar, J. F., Swartwood, M. O., Swartwood, J. N., & O'Donnell, P. H. (1995).
Evaluation of the effectiveness of EEG neurofeedback training for ADHD in a
clinical setting as measured by changes in T.O.V.A. scores, behavioral ratings,
and WISC-R performance. Biofeedback and Self Regulation, 20(l), 83-99.
Mizuki, Y., Tanaka, M., lsozaki, H., & Inanaga, K. (1980). Periodic appearance
of theta rhythm in the frontal midline area during performance of a mental task.
Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 49, 345-351.
Nadon, R., Hoyt, I., Register, P., & Kihistrom, J. (1991). Absorption and
hypnotizability: Context effects reexamined. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 60,144-153.
Ochs, L. (1994). New lights on lights, sounds, and the brain. The Journal of
Mind Technology, 11, 48-52.
Oster, G. (1973). Auditory beats in the brain. Scientific American, 229, 94-102.
Peniston, E. G. & Kulkosky, P. J. (1989). Alpha-theta brainwave training and
beta-endorphin levels in alcoholics. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental
Research, 13, 271-279.
Peniston, E. G. & Kulkosky, P. J. (1990). Alcoholic personality and alpha theta
brainwave training. Medical Psychotherapy: An International Journal, 3, 37-55.
Peniston, E. G. (1990). EEG brainwave training as a bio-behavior intervention
for vietnam combat-related PTSD. The Medical Psychotherapist, 6(2).
Peniston, E. G. & Kulkosky (1991). Alpha-theta brainwave neurofeedback for
vietnam veterans with combat related post-traumatic stress disorder. Medical
Psychotherapy: An International Journal, 4, 1-14.
Peniston, E. G., Marrinan, D. A., Deming, W. A. & Kulkosky, P. J. (1993). EEG
alpha-theta brainwave synchronization in Vietnam theater veterans with
combat-related post-traumatic stress disorder with alcohol abuse. Advances in
Medical Psychotheragy: An International Journal, 6, 37-50.
Perlini, A. H., Spanos, N. P. (1991). EEG alpha methodologies and
hypnotizability: A critical review. Psychophysiology, 28(5), 511-530.
Perry, C. (1977). Is hypnotizability modifiable? The International Journal of
Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 25(3), 125-146.
Perry, C., Nadon, R., & Bufton, J. (1992). The measurement of hypnotic ability.
In E. Fromm & M. Nash (Eds.), Contemporary hypnosis research (pp. 227-266). New
York: Guilford Press.
Rossiter, T. R. & Vaque, T. J. (1995). A comparison of EEG biofeedback and
psychostimulants in treating attention deficit /hyperactivity disorders. Journal
of Neurotherapy, Summer 1995.
Ruzyla-Smith, P., Barabasz, A., Barabasz, M. & Warner, D. (1995). Effects of
hypnosis on the immune response: B-cells, T-cells, helper and suppressor cells.
American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 38(2), 71-79.
Sabourin, M. (1982). Hypnosis and brain function: EEG correlates of state-trait
differences. Research Communications in Psychology, Psychiatry and Behavior, 7
(2), 149-168.
Sabourin, M. E., Cutcomb, S. D., Crawford, H.J., & Pribram, K. (1990). EEG
correlates of hypnotic susceptibility and hypnotic trance: Spectral analysis and
coherence. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 10, 125-142.
Saxby, E. & Peniston, E. G. (1995). Alpha-theta brainwave neurofeedback
training: An effective training for male and female alcoholics with depressive
symptoms. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 51(5), 685-693.
Schacter, D. L. (1977). EEG theta waves and psychological phenomena: A review
and analysis. Biological Psychology, 5, 47-82.
Shor, R. & Orne, E. C. (1962). The Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic
Susceptibility, Form A: Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA.
Soskis, D.A. (1986). Teaching self-hypnosis: An introductory guide for
clinicians. New York: W. W. Norton & company.
Swann, R., Bosanko, S., Cohen, R., Midgley, R. & Seed, K. M. (1982). The brain -
A user's manual, 92. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons.
Tebecis, A. K., Provins, K. A., Farnbach, R. W., & Pentony, P. (1975). Hypnosis
and the EEG: A quantitative investigation. Journal of Nervous and Mental
Disease, 161, 1-17.
Telliegen, A., & Atkinson, G. (1974). Openness to absorbing and self altering
experiences ("absorption"), a trait related to hypnotic susceptibility. Journal
of Abnormal Psychology, 83, 268-277.
Tice, L. & Steingerg, A. (1989). A better world, a better you, 57-62. New
Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Vogel, W., Borverman, D. M., & Wilson, A. (1977). EEG and mental abilities.
Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 24, 166-175.
Waite, A. E.. (1960). Braid on hypnotism: The beginnings of modern hypnosis. New
York: Julian. (Rev. ed. of Neurypnology, by J. Braid, 1843).
Weitzenhoffer, A.M. (1953). Hypnotism: An objective study in suggestibility. New
York: Wiley.
Weitzenhoffer, A. M. & Hilgard, E. R. (1959). Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility
Scale, Forms A and B: Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA.
Weitzenhoffer, A. M. & Hilgard, E. R. (1962). Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility
Scale, Form C.: Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA.
Wickramasekera, I. (1979). A model of the patient at high risk for chronic
stress related disorders: Do beliefs have biological consequences? Paper
presented at the Annual Convention of the Biofeedback Society of America, San
Diego, CA.
Wickramasekera, I. (1994). Psychophysiological and clinical implications of the
coincidence of high hypnotic ability and high neurooticism during threat
perception in somatization disorders. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis,
37(l), 22-33.
Wickramasekera, I. , Pope, A. T., & Kolm, P. (1996 in press) Hypnotizability:
Skin conductance level and chronic pain: Implications for the somatization of
trauma. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease.


























