A personalised induction will always be more effective discussed
This is an interesting statement that I shall hope to explore and discuss here.
Although I feel there are numerous merits to support this, there are some instances where I feel this is not the case.
Imagine perhaps, a session of people for perhaps weight loss, or a quitting smoking group. You will have a group of people probably with different modalities and preferences towards either ‘Permissive’, or ‘Authoritarian styles of induction, making it impossible to personalize the induction to suit everyone, and instead have to use a general induction to reach the varying needs of the individual clients.
There are also certain cases where an authoritarian style, is …show more content…
He said, “I think it is tremendously important that you observe everything that is possible and then if you want to use Hypnosis, you know how to verbalise your suggestions to influence your patient, to elicit their responses.”
Permissive style at work here.
In other words, the therapist must adapt to be in line with the values and desires of their client.
On the other side of preferences , Clark Hull disagreed with this belief, and felt that the Authoritarian style was better to use. This involved the client following commands or the direction of the therapist and relinquishing control to him.
Hull thought that working through repeating commands was the right way to conduct Hypnosis. These screeds would be direct and to the point, even a bit harsh perhaps.
In this case, the Authoritarian approach, the client is not so involved in the process, more on the receiving end of a series of commands or suggestions that are repeated over and over, under the control of the hypnotist.
Freud was another example of someone who felt that the Authoritarian style of screed worked best, although he did have limited success with hypnotherapy, and concentrated his work more on psychoanalysis.
In our hypnosis today, the Permissive style