MindNet is no longer active.

Back to MindNet Index

     MindNet Journal - Vol. 1, No. 58
     V E R I C O M M / MindNet         "Quid veritas est?"

The views and opinions expressed below are not necessarily the
views and opinions of VERICOMM, MindNet, or the editors unless
otherwise noted.

The following is reproduced here with the express permission of
the author.

Permission is given to reproduce and redistribute, for
non-commercial purposes only, provided this information and the
copy remain intact and unedited.

Editor: Mike Coyle 

Assistant Editor: Rick Lawler

Research: Darrell Bross

Editor's Note:

The "Greenbaum Speech" referred to below cannot be made
available by this publication per the author's instructions.



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
   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.


   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

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

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,

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,

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

Vol. 17, No. 4, October 1969, The Effects of Sensory
Restriction on Susceptibility To Hypnosis: A Hypothesis,
Some Preliminary Data and Theoretical Speculation, Ian

Vol. 16, No. 1, January 1968, A Brief Non-Threatening
Procedure For the Evaluation of Hypnotizability, Julio

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

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

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

_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,

_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).

MindNet Journal Archive Filename: [mn158.txt]

To receive the MindNet Journal via email:

Send message: [subscribe mindnet] to: .

To unsubscribe:

Send message: [unsubscribe mindnet] to: .

Back issues of the MindNet Journal are available at our
FTP Archive site:


MindNet Journal Publication Index: [mnindex.txt]

Submission of articles for publication within the MindNet
Journal on the subjects of mind control, directed-energy
weapons, non-lethal weapons, ritual abuse, UFO abductions,
bioelectromagnetics, hypnosis, and other related topics
will be accepted with the author's statement of permission
to publish. The editor reserves the right to accept or
reject for publication. The publisher disclaims all
responsibility to return unsolicited matter. Send articles
for submission to:

, or VERICOMM BBS 510.891.0303, or VERICOMM,
POB 32314, Oakland, CA 94604-2314 USA.

VERICOMM / MindNet and its agents disclaim any and all
responsibility or liability for any and all claims and/or
guarantees, express or implied, and delivery of products,
merchandise, and/or services offered for sale by
advertisers and/or authors within the MindNet Journal.

The MindNet mailing list is owned and maintained by Mike Coyle,
, VERICOMM / MindNet, POB 32314 Oakland, CA
94604-2314 USA.

The MindNet Journal is published by VERICOMM / MindNet in
cooperation with the Freedom Of Thought Foundation, POB 35072,
Tucson, AZ 85740-5072 USA.


||||  ||||  |      |       |  |      |      |   |   |   |   ||||
|||||  ||  ||  |||||  |||  |  |  |||||  ||  |  | |  |  | |  ||||
||||||    |||  ,,,,|      ||  |  |||||  ||  |  |||  |  |||  ||||
|||||||  ||||      |  |||  |  |      |      |  |||  |  |||  sm||
||||||||||||  VERICOMM / MindNet : MindNet@c2.org  |||||||||||||