搜尋引擎讓我們程式搜尋結果更加完美
  • 如果您覺得該文件有幫助到您,煩請按下我
  • 如果您覺得該文件是一個一無是處的文件,也煩請按下我

  • 搜尋引擎該文件您看起來是亂碼嗎?您可以切換編碼方式試試看!ISO-8859-1 | latin1 | euc-kr | euc-jp | CP936 | CP950 | UTF-8 | GB2312 | BIG5 |
    搜尋引擎本文件可能涉及色情、暴力,按我申請移除該文件

    搜尋引擎網址長?按我產生分享用短址

    ©2024 JSEMTS

    https://tw.search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A8tUwZJ2QE1YaVcAUmFr1gt.;_ylc=X1MDMjExNDcwNTAwMwRfcgMyBGZyA3lmcC10LTkwMC1zLXR3BGdwcmlkAwRuX3JzbHQDMARuX3N1Z2cDMARvcmlnaW4DdHcuc2VhcmNoLnlhaG9vLmNvbQRwb3MDMARwcXN0cgMEcHFzdHJsAwRxc3RybAM4NARxdWVyeQMlRTglQjYlODUlRTUlOEYlQUYlRTYlODQlOUIlRTclOUElODQlRTUlQUYlQjYlRTUlQUYlQjYlMjAlRTglODMlQTElRTUlQUUlODklRTUlQTglOUMEdF9zdG1wAzE0ODE0NTc3OTM-?p=%E8%B6%85%E5%8F%AF%E6%84%9B%E7%9A%84%E5%AF%B6%E5%AF%B6+%E8%83%A1%E5%AE%89%E5%A8%9C&fr2=sb-top-tw.search&fr=yfp-t-900-s-tw&rrjfid=7546386 https://tw.search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A8tUwZJ2QE1YaVcAUmFr1gt.;_ylc=X1MDMjExNDcwNTAwMwRfcgMyBGZyA3lmcC10LTkwMC1zLXR3BGdwcmlkAwRuX3JzbHQDMARuX3N1Z2cDMARvcmlnaW4DdHcuc2VhcmNoLnlhaG9vLmNvbQRwb3MDMARwcXN0cgMEcHFzdHJsAwRxc3RybAM4NARxdWVyeQMlRTglQjYlODUlRTUlOEYlQUYlRTYlODQlOUIlRTclOUElODQlRTUlQUYlQjYlRTUlQUYlQjYlMjAlRTglODMlQTElRTUlQUUlODklRTUlQTglOUMEdF9zdG1wAzE0ODE0NTc3OTM-?p=%E8%B6%85%E5%8F%AF%E6%84%9B%E7%9A%84%E5%AF%B6%E5%AF%B6+%E8%83%A1%E5%AE%89%E5%A8%9C&fr2=sb-top-tw.search&fr=yfp-t-900-s-tw&rrjfid=4870605 https://tw.search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A8tUwYgkQU1YcXoAUE9r1gt.;_ylc=X1MDMjExNDcwNTAwMwRfcgMyBGZyA3lmcC10LTkwMC10dwRncHJpZAMxWU5tY2FYMVFGQ2ZvUXZGN1N0bzVBBG5fcnNsdAMwBG5fc3VnZwMwBG9yaWdpbgN0dy5zZWFyY2gueWFob28uY29tBHBvcwMwBHBxc3RyAwRwcXN0cmwDBHFzdHJsAzQ4BHF1ZXJ5AyVFNiVBRCVBMSVFNiVBRCU4QyUyMCVFNSVCMCU4OCVFNiU4MyU4NSVFNSU5QyU5OAR0X3N0bXADMTQ4MTQ1Nzk3Ng--?p=%E6%AD%A1%E6%AD%8C+%E5%B0%88%E6%83%85%E5%9C%98&fr2=sb-top-tw.search&fr=yfp-t-900-tw&rrjfid=6014268 