A PRIMER ON HYPNOSIS AND MIND CONTROL
By Darrell Bross
May 1995
The purpose of this paper is to provide some primary research tools for the layman to explore the many myths about hypnosis (is hypnotic mind control feasible — absolutely!) and where, in the scientific literature, can I go to find out about it.
Some months ago I stumbled across a transcription of a talk given by D. C. Hammond at the Fourth Annual Eastern Regional Conference on Abuse and Multiple Personality, June 25,1992. If you are unfamiliar with mind control or have not heard of this speech, also know as the Greenbaum Speech, stop now and read it. It is very frightening in its implications.
On October 30, 1993 I had the opportunity to observe, what amounted to, a stage demonstration of a UFO abduction regression. My domestic partner was the “volunteer from the audience” who was placed under hypnosis as part of this demonstration. I was sitting in about the fifth row and was observing the proceedings intensely. I walked away from that with significantly more questions than when I had started.
I went to my nearest teaching hospital library with two fundamental questions in mind. What exactly is the mechanism of hypnosis and is the process that Hammond (and now others) describes feasible, on the level and quantity that Hammond intimates? I think from your own perusal of the readily available resources you will be able to make a quick judgement. Methodology.
I went backward through the two primary journals that professional hypnosis therapists and researchers use to publish their papers. In the American Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis I was able to cite not only significant papers but abstracts of relevant articles that appeared in other journals. These abstracts consisted of, two paragraphs, reviews of papers that had appeared in other publications. Obviously some of these publications may not be in your particular library but your librarian can certainly tell you how to get copies of the complete paper. It has certainly been my experience that the authors are more than happy to send you reprints if you can’t get hold of the publication. These abstracts should be looked at first before you go to the trouble of tracking down these, sometimes hard to find, journals. I did have the opportunity to at least glance at all of the articles in sufficient depth to say that each of them would contribute to your knowledge about the feasibility of mind control. I feel fairly comfortable in stating that anybody who spent a couple of weeks reading this material would know how to do what Hammond describes and realize that the basic knowledge was available as early as the late 1940’s.
History of the Journals
The two primary journals (and their associated professional societies) the American Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, and the International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis date back to the 50’s. Milton Erickson started the AJCEH ostensibly as a separate vehicle for his ideas about the fundamental mechanisms of hypnosis. George Estabrooks was instrumental in the initial formative years of the IJCEH. Volumes could be (and have been) written about the scientific disagreements over the causes of the hypnotic state and the papers appearing in both journals are not coherently shedding much light on the controversy particularly in the early years. Unfortunately in the later years (1990+) the issues have polarized, often along political lines, so that now the IJCEH (in particular) seems to be a strident voice siding with the False Memory Syndrome crowd. Oddly enough, Estabrooks, who was the principle proponent of “The Government Has Created Manchurian Candidate Super-Spys” would certainly feel more comfortable publishing/editing for the alternate AJCEH. In short…it may, or may not, be significant to be aware of who is writing for what journal at what time. Part of the problem lies in the radically different interpretation one can put on some of the tests described. As an example one of the early demonstrations involves implanting a real time suggestion that the subject will not be able to hear anything going on around him — cutting off his sense of hearing. Subsequently the, still hypnotized, subject will be asked if he can hear and his reply will be “no.” People who lean toward the theory that “hypnosis is not a state at all” seize on this as conclusive proof. The other end of the spectrum… people who believe in a dissociative, neo- dissociative, trance mechanism, or altered state of consciousness will conclude that either the psyche has dissociated and another “personality” has answered the question (and is still able to hear), or the “hidden observer” mechanism of the trance state is doing the talking.
It is easier, oddly enough, to start reading the journals backward in time to get a better understanding of how the polarizing occurred and what shape it is in at various stages. It is also important to understand how the politicizing of these issues has come about and it is therefore important to observe who, consistently, are the major players in the hypnosis arena — particularly the publishing one. There is also the interesting element, if you can spot it, of the cross-overs — the players who jump from one side to the other. There are only a few but watch for them — they are significant. What IS Hypnosis.
