This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on Web of Science (7)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

PETER H. van der WALDE, MD

Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1965;12(5):438-447.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

A Statement of Purpose

MANY THEORIES have been advanced since the time of Mesmer to explain the phenomenon called hypnosis. These theories have ranged from purely physiological considerations to highly abstract psychological statements. Differences of opinion have been as striking within schools of thought as they have been between disciplines. Despite this, almost all theories of hypnosis have in common their view of hypnosis as a unique, tangible, and welldefined entity. It is noteworthy that even this basic orientation has in recent years been challenged from two directions. The first, questioning hypnosis as a well-defined tangible entity, and the second, questioning the alleged unique aspects of hypnotic behavior. In both instances, the emphasis is clearly on the need for redefinition of, and reorientation toward, the phenomenon called hypnosis.

It is the purpose of this paper to attempt this redefinition by outlining an ego . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
HARDING, MASS

Medfield State Hospital, Director of Admissions; Clinical Instructor in Psychiatry, Tufts University and Boston University Schools of Medicine.

Footnotes
Submitted for publication Sept 17, 1964.

Reprint requests to Medfield State Hospital, Harding, Mass 02042.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?