A Personalised Induction Will Always Be More Effective Essay Example
A Personalised Induction Will Always Be More Effective Essay Example

A Personalised Induction Will Always Be More Effective Essay Example

Available Only on StudyHippo
  • Pages: 7 (1849 words)
  • Published: August 29, 2016
  • Type: Essay
View Entire Sample
Text preview

This will discuss the topic if a personalised induction is always more effective and will look at the theoretical concepts and techniques. I will be looking at the permissive technique through the work of Erickson and on the opposite end of the scale I will take a look at the use of authoritarian screeds through the work of Hull and Freud who were known as more traditional hypnotherapists. I will also look at Modalities as another technique in personalising inductions.

This essay will argue and conclude that a personalised induction would be more effective however, whether a personalised induction will be more effective can somewhat be debatable depending on the goals of the therapy. Personalising Inductions In today's society modern professional hypnotists assess their clients, get an understanding of their goals and what

...

they want to achieve from the therapy as well as their expectations and they will discuss with them the whole process of hypnosis answering any other questions along the way so as to allay any fears and reassuring them.

During assessment rapport is also being built and this trust and assurance helps decrease the chances of resistance from the client during therapy. No two assessments will produce the same results and this in itself signifies the difference between individuals. There are many techniques, which can be used to employ hypnosis and the effectiveness of each will vary from client to client. One technique may be found to be extremely effective on one individual while the opposite is found on another. Using a specific type of techniques depending on the individual’s assessment outcome is what is called personalising.

View entire sample

Join StudyHippo to see entire essay

justify">Individual Differences Each individual is unique and different in many ways. Even twins have differences between them, however alike they seem. These differences are due to many factors, cultural backgrounds and the environment in which individuals are brought up in have a big impact on these. Everyone has different likes and dislikes and different ways of looking at things. These differences are what make us all unique because of these differences people have different ways of dealing with certain situations, different coping mechanisms and various levels of openness or resistance.

It is due to these differences that require hypnotherapists to take these variables into consideration when devising a therapy strategy and selecting techniques to be used for the individual so as to achieve the best result from the therapy. The way we all communicate as individuals is through language, however it is not just with the use of words it is also through body language. The body says many things through its actions which we are unable to do through the use of words and much of the time we do not even realise the actions of our own bodies when we are speaking.

Words and body language work together in communicating with others, however when you are in therapy with a client they will have their eyes shut so they will not be able to see the actions of your body to receive the full message you are passing on. This causes the message you are sending to the client to weaken. In order for therapy to be successful we can adapt and personalise the way we speak to suit the clients

through tone, pace, volume and altering words for more effectiveness. Erickson (cited in Havens RA 2005 page 14) recognised that every individual is different so they should all be treated as such.

Below are two quotes from the book title “Wisdom of Milton H Erickson” outlining the importance of observation of individuals to the process of hypnotherapy in order to achieve success from therapy and researching the client’s initial goals. “In brief we need to look upon research in hypnosis not in terms of what we can think and devise and hypothesize, but in terms of what we can, by actual observation and notation, discover about the unique varying, fascinating kind of behaviour that we can recognised as a state of awareness that can be directed and utilised in accord with inherent but unknown laws (1962) in Erickson (1980 Vol. 11 chapter 33 p. 350 cited in Havens RA 2005 page 15) “I think it is tremendously important that you observe everything is possible and then if you want to use hypnosis you know how to verbalising suggestions to influential patient to elicit their responses” ASCH (1980 Taped Lecture, 7/16/65 cited in Havens RA 2005 page 17 Therapeutic approaches Milton H Erickson Erickson believed that the internal processes of individual clients are important to the success of therapy.

Through observation Erickson noticed the significance of non-verbal communication, the importance of body language tone of voice and the way that non-verbal expressions often directly contradicted the verbal ones. Erickson developed an understanding of people through his research and observation. He believed that people must take part in their own therapy in order to achieve success

and accomplish their goals. Erickson believed that for the therapy to be successful the suggestions made by the therapist must be in line with client’s values and desires.

He believed that hypnosis was a natural process which evolves and went on to use more of a permissive style as opposed to an authoritarian style during therapy with client’s so as to increase the cooperation and responsiveness of the client. The permissive technique uses a much softer approach with the gentler tone of voice so as to help the client get into a relaxed state. This technique also gives more responsibility to the client and equalizes the power between hypnotist and client during therapy.