I can, and will, be a little flip here. I don’t know what hypnosis is and I can’t definitively point to anything that I would call proof that it is one thing or another. Hypnosis seems to be a “results driven” science in that you have people exhibiting behavior and providing results while being “under hypnosis.” Behavioral scientists then attempt to draw conclusions about the causal mechanism. A lot of people have spent a lot of research time proving; from one end of the spectrum that hypnosis is not a state at all and consists merely of varying degrees of suggestible people “going along with it,” all the way to the other end of the spectrum where people argue that hypnosis is a distinct “altered state of consciousness.” “Deeply” hypnotized subjects, however, do not seem to measure marked differences on standard physiological instrumentation (EEG, GSR, etc.). There is a distinct methodology for induction into this “condition” which is too lengthy to go into here but is readily available through the enclosed literature citations. Suffice it to say that it seems to involve the subjects shutting down several of their informational input mechanisms (sight, sound, feeling etc.) so that a state of dependency upon the hypnotist for sensory input begins to occur. Subjects reach a state where the hypnotists voice appears to originate inside their own head and they think that the commands (suggestions) are originating with themselves. Obviously, if you think a little bit about this mechanism you can imagine that it wouldn’t take much to attain an induction using elements other than a one on one operator to subject relationship. Thusly we then can open the door to some of the darker suggestions about the feasibility of mind control.
A History of My Involvement with “Adverse Hypnosis”
I should have followed the preceding section with another entitled “What Hypnosis Isn’t,” but I think it is more helpful to include this personal narrative not just because it tells you where I’m coming from but to try to pass on a little of my own investigative enthusiasm. If you posit a mind control scenario then you certainly aren’t going to be able to go to a single source like the CIA and ask to see their research materials (manual). So we have to develop our own reasoning and methodology and following is how I developed mine.
When UFO abduction phenomena first appeared I began to have a deductive unease about the veracity of what I was hearing. I had just come out of a four year experience in criminal investigation which tangentially had gotten me into investigating a case of spontaneous human combustion. My primary avocation was that of an accounting auditor. All of this has given me a lot of practise in using my logic skills. In the spontaneous combustion case I was forced to explore similar phenomena and came into contact with, among others, the UFO subculture. As I got into “that side of things” I began to notice that whenever I went “into the field” investigating practically anything, I would stumble over disinformation operations, particularly in the UFO community. Very little UFO material is real. In fact there is a strong suggestion that abduction regressions have remarkable parallels to the phenomena associated with mind control. Once the reader has digested this information please go back and think about what you know about UFO abduction or read any recent book on the subject (John Mack’s bestseller would be a good one).
In a casual conversation that I had a few years ago with a scientologist friend of mine, he happened to mention that L. Ron Hubbard had done some research with Manuchurian Candidate type Korean War veterans and had been involved in deprogramming them, in addition either offering or actually working with the government on this subject. I subsequently found out that Hubbard had been deeply involved in Satanic circles in the 40’s and that woven through scientology were the same techniques that Aleister Crowley and Jack Parsons had codified. So Hubbard’s expertise came as no surprise. All my friend could tell me was that PDH (pain, drugs, hypnosis) was involved. I got the distinct impression that if I wanted to find out what the Church of Scientology had on this I would have to become either highly placed in the organization or spend big bucks or both. Shortly after I came upon the Greenbaum speech by Hammond, whose validity (the fact that he did give the speech and that he is extremely well credentialled) was verified. Within just a few months other clinicians popped up with verification and now there are conferences, videotapes and at least five books slated to appear on this subject. One can certainly wonder how and why all the sudden fervor\exposure of this subject has suddenly appeared but that particular question is a whole other ball of wax…just keep it somewhat in mind.
In the first flush of material appearing on this subject I noticed that people kept referring to George Estabrooks book on hypnosis and for awhile had trouble finding anybody who carried it. When I did find it (in the reference section at the San Francisco Public Library) the mystery was somewhat lessened when I discovered it had been printed in 1952. This book is actually a collection of papers given at a conference on, what was then, state of the art in hypnosis. I have included, in a separate section, the titles of some of these papers. I think the reader will be as astounded as I was that a good deal of the technology was available as early as this. Of course the citations that each of the presenters listed after their own articles was, if anything, even more interesting.
What Hypnosis ISN’T
Hopefully, by now, you will be less surprised than I was, to find that almost everything you had been led to believe about hypnosis is untrue. And I use the word “led” in as emphasized a fashion as I can because most of these lies were knowingly being foisted back, at least, to the time of Estabrooks book. Following are as many of the lies as I can think of offhand: “You can’t be hypnotized against your will.” Not only can you, but once hypnotized you can be hypnotized again — over the phone. Also you can be passed around. “You can’t be made to do anything against your morals.” Indeed you can — directly, immediately and up front.