https://tw.search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A8tUwYgkQU1YcXoAUE9r1gt.;_ylc=X1MDMjExNDcwNTAwMwRfcgMyBGZyA3lmcC10LTkwMC10dwRncHJpZAMxWU5tY2FYMVFGQ2ZvUXZGN1N0bzVBBG5fcnNsdAMwBG5fc3VnZwMwBG9yaWdpbgN0dy5zZWFyY2gueWFob28uY29tBHBvcwMwBHBxc3RyAwRwcXN0cmwDBHFzdHJsAzQ4BHF1ZXJ5AyVFNiVBRCVBMSVFNiVBRCU4QyUyMCVFNSVCMCU4OCVFNiU4MyU4NSVFNSU5QyU5OAR0X3N0bXADMTQ4MTQ1Nzk3Ng--?p=%E6%AD%A1%E6%AD%8C+%E5%B0%88%E6%83%85%E5%9C%98&fr2=sb-top-tw.search&fr=yfp-t-900-tw&rrjfid=8755154 https://tw.search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A8tUwYgkQU1YcXoAUE9r1gt.;_ylc=X1MDMjExNDcwNTAwMwRfcgMyBGZyA3lmcC10LTkwMC10dwRncHJpZAMxWU5tY2FYMVFGQ2ZvUXZGN1N0bzVBBG5fcnNsdAMwBG5fc3VnZwMwBG9yaWdpbgN0dy5zZWFyY2gueWFob28uY29tBHBvcwMwBHBxc3RyAwRwcXN0cmwDBHFzdHJsAzQ4BHF1ZXJ5AyVFNiVBRCVBMSVFNiVBRCU4QyUyMCVFNSVCMCU4OCVFNiU4MyU4NSVFNSU5QyU5OAR0X3N0bXADMTQ4MTQ1Nzk3Ng--?p=%E6%AD%A1%E6%AD%8C+%E5%B0%88%E6%83%85%E5%9C%98&fr2=sb-top-tw.search&fr=yfp-t-900-tw&rrjfid=1982150 https://tw.search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A8tUwYgkQU1YcXoAUE9r1gt.;_ylc=X1MDMjExNDcwNTAwMwRfcgMyBGZyA3lmcC10LTkwMC10dwRncHJpZAMxWU5tY2FYMVFGQ2ZvUXZGN1N0bzVBBG5fcnNsdAMwBG5fc3VnZwMwBG9yaWdpbgN0dy5zZWFyY2gueWFob28uY29tBHBvcwMwBHBxc3RyAwRwcXN0cmwDBHFzdHJsAzQ4BHF1ZXJ5AyVFNiVBRCVBMSVFNiVBRCU4QyUyMCVFNSVCMCU4OCVFNiU4MyU4NSVFNSU5QyU5OAR0X3N0bXADMTQ4MTQ1Nzk3Ng--?p=%E6%AD%A1%E6%AD%8C+%E5%B0%88%E6%83%85%E5%9C%98&fr2=sb-top-tw.search&fr=yfp-t-900-tw&rrjfid=1250813