Hypnotic susceptibility scales under attack: An examination of Weitzenhoffer's criticisms

Weitzenhoffer (1980) has criticized the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scales (Weitzenhoffer & amp; Hilgard 1959, 1962), and others constructed similarly to them, on the grounds (a) that they presume to measure depth of hypnosis but may not do so, (b) that the inclusion of easy items is inappropriate, (c) that involuntariness (automaticity) is underplayed, in part by a confusion between instructions and suggestions, and (d) that hypnotizability should be measured by an increase in responses to suggestion after induction over baseline responses to suggestion prior to induction (“gain-scores”). Each of these criticisms is examined, and the standardized scales of hypnotic responsiveness, despite their imperfections, are not vulnerable to these criticisms. The proposal that “gain-scores” should be used is impractical on the basis of both pragmatic and psychometric considerations. Such scores produce counterintuitive results, artifacts difficult to overcome, and they suffer from unreliability.