Skip to content

The Association Between Mindfulness and Hypnotizability: Clinical and Theoretical Implications.

Michelle P Grover, Mark P Jensen, David R Patterson, Kevin J Gertz, Melissa A Day

American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis July 2018 DOI: 10.1080/00029157.2017.1419458 (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Cross-sectional survey Peer reviewed
Sample size 154
Population Veterans with heterogeneous chronic pain conditions
Measures Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire, Stanford Hypnotic Clinical Scale
Topics Meditation
Keywords Hypnotizability
Key findings Correlations between the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire scales and the Stanford Hypnotic Clinical Scale total score were uniformly weak, with significant negative correlations only for the observe and nonreact mindfulness facets (ps < 0.05). The authors argue that mindfulness and hypnotizability are largely unique constructs, and that when associated, hypnotic suggestibility corresponds with lower mindfulness.

Abstract

Mindfulness-based interventions and hypnosis are efficacious treatments for addressing a large number of psychological and physical conditions, including chronic pain. However, there continues to be debate surrounding the relative uniqueness of the theorized mechanisms of these treatments-reflected by measures of mindfulness facets and hypnotizability-with some concern that there may be so much overlap as to make the mechanism constructs (and, therefore, the respective interventions) redundant. Given these considerations, the primary aim of the current study was to examine the degree of unique versus shared variance between two common measures of mindfulness facets and hypnotizability: the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire and the Stanford Hypnotic Clinical Scale. A cross-sectional survey was conducted with a sample of (N = 154) veterans with heterogeneous chronic pain conditions. Bivariate Pearson correlations were used to examine the associations between the target scales. Results showed that the correlations between the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire scales and Stanford Hypnotic Clinical Scale total score were uniformly weak, although significant negative correlations were found between mindfulness facets of observe and nonreact with hypnotizability (ps < 0.05). Thus, not only are the mindfulness and hypnotizability constructs unique, but when significantly associated, hypnotic suggestibility corresponds with a tendency to be less mindful. These findings have important implications for future research aimed toward matching patients to the treatment most likely to be of benefit, and suggest that matching patients on the basis of these theoretically derived "unique" moderators may hold potential.

Comparable studies

Other cross-sectional and survey studies on meditation, most cited first.

Study Year Design Participants
Construct Validity of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire in Meditating and Nonmeditating Samples Experienced meditators and nonmeditating comparison groups 2008 Cross-sectional study
Neural Correlates of Dispositional Mindfulness During Affect Labeling Adult participants 2007 Observational cross-sectional n = 27
Assessing mindfulness in children and adolescents: Development and validation of the Child and Adolescent Mindfulness Measure (CAMM). School-aged children and adolescents 2011 Cross-sectional validation study n = 1,413
Mindfulness and self-compassion as predictors of psychological wellbeing in long-term meditators and matched nonmeditators Experienced meditators and demographically matched nonmeditators 2012 Cross-sectional study n = 152
Mechanisms of Action in the Inverse Relationship Between Mindfulness and Psychological Distress Undergraduates 2008 Cross-sectional, correlational

Citations in the library

Explore topics