“Things you are told to forget will eventually come back.” Not true — see Greenbaum.
“You cannot create multiple personalities.” Not only can you easily do so, many theorists contend that the mechanism of hypnosis is a form of dissociation in itself. Some researchers have stated in the literature that you can wipe out the primary personality and replace it with one or more different personalities. NLP (Neuro-Linguistic Programming) has some connection with this subject but is too complex to be included in a paper of this length.
Some people are not hypnotizable. True but only in a limited sense. Hypnotizability is an easily learned “skill.” The nature of hypnotism is that it gets easier (reinforceability). There is also a large body of information in the journals about ascertaining the hypnotizability of subjects by administering written questionnaires (see references below). Much work has been done to identify personality types and a whole host of other criteria as to their hypnotizability (schizophrenics are considered unhypnotizable). Studies have been done relating performance on the MMPI to hypnotizability (most of the prisoners incarcerated within this country in the last 40 years have had the MMPI administered to them).
Other Misconceptions
Scientists, therapists, hypnotists, indeed it seems anybody who publishes on this subject, seems to like to argue about definitions. The arena of hypnosis is no exception. I will not attempt precise definitions myself because I believe it is an integral part of the readers own investigation to see how each of the hundred or so principles that you come across handles this particular problem…some of them deliberately use the terms to mislead the reader. But a couple of the terms need to be flagged as particularly troublesome because some writers will use an incorrect term for a period of time and then invent another term, some writers will continue to use an incorrect term because they feel public acceptance of that term is too ingrained. The principle troublemaker you’ll run across is the term Multiple Personality Disorder. True MPD is a disorder, quite rare, that occurs “naturally” in mentally disturbed patients. Its chief distinguishing feature compared to “artificially” (hypnotically) induced phenomena is that the different personalities (alters) cannot usually be produced on demand. The term “dissociation” (dissociative identity disorder) came into favor and enjoyed popularity for awhile but it too has its problems. Suffice it to say that when reading the literature the terminology has to be examined in a special context and one has to be always on guard to understand the context that the writer intends.
Notes on the Literature
Obviously not all researchers will agree with my choices nor do all of these titles reflect the nature or depth of the material therein. I do think that most are relevant.
_American Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis_ Vol. 37, No. 3, January 1995, Pseudomemories: The Standard of Science and the Standard of Care in Trauma Treatment, Daniel Brow.
Vol. 37, No. 2, October 1994, Abstract: Intensity of amnesia during hypnosis is positively correlated with estimated prevalence of sexual abuse and alien abductions: Implications for the false memory syndrome, Michael A. Persinger, (_ Perceptual Motor Skills_, 77(3, Pt 1), 895-898).
Vol. 37, No. 4, April 1995, Abstract: Forgetting sexual trauma: What does it mean when 38% forget? (_Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology_, 62(6) 1177- 1181); Abstract: Recall of childhood trauma. A prospective study of women’s memories of child sexual abuse (_Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology_, 62(6) 1167-1176).
Vol. 34, No. 1, July 1991, Abstract: Non-rational guilt in victims of trauma. (_Dissociation_, 3, 160-164).
Vol. 34, No. 2, October 1991, Abstract: Selective hypnotic amnesia. (_Journal of Abnormal Psychology_, 100(2) 133-143, Abstract: Patients reporting ritual abuse in childhood: A clinical syndrome. (_Child Abuse & Neglect_, 15(3) 181-189).
Vol. 34, No. 3, January 1992, Abstract: Animal alters – Case Reports, (_Dissociation_, 3(4), 218- 221), Abstract: Fantasy proneness, amnesia, and the UFO abduction phenomenon. (_ Dissociation_, 4(1), 46-54.
Vol. 34, No. 4, April 1992, Hypnosis, Ericksonion Hypnotherapy, and Aikido, Rod Windle & Michael Sanks, Abstract: Can hypnosis compel people to commit harmful, immoral and criminal acts? A review of the literature. (_Contemporary Hypnosis_, 8(3) 129- 140; Abstract: Psychosomatically induced death: Relative to stress, hypnosis, mind control, and voodoo: Review and possible mechanisms. (_Stress Medicine_, 7, 213-232); Abstract: Dissociative experiences in the general population (_Hospital and Community Psychiatry_, 4(3), 297-301).
