Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Can unconscious intentions be more effective th...

Electronic data

  • 2018.11.01 Test of Cold Control_Manuscript

    Rights statement: This is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Cortex. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Cortex, 135, 2021 DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2020.11.006

    Accepted author manuscript, 460 KB, PDF document

    Available under license: CC BY-NC-ND: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Can unconscious intentions be more effective than conscious intentions?: Test of the role of metacognition in hypnotic response

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Can unconscious intentions be more effective than conscious intentions? Test of the role of metacognition in hypnotic response. / Palfi, Bence; Parris, Ben; McLatchie, Neil Marvin et al.
In: Cortex, Vol. 135, 28.02.2021, p. 219-239.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Palfi B, Parris B, McLatchie NM, Kekecs Z, Dienes Z. Can unconscious intentions be more effective than conscious intentions? Test of the role of metacognition in hypnotic response. Cortex. 2021 Feb 28;135:219-239. Epub 2020 Dec 3. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2020.11.006

Author

Bibtex

@article{02cb2e2bff3d4d7689eecd5dd40b1b6f,
title = "Can unconscious intentions be more effective than conscious intentions?: Test of the role of metacognition in hypnotic response",
abstract = "Theories of hypnotic responding can be assigned to two classes based on their reliance on metacognition. While several theories assume that responses to hypnotic suggestions can be implemented without executive intentions , the metacognitive class of theories postulate that the behaviors produced by hypnotic suggestions are intended and the accompanying feeling of involuntariness is only a consequence of strategically not being aware of the intention, proposing that hypnotic responding is the product of a purely metacognitive process. In this project, we seek to disentangle these two classes of theories in a behavioural experiment by testing a central prediction of the simplest metacognitive theory, namely the cold control theory. To this aim, we compared the performance of highly suggestible participants in reducing the Stroop interference effect in a post-hypnotic suggestion condition (word blindness: that words will appear as a meaningless foreign script) and in a volitional condition (asking the participants to imagine the words as a meaningless foreign script) to explore whether the simplest version of the cold control theory, could account for hypnotic phenomena. The results of the pilot experiment revealed that the Stroop interference effect was smaller in the post-hypnotic suggestion condition than in the volition condition calling into question the core idea of the cold control theory as these data suggest that there is more to hypnotic response than a simple change in monitoring of higher order thoughts of intentions. Consequently, the cold control theory may need to be revised to fit the idea that an unconscious intention can be more effective than a conscious one, which indicates that possessing a higher order thought of a mental state can have a causal role on one's first order abilities. Given the importance of the issue, we believe a pre-registered experiment is imperative to draw strong conclusions as it would provide us with more credible evidence.",
keywords = "Hypnosis, Post-hypnotic suggestion, Higher order thoughts, Metacognition, Stroop effect",
author = "Bence Palfi and Ben Parris and McLatchie, {Neil Marvin} and Zoltan Kekecs and Zoltan Dienes",
note = "This is the author{\textquoteright}s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Cortex. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Cortex, 135, 2021 DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2020.11.006",
year = "2021",
month = feb,
day = "28",
doi = "10.1016/j.cortex.2020.11.006",
language = "English",
volume = "135",
pages = "219--239",
journal = "Cortex",
issn = "0010-9452",
publisher = "Masson SpA",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Can unconscious intentions be more effective than conscious intentions?

T2 - Test of the role of metacognition in hypnotic response

AU - Palfi, Bence

AU - Parris, Ben

AU - McLatchie, Neil Marvin

AU - Kekecs, Zoltan

AU - Dienes, Zoltan

N1 - This is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Cortex. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Cortex, 135, 2021 DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2020.11.006

PY - 2021/2/28

Y1 - 2021/2/28

N2 - Theories of hypnotic responding can be assigned to two classes based on their reliance on metacognition. While several theories assume that responses to hypnotic suggestions can be implemented without executive intentions , the metacognitive class of theories postulate that the behaviors produced by hypnotic suggestions are intended and the accompanying feeling of involuntariness is only a consequence of strategically not being aware of the intention, proposing that hypnotic responding is the product of a purely metacognitive process. In this project, we seek to disentangle these two classes of theories in a behavioural experiment by testing a central prediction of the simplest metacognitive theory, namely the cold control theory. To this aim, we compared the performance of highly suggestible participants in reducing the Stroop interference effect in a post-hypnotic suggestion condition (word blindness: that words will appear as a meaningless foreign script) and in a volitional condition (asking the participants to imagine the words as a meaningless foreign script) to explore whether the simplest version of the cold control theory, could account for hypnotic phenomena. The results of the pilot experiment revealed that the Stroop interference effect was smaller in the post-hypnotic suggestion condition than in the volition condition calling into question the core idea of the cold control theory as these data suggest that there is more to hypnotic response than a simple change in monitoring of higher order thoughts of intentions. Consequently, the cold control theory may need to be revised to fit the idea that an unconscious intention can be more effective than a conscious one, which indicates that possessing a higher order thought of a mental state can have a causal role on one's first order abilities. Given the importance of the issue, we believe a pre-registered experiment is imperative to draw strong conclusions as it would provide us with more credible evidence.

AB - Theories of hypnotic responding can be assigned to two classes based on their reliance on metacognition. While several theories assume that responses to hypnotic suggestions can be implemented without executive intentions , the metacognitive class of theories postulate that the behaviors produced by hypnotic suggestions are intended and the accompanying feeling of involuntariness is only a consequence of strategically not being aware of the intention, proposing that hypnotic responding is the product of a purely metacognitive process. In this project, we seek to disentangle these two classes of theories in a behavioural experiment by testing a central prediction of the simplest metacognitive theory, namely the cold control theory. To this aim, we compared the performance of highly suggestible participants in reducing the Stroop interference effect in a post-hypnotic suggestion condition (word blindness: that words will appear as a meaningless foreign script) and in a volitional condition (asking the participants to imagine the words as a meaningless foreign script) to explore whether the simplest version of the cold control theory, could account for hypnotic phenomena. The results of the pilot experiment revealed that the Stroop interference effect was smaller in the post-hypnotic suggestion condition than in the volition condition calling into question the core idea of the cold control theory as these data suggest that there is more to hypnotic response than a simple change in monitoring of higher order thoughts of intentions. Consequently, the cold control theory may need to be revised to fit the idea that an unconscious intention can be more effective than a conscious one, which indicates that possessing a higher order thought of a mental state can have a causal role on one's first order abilities. Given the importance of the issue, we believe a pre-registered experiment is imperative to draw strong conclusions as it would provide us with more credible evidence.

KW - Hypnosis

KW - Post-hypnotic suggestion

KW - Higher order thoughts

KW - Metacognition

KW - Stroop effect

U2 - 10.1016/j.cortex.2020.11.006

DO - 10.1016/j.cortex.2020.11.006

M3 - Journal article

VL - 135

SP - 219

EP - 239

JO - Cortex

JF - Cortex

SN - 0010-9452

ER -