Sun, Jul 14, 2024
| فارسی
Volume 23, Issue 3 (Fall 2017)
IJPCP 2017, 23(3): 362-379 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Taslimbakhsh Z, Sadeghi K, Sadeghi K, Ahmadi S M. Investigating Factor Structure, Validity, and Reliability of the Persian Version of the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale: Form C (SHSS: C). IJPCP 2017; 23 (3) :362-379
URL: http://ijpcp.iums.ac.ir/article-1-2530-en.html
URL: http://ijpcp.iums.ac.ir/article-1-2530-en.html
1- Department of Clinical Psychology, Faculty of Medicine, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah, Iran , Email: z.taslimbakhsh@kums.ac.ir
2- Department of Clinical Psychology, Faculty of Medicine, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah, Iran
3- Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Research Center, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran
2- Department of Clinical Psychology, Faculty of Medicine, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah, Iran
3- Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Research Center, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran
Abstract: (8171 Views)
Objectives The Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale: Form C (SHSS: C) was first introduced by Weitzenhoffer and Hilgard in 1952 and then revised and completed in 1962. The given scale mainly measures behavioral compliance and suggestibility within a whole range of hypnotic phenomena (movements as well as examples of imagination and cognitive distortions) in a short time. Thus, the purpose of this study was to investigate the psychometric properties of SHSS: C in a non-clinical population.
Methods This descriptive study was conducted on 300 students from different schools of Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences in Iran selected by multi-stage cluster random sampling method and tested via research instruments such as SHSS: C, the Hypnotic Induction Profile (HIP), the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility by Spiegel, and the NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI). The data obtained were analyzed using descriptive statistics, correlation coefficient, exploratory factor analysis, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, and Guttman’s split-half coefficient using the SPSS software version 22.
Results Factor analysis using varimax rotation from the principal component analysis extraction method for the SHSS: C could lead to the extraction of three factors of hypnotic susceptibility talents of perceptive-cognitive abilities, sensory-motor phenomena, cognitive distortions, and post-hypnotic effects. The reliability coefficients (alpha, test-retest, and internal consistency) were also equal to 0.80, 0.75, and 0.74, respectively. Moreover, three types of validity (concurrent, criterion, and correlation between subscales and total scale and inter-correlations) for the HIP, the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility by Spiegel, and the NEO-FFI were reported to be 0.89, 0.84, and 0.68, respectively.
Conclusion The results showed that the SHSS: C was endowed with desirable psychometric properties in an Iranian population, and it could be used in research studies on psychology and psychiatry.
Methods This descriptive study was conducted on 300 students from different schools of Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences in Iran selected by multi-stage cluster random sampling method and tested via research instruments such as SHSS: C, the Hypnotic Induction Profile (HIP), the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility by Spiegel, and the NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI). The data obtained were analyzed using descriptive statistics, correlation coefficient, exploratory factor analysis, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, and Guttman’s split-half coefficient using the SPSS software version 22.
Results Factor analysis using varimax rotation from the principal component analysis extraction method for the SHSS: C could lead to the extraction of three factors of hypnotic susceptibility talents of perceptive-cognitive abilities, sensory-motor phenomena, cognitive distortions, and post-hypnotic effects. The reliability coefficients (alpha, test-retest, and internal consistency) were also equal to 0.80, 0.75, and 0.74, respectively. Moreover, three types of validity (concurrent, criterion, and correlation between subscales and total scale and inter-correlations) for the HIP, the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility by Spiegel, and the NEO-FFI were reported to be 0.89, 0.84, and 0.68, respectively.
Conclusion The results showed that the SHSS: C was endowed with desirable psychometric properties in an Iranian population, and it could be used in research studies on psychology and psychiatry.
Keywords: SHSS, Hypnotic susceptibility, Factor
structure, Validity, Reliability, Psychometric
properties, Persian norms
Type of Study: Original Research |
Subject:
Psychiatry and Psychology
Received: 2016/06/26 | Accepted: 2017/02/25 | Published: 2017/10/1
Received: 2016/06/26 | Accepted: 2017/02/25 | Published: 2017/10/1
References
1. Morgan AH, Hilgard ER, Davert EC. The heritability of hypnotic susceptibility of twins: A preliminary report. Behavior Genetics. 1970; 19(2):213-24. doi: 10.1007/bf01074653 [DOI:10.1007/BF01074653]
2. Hilgard ER. Hypnotic susceptibility. San Diego: Harcourt, Brace & World; 1965.
3. Sadock BJ, Sadock VA, Kaplan HI. Kaplan and Sadock's Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2009.
4. Hammond C. Hypnotic induction & suggestion: An introductory manual [S. K. Alavi Fazel, Persian trans]. Tehran: Tarava; 2010.
5. Morgan AH, Hilgard JR. The Stanford hypnotic clinical scale for children. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis. 1978; 21(2-3):148–69. doi: 10.1080/00029157.1978.10403969 [DOI:10.1080/00029157.1978.10403969]
6. De Saldanha da Gama PAM, Davy T, Cleeremans A. Belgian Norms for the Waterloo-Stanford Group C (WSGC) scale of hypnotic susceptibility. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis. 2012; 60(3):356–69. doi: 10.1080/00207144.2012.675299 [DOI:10.1080/00207144.2012.675299]
7. Gauld A. A History of hypnotism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1995.
8. Spiegel H, Spiegel D. Trance and treatment: Clinical uses of hypnosis. Arlington: American Psychiatric Publications; 2004.