Vol. 33, No. 1, July 1990, Dissociation and Displacement: Where Goes the Ouch?, John G. Watkins and Helen H. Watkins; Abstract: The dissociation theory of Pierre Janet (_Journal of Traumatic Stress_, 2(4), 397-411) .
Vol.33, No. 2, October 1990, Abstract: Multiple personality disorder and satanic ritual abuse. The issue of credibility. (_ _Dissociation_, 3(1) 22-30); Abstract: Contemporary interest in multiple personality disorder and child abuse (satanic) in the Netherlands (_Dissociation_, 3(1), 34-37).
Vol. 34, No. 4, April 1990, Abstract: Multiple disorder and homicide: Professional and legal issues. (_Dissociation_, 2(2), 110-115); Abstract: Multiple personality disorder: An analysis (_ Canadian Journal of Psychiatry_, 34(5), 413-418).
Vol. 33, No. 3, January 1990, Abstract: Satanism: Similarities between patients accounts and preinquisition historical sources. (_Dissociation_, 2(1) 39-44).
Vol. 31, No. 2, October 1988, Abstract: The BASK (behavior, affect, sensation, knowledge) model of dissociation. (_ Dissociation_, 1(1), 4-23).
Vol. 31, No. 4, April 1989, Abstract: Treating phobias rapidly with Bandler’s theater technique. (_Australian Journal of Clinical & Experimental Hypnosis_, 16, 153-160).
Vol. 30, No. 1, July 1987, Abstract: Restraints in the treatment of a patient with multiple personality disorder. (_American Journal of Psychotherapy_, 40(4), 601-606).
Vol. 30, No. 4, April 1988, Contrasting Stage & Clinical Hypnosis, Lennis G. Echterling.
Vol. 29, No. 1, July 1986, Abstract: Child abuse and hypnotic ability. (_Imagery Cognition and Personality_, 5, 211-218).
Vol. 29, No. 2, October 1986, A Brief History of Dissociation, Shirley Sanders and James A. Hall.
Vol. 21, No. 4, April 1979, A Rapid Induction Technique, George Mathison and John F. Grehan.
Vol. 20, No. 2, October 1977, Abstract: Hypnotically Induced Multiple Personality: An experimental study. (_Psychiatria Fennica_, 1974, 201-209).
Vol. 20, No. 4, April 1978, Hypnotherapy at a Distance Through Use of the Telephone, H. E. Stanton, PhD, Abstract: Rapid hypnotic induction using relative analgesia. (_Australian Journal of Clinical Hypnosis_, 1977, 5, 30-34) p73.
Vol. 17, No. 4, April 1975, Abstract: More on drugs, hypnotic susceptibility and experimentally controlled conditions. (_ Bulletin of the British Psychological Society_, 1973, 26, 95- 103).
Vol. 16, No. 4, April 1974, Impact of Psychoactive Drugs on Hypnotizability, John Beahrs MD, Albert Carlin PhD, & Janice Shehorn R.N.
Vol. 16, No. 1, July 1973, Abstract: Analysis of a non-verbal induction procedure in hypnosis. (_British Journal of Clinical Hypnosis_, 1972, 3(3), 118- 123).
Vol. 16, No. 4, April 1973, Abstract: Electric approaches to hypnotherapy. (_American Journal of Psychotherapy_, 26, 1972, 511-520).
Vol. 14, No. 4, April 1972, Open Ended Distance Hypnotherapy, Andre M. Weitzenhoffer D.D.
Vol. 14, No. 3, January 1972, Abstract: Toward an explanation of stage hypnosis. (_Journal of Abnormal Psychology_, 1971, 77(1), 61-70).
Vol. 13, No. 2, October 1970, Abstract: Crime and hypnosis. (_ Parapsychology Review_, 1970, 1(1), 1-2, 22-24), Abstract: The validity of the polygraph with hypnotically induced repression and guilt. (_American Journal of Psychiatry_, 1970, 126, 143- 146).
Vol. 12, No. 4, April 1970, An Analysis of Induction Procedures in Hypnosis, Paul Sacerdote M.D., PhD.