Clark Hull Hull had very different ideas to Erickson in the process of hypnosis and did not consider it important to involve the client in their therapy. Hull (cited in Hidden Depths: The Story of Hypnosis, 2004) did not believe the existence of a special state during hypnosis (hypnotic trance) In fact he went as far as denying it. He believed that it was more of a case of normal psychological mechanisms than phenomena.

Hypnosis was further developed in 1940 by Jung and Hull still believing that the authoritarian style was the best to use, forcing the clients to follow the desires of the therapist however Jung did not feel comfortable enforcing clients to follow his will so he broke away from Hull as he no longer wished to continue this method of therapy. The authoritarian style is very different to the permissive style and is more directing commanding and its main purpose is to take control over the

client and alter their behaviour through repetitious commands.

Sigmund Freud Freud is most famous for his work on psychoanalysis however he did develop a brief interest in hypnosis. Freud (cited in The History of Hypnosis 2002) believed that hypnosis could only be achieved when the client was in the deep trance. Freud just like Hull used a more authoritarian style but he found that the clients were resisting during therapy. They were ignoring certain memories and ideas which made therapy impossible to be a success.

Along with Freud, others such as Pierre Janet had also failed to hypnotise and it has been said that the reason why they failed to hypnotise was because they had failed to build a rapport during the initial interview. This only further strengthens Erickson’s view that involving the client in their therapy is crucial to its success. Modern Hypnosis It is now found that modern hypnosis is more permissive, using a more gentle approach rather than authoritarian.

During the induction phase it is important to get the client as relaxed as possible, explain what is involved in hypnosis, discussing the goals and expectations of the client and answer any questions that may arise so as to ease them and allay any suspicions they may have especially if they have had previous false notions about hypnosis through mediums such as T. V and fiction. Authoritative v Permissive Though traditional hypnotherapists like Hull and Freud had numerous failings with clients using the authoritative style it’s not to say that it does not altogether work. The one thing that Hull and Freud had in common in their methods was that they

used the same style on all their clients.

None of these hypnotherapists made any effort to personalise their induction to suit each client but the reason why Erickson appeared to have more success was because his permissive style was a much more gentle approach and took into consideration the clients wants and needs and Erickson was quite aware of the individual differences of his clients and showed importance to building a rapport with them so he received much more of a response and cooperation from the clients. The Authoritative style is much harsher and gives out direct commands without involving the clients.

Most people do not like being told what to do and are not used to responding to forceful commands such as these. However some people may have in fact been brought up in an environment where they are used to this method and perhaps are comfortable with it. If you assess an individual before therapy and it shows that this is the case you may find that this approach would work best and pave way for success. This is what you would refer to as personalising. Something modern therapists tend to do now is actually create a screed which uses a mixture of Authoritative and Permissive depending on what the goals of the therapy are.

Modality Another technique which can be used to personalise an induction are through their modalities. Everyone interprets the world, their experiences and memories in different ways using our five senses Ear (Sound, Auditory) Eyes (Sight, Visual) Nose (Smell, Olfactory) Hands (Touch, Kinaesthetic) and Tongue (Taste, Gustatory) These are what are known as our Representational Systems

(Modalities) If during assessment it is established what the clients Modalities are then this can also be incorporated into the clients screed, further personalising, increasing the clients experience and strengthening the outcome. Conclusion

Throughout this essay I have looked at the use of authoritative and permissive screeds through those like Erickson and Freud. Their successes and failures, individual differences and I have also looked at modality to establish the validity of the statement personalising an induction is always more effective. This essay concludes that though yes personalising inductions for individual clients are generally more effective, personalising inductions is not always more effective. This varies on the goal of the therapy. If the goal is to stop smoking in order to achieve success a more firm approach needs to be taken.

So if the assessment of the client shows that the permissive technique would generally be more effective for the client the permissive style alone for this goal may not prove successful. You may be required to adapt the permissive screed to perhaps include an authoritarian style as well so as to increase the chances of success in achieving the goal. You can further adapt the screed to include the client’s modalities. This will help relax a client, increase success and co-operation as well as increasing the pleasure of the experience for the client.

Get an explanation on any task
Get unstuck with the help of our AI assistant in seconds
New