9. Kirenskaya AV, Novototsky-Vlasov VY, Zvonikov VM. Waking EEG spectral power and coherence differences between high and low hypnotizable subjects. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis. 2011; 59(4):441–53. doi: 10.1080/00207144.2011.594744 [DOI:10.1080/00207144.2011.594744]
10. Hilgard ER. Hypnosis. Annual Review of Psychology. 1975; 26:19-44. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ps.26.020175.000315 [DOI:10.1146/annurev.ps.26.020175.000315]
11. Weitzenhoffer AM, Hilgard ER. Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale: Forms A and B. Palo Alto, California: Consulting Psychologists Press; 1959.
12. Lamas JR, Valle-Inclán F, Blanco MJ, Díaz AA. Spanish norms for the Stanford hypnotic susceptibility scale, Form C. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis. 1985; 37(3):264-273 . [DOI:10.1080/00207148908414477] [PMID]
13. Hilgard ER, Crawford HJ, Bowers P, Kihlstrom JF. A tailored shss.c, permitting user modification for special purposes. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis. 1979; 27(2):125–33. doi: 10.1080/00207147908407552 [DOI:10.1080/00207147908407552]
14. Hypnotizability and psychopathology. American Journal of Psychiatry. 1982; 139(4):431–7. doi: 10.1176/ajp.139.4.431 [DOI:10.1176/ajp.139.4.431]
15. Cox RE, Langdon RA. Hypnotic olfactory hallucinations. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis. 2015; 64(1):24–44. doi: 10.1080/00207144.2015.1099401 [DOI:10.1080/00207144.2015.1099401]
16. Green JP. The Valencia scale of attitudes and beliefs toward hypnosis–client version and hypnotizability. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis. 2012; 60(2):229–40. doi: 10.1080/00207144.2012.648073 [DOI:10.1080/00207144.2012.648073]
17. Khaje Mogehi N. [Developmental and validation of Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-II (MCMI-II) (Persian)] [MSc. thesis]. Tehran: Iran University of Medical Science; 1995.
18. Millon T. Millon clinical multiaxial inventory-III. London: Pearson; 1983.
19. Hilgard ER. Divided consciousness: Multiple controls in human thought and action. New York: Wiley-Interscience; 1986
20. Squire LR, Cohen NJ. Human memory and amnesia, in Neurobiology of Learning and Memory. New York: Guilford; 1984
21. Elkins GR, Johnson AK, Johnson AJ, Sliwinski J. Factor analysis of the elkins hypnotizability scale. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis. 2015; 63(3):335–45. doi: 10.1080/00207144.2015.1031550 [DOI:10.1080/00207144.2015.1031550]
22. Roark JB, Barabasz AF, Barabasz M, Lin-Roark IH. An investigation of Taiwanese norms for the Stanford hypnotic susceptibility scale: form C (mandarin Chinese translation). International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis. 2012; 60(2):160–74. doi: 10.1080/00207144.2012.648062 [DOI:10.1080/00207144.2012.648062]
23. Naäring GWB, Roelofs K, Hoogduin KAL. The stanford hypnotic susceptibility scale, form C: Normative data of a dutch student sample. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis. 2001; 49(2):139–45. doi: 10.1080/00207140108410064 [DOI:10.1080/00207140108410064]
24. Robin BR, Kumar VK, Pekala RJ. Direct and indirect scales of hypnoticsusceptibility: resistance to therapy and psychometric comparability. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis. 2005; 53(2):135-47. doi: 10.1080/00207140590927617 [DOI:10.1080/00207140590927617]
25. Spiegel H, Greenleaf M. Personality style and hypnotizability: the fix–flex continuum. Psychiatric medication. 1992; 10(1):13–24. PMID: 1549748
26. Del Rosario G. The structure of human hypnotic suggestibility and trait hypnotic responsiveness of Koreans [PhD dissertation]. San Francisco: Saybrook Graduate School and Research Center; 2001.
27. Spiegel D, Koopman C, Carde-a E, Classen C. Dissociative symptoms in the diagnosis of acute stress disorder. In: Larry M, Ray K, William J, editors. Handbook of Dissociation: Theoretical, Empirical, and Clinical Perspectives. Berlin: Springer; 1996. [DOI:10.1007/978-1-4899-0310-5_17]
28. Weitzenhoffer AM, Weitzenhoffer GB. Personality and hypnotic susceptibility. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis. 1958; 1(2):79–82. doi: 10.1080/00029157.1958.10734338 [DOI:10.1080/00029157.1958.10734338]
29. Shimizu T. Role of beliefs about hypnotic states as a moderator variable: A reexamination of the relationship between reactance and hypnotizability. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis. 2016; 64(2):167–86. doi: 10.1080/00207144.2016.1131586 [DOI:10.1080/00207144.2016.1131586]
30. Benham G, Smith N, Nash MR. Hypnotic susceptibility scales: Are the mean scores increasing? International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis. 2002; 50(1):5–16. doi: 10.1080/00207140208410087 [DOI:10.1080/00207140208410087]
31. Sánchez A, Barabasz A. Mexican norms for the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis. 2005; 53(3):321–31. doi: 10.1080/00207140590961448 [DOI:10.1080/00207140590961448]
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
Copyright © The Author(s);
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-By-NC), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
Contact Information