Vol. 11, No. 2, October 1968, A Proposed Definition of Hypnosis with a Theory of Its Mechanism of Action, Esther E. Bartlett M. D., Abstract: Hypnosis: the technique of programmed hypnosis as applied in the general practice of medicine. (_Medical Proceedings_, 1967, 13/14: 369-372).
Vol. 9, No. 1, July 1966, Abstract: Control of pain motivation by cognitive dissonance. (_Science_, 1966, 151, 217-219).
Vol. 9, No. 1, July 1965, Abstract: The use of Hypnosis to interrupt and to reproduce an LSD-25 experience. (_Journal Clinical Experimental Psychopathology_, 1964, 23, 11-16).
Vol. 6, No. 3, January 1964, The Confusion Technique in Hypnosis, Milton H. Erickson M.D.; Rapid hypnosis by Using Nitrous Oxide, George D. Binghman DDS.
Vol. 5, No. 3, January 1963, Some Dangerous Techniques of Hypnotic Induction, Boris Kaim M.D.
International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis_ Note: Those articles marked with an * are rabidly anti-repressed memory. They are included not only for balance, but also because they serve to show the polarization and to jog the thinking processes.
* Vol. 42, No. 4, 1994, Satanism, Ritual Abuse, and Multiple Personality Disorder: A Sociohistorical Perspective, Sherrill Mulhern; Recovered Memory Therapy and Robust Repression: Influence and Pseudomemories, Richard J. Ofshe & Margaret Singer.
* Vol. 40, No. 3, July 1992, Inadvertent Hypnosis During Interrogation: False Confession Due to Dissociative State: Mid- -Identified Multiple Personality and the Satanic Cult Hypothesis, Richard J. Ofshe.
Vol. 40, No. 4, October 1992, Hypnosis: Wherefore Art Thou?, William C. Coe; Theorizing About Hypnosis in Either/Or Terms, Campbell Perry; Imagination and Dissociation in Hypnotic Responding.
Vol. 39, No. 3, July 1991, Dissociation in Hypnosis and Multiple Personality Disorder, Kenneth S. Bowers.
Vol. 38, No. 2, April 1990, 40h EEG Activity during Hypnotic Induction and Hypnotic Training, Vilfredo DePascalls & Pietronilla M. Penna.
Vol. 34, No. 1, January 1986, Hypnotherapy in a Case of Dissociated Incest, Arnold Miller.
Vol. 34, No. 2, April 1986, Finding the Hypnotic Virtuoso, Patricia A. Register and John F. Kihlstrou; Beliefs About Forensic Hypnosis, Leanne Wilson, Edith Greene and Elizabeth Loftus.
Vol. 34, No. 4, October 1986, Duality, Dissociation, and Memory Creation in Highly Hypnotizable Subjects, Jean-Roch Laurence, Robert Nadon, Heather Nogrady and Campbell Perry.
Vol. 33, No. 4, October 1985, An Empirical Evaluation of the Neurolinguistic Programming Model, William C. Coe & Joseph A. Scharcoff.
Vol. 32, No. 1, January 1984, Adult Hypnotic Susceptibility, Childhood Punishment and Child Abuse, Michael Nash, Steven Lynn, and Deborah Givens.
Vol. 32, No. 2, April 1984, The Bianchi (LA Hillside Strangler) Case: Sociopath or Multiple Personality, John G. Watkins. Difficulties Diagnosing the Multiple Personality Syndrome in a Death Penalty Case, Ralph B. Allison; On The Differential Diagnosis of Multiple Personality in the Forensic Context, Martin Orne, David Dinges, Emily Orne; Diagnosis of Multiple Personality During Hypnosis: A Case Report, Colin Ross.
Vol. 24, No. 3, July 1976, Hypnotically Induced multiple personality: An Experimental Study, Resima Kampsman.
Vol. 22, No. 2, April 1974, Persistence of a Hypnotic Dissociative Reaction, Steven Starker.
Vol. 22, No. 4, October 1974, The Grade 5 Syndrome: The Highly Hypnotizable Person, Herbert Spiegel.
Vol. 20, No. 1, January 1972, Hypnosis By Video Tape, George Ulett, Sevkat Akpinar and Turan Itil.
Vol. 20, No. 2, April 1972, Is Hypnosis Really Dangerous, Jacob Conn; The Production of Antisocial Behavior Through Hypnosis: New Clinical Data, Milton Kline; Antisocial Behavior Under Hypnosis: Possible or Impossible, John Watkins.
