Article covering efficacy of hypnosis.

You are feeling sleeeeepy.

http://chicagopsychology.org/hypnosis/review-of-what-should-we-mean-by-empirical-validation-in-hypnotherapy/

This article is a review of another article which discusses the current status of how researchers view the efficacy of the use of clinical hypnosis in a variety of problem areas.  It may be helpful in understanding what the research seems to be saying at this point about the efficacy of hypnosis.  It should not be taken as gospel, but as an opinion in a point in time.  Overall, it suggests that hypnosis is considered to be a good treatment for a variety of issues, even though it doesn’t have a seal of approval from the APA for a variety of reasons, including probably political reasons.  Enjoy the read.

About Nate Prentice, MSW, LCSW, CAS-PC

Nate Prentice, MSW, LCSW is a Licensed Clinical Social Worker and Pastoral Counselor who maintains a private psychotherapy practice in Drexel Hill, PA.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Article covering efficacy of hypnosis.

  1. There was a good article recently in Skeptic magazine about Hypnosis. There are no studies showing the effectiveness of hypnosis in treating depression, addiction, and many more disorders. There are lots of ill conceived notions about hypnosis, so it’s a good thing that this isn’t approved by the APA.

  2. Nate Prentice says:

    Hi. I’d be interested in reading this article. My understanding is that efficacy studies are relatively recent, so it does not surprise me that there are not a lot of studies out there. Do you have citation for the article so I can look it up?

  3. Nate Prentice says:

    Seriously. I’m trying to find reference to the article online but having a hard time. Could you point me at least to the citation?

  4. Nate Prentice says:

    Perhaps Mr. Cummings meant an article similar to this one: http://www.skepdic.com/hypnosis.html. There are things that I agree with in this article and things I don’t.

    I agree that past-life regressions and memory retrieval is dangerous work and that I really, really, don’t think I will be doing any of that in my practice, as it is probably a bunch of hooey.

    On the other hand, I found the article to be quite biased with no mention of any of the positive findings (see the original post for this thread).

    Hypnosis is not a cure-all. But it appears to have some benefits. Research continues to be done to measure the benefits. One thing I know from my doctoral student days is that research is neither complete nor perfect.

    CBT was mentioned as an alternative to hypnosis. However, there are complaints out there that state, for example, that the research about the efficacy of CBT is flawed because it is based on manual-based psychotherapy which isn’t what normal psychotherapy looks like.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s