ArticleNeuroscience of consciousness2018
Can hypnosis displace the threshold for visual consciousness?
Article in Neuroscience of consciousness, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hypnotic suggestions cognitively penetrate tactile perception through top-down modulation of semantic contents.Scientific reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To test the specific effects of hypnosis on the attentional components of visual awareness, we developed a posthypnotic suggestion for peripheral visual inattention inspired on the "tunnel vision" symptom of the Balint Syndrome. We constructed a dual-target visibility and discrimination paradigm, in which single-digit numerical targets were placed both on the hypnotically affected peripheral space and on the remaining undisturbed central area. Results were 3-fold: (i) when compared to participants of Low hypnotic susceptibility (Lows), highly susceptible participants (Highs) presented decreased subjective visibility; (ii) Highs did not show dual-task interference from peripheral targets (an effect of unconscious processing) during hypnotic suggestion to not attend them, but Lows did; (iii) nevertheless, when asked to execute a discrimination task over these same targets, Highs performed with the same accuracy as Lows. These results suggest that the hypnotic manipulation of visuospatial attention did produce an experiential change in Highs, but not one that could be mapped onto interference at a single (conscious or unconscious) level of processing. Rather, we posit that Highs simultaneously displayed (i) a fluctuation in awareness of peripheral targets coherent with the suggestion and (ii) a control strategy that involved removing hypnotically unattended targets from the task set whenever task instructions would allow for it. In light of these findings, we argue that hypnosis cannot be used as a tool to restrict the processing of otherwise supraliminal stimulation to subliminal levels.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.