Vol. 17, No. 4, October 1969, The Effects of Sensory Restriction on Susceptibility To Hypnosis: A Hypothesis, Some Preliminary Data and Theoretical Speculation, Ian Wickromasehra.
Vol. 16, No. 1, January 1968, A Brief Non-Threatening Procedure For the Evaluation of Hypnotizability, Julio Dittborn.
Vol. 15, No. 2, April 1967, An Experimental Indirect Technique for the Induction of Hypnosis Without Awareness, Frederick Evans.
Vol. 13, No. 2, April 1965, Trance Inductions Under Unusual Circumstances, Hallock McCord.
Vol. 10, No. 2, April 1962, Hypnosis Without Hypnosis, Arthur Kuhner.
Vol. 10, No. 3, July 1962, The Use of Hypnosis With Unconscious Patients, Harold Crasilneck and James Hall .
Vol. 10, No. 4, October 1962, Personal Identity, Multiple Personality, and Hypnosis, J. P. Sutcliff and Jean Hones.
Vol. 9, No. 4, October 1961, Note on an Hypnotic Induction Device, Richard Skemp PhD.
Vol. 7, No. 2, April 1959, An Electronic Aid For Hypnotic Induction: A Preliminary Report, William Kroger M.D. & Sidney Schneider P.E.
Vol. 6, No. 4, October 1958, Clinical note: The Niagara Deep Massage Table, A Mechanical Aid to Hypnotic Induction Procedure: Indications and Contra Indications, Walter Edmundson.
Vol. 5, No. 1, January 1957, Clinical Use of Drugs in Induction and Termination of the Hypnotic State, Irwin Rothman. Hypnotic Susceptibility Scales
Note: The first two listed are the “industry standards.”
* Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale
* Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility
* Stanford Profile Scales of Hypnotic Susceptibility
* Children’s Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale
* Hypnotic Induction Profile
* Barber Suggestibility Scale
Must Read Books
The Encyclopedia of Genuine Stage Hypnotism_, O. McGill, 1947, Colon, Michigan, Abbott’s Magic Novelty Co. Divided Consciousness_, Ernest Hilgard, 1978, New York, Wiley Press.
_Hypnosis Induction Technics_, Myron Teitelbaum, 1969, Springfield, Illinois, Charles C. Thomas.
_Theories of Hypnosis: Current Models and Perspectives_, New York, 1991, Guilford.
_What Is Hypnosis? Current Theories and Research_, Peter L.D. Naish, 1986, Philadelphia, Open University Press.
_The Induction of Hypnosis_, William E. Edmonston, New York, Wiley & Sons.
_Multiple Personality, Allied Disorders, and Hypnosis_, Eugene L. Bliss, 1986, New York, Oxford University Press.
_Psychiatric Clinics of North America Symposium on Multiple Personality_, Vol. 7, Bennett G. Braun, 1984, Philadelphia, Saunders.
_Hypnosis: Questions and Answers_, Bernie Zilbergeld, M. Gerald Edelstein, David L. Araoz, 1986, New York, Norton.
_Personality and Hypnosis_, Josephine Hilgard M.D., 1970, University of Chicago Press.
_Methodologies of Hypnosis_, Peter W. Sheehan & Campbell W. Perry, 1976, John Wiley & Sons.
_Hypnosis For The Seriously Curious_, Kenneth S. Bowers, 1977, New York, Jason Aronson Inc.
_Handbook of Hypnosis For Professionals_, Roy Udolf, J.D. PhD., 1981, New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold Co. (*Negative Book) _They Call It Hypnosis_, Robert A. Baker, Buffalo, NY, Prometheus Books.
_Deep Hypnosis and Its Induction, Experimental Hypnosis_, Milton H. Erickson, 1952, New York, MacMillan. Additional citations from: _Hypnosis_, George Estabrooks: Process of Hypnotism and the Nature of the Hypnotic, L. S. Kubie & S. Margolin (_American Journal of Psychiatry_, 1944, 100, 611- 622).
Ability to Resist Artificially Induced Dissociation, W. R. Wells (_Journal of Abnormal Psychology_, 1941, 11, 63-102).
A New Approach to Multiple Personalities, P. L. Harriman (_ _American Journal Orthopsychiatry_, 1943, 13, 638-644).