Hypnotizability and sensorimotor gating: a dopaminergic mechanism of hypnosis

The neurochemistry of hypnotic suggestion

A diverse array of studies has been devoted to understanding the neurochemical systems supporting responsiveness to hypnotic suggestions, with implications for experimental and clinical applications of hypnosis. However, this body of research has only rarely been integrated and critically evaluated and the prospects for the reliable pharmacological manipulation of hypnotic suggestibility remain poorly understood. Here we draw on pharmacological, genotyping, neuroimaging, and electrophysiological research to synthesize current knowledge regarding the potential role of multiple widely-studied neurochemicals in response to suggestion. Although we reveal multiple limitations with this body of evidence, we identify converging results implicating different neurochemical systems in response to hypnotic suggestion. We conclude by assessing the extent to which different results align or diverge and outline multiple avenues for future research. Elucidating the neurochemical systems underlying response to suggestion has the potential to significantly advance our understanding of suggestion.

Psychedelics and hypnosis: Commonalities and therapeutic implications

BACKGROUND

Recent research on psychedelics and hypnosis demonstrates the value of both methods in the treatment of a range of psychopathologies with overlapping applications and neurophenomenological features. The potential of harnessing the power of suggestion to influence the phenomenological response to psychedelics toward more therapeutic action has remained unexplored in recent research and thereby warrants empirical attention.

AIMS

Here we aim to elucidate the phenomenological and neurophysiological similarities and dissimilarities between psychedelic states and hypnosis in order to revisit how contemporary knowledge may inform their conjunct usage in psychotherapy.

METHODS

We review recent advances in phenomenological and neurophysiological research on psychedelics and hypnosis, and we summarize early investigations on the coupling of psychedelics and hypnosis in scientific and therapeutic contexts. Results/outcomes: We highlight commonalities and differences between psychedelics and hypnosis that point to the potential efficacy of combining the two in psychotherapy. We propose multiple research paths for coupling these two phenomena at different stages in the preparation, acute phase and follow-up of psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy in order to prepare, guide and integrate the psychedelic experience with the aim of enhancing therapeutic outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

Harnessing the power of suggestion to modulate response to psychedelics could enhance their therapeutic efficacy by helping to increase the likelihood of positive responses, including mystical-type experiences.

COMT Genotype and Sensory and Sensorimotor Gating in High and Low Hypnotizable Subjects

We investigated the association between hypnotizability, COMT polymorphism, P50 suppression ratio, and prepulse inhibition of acoustic startle response (ASR) in 21 high (HH) and 19 low (LH) hypnotizable subjects. The frequency of Met/Met carriers of COMT polymorphysm was higher in HH than in LH group (33.3% versus 10.6%, p = .049). Increased ASR amplitude and latency and decreased prepulse inhibition at 120 ms lead interval were found in the HH compared to the LH group. The effect of COMT genotype on prepulse inhibition was observed in LH group only. No between-group differences in P50 measures were found. The obtained results suppose the participation of dopamine system in mechanisms of hypnotizability and different allocation of attentional resources in HH and LH subjects.

Hypnotizability, hypnosis and prepulse inhibition of the startle reflex in healthy women: an ERP analysis

A working model of the neurophysiology of hypnosis suggests that highly hypnotizable individuals (HHs) have more effective frontal attentional systems implementing control, monitoring performance, and inhibiting unwanted stimuli from conscious awareness, than low hypnotizable individuals (LHs). Recent studies, using prepulse inhibition (PPI) of the auditory startle reflex (ASR), suggest that HHs, in the waking condition, may show reduced sensory gating although they may selectively attend and disattend different stimuli. Using a within subject design and a strict subject selection procedure, in waking and hypnosis conditions we tested whether HHs compared to LHs showed a significantly lower inhibition of the ASR and startle-related brain activity in both time and intracerebral source localization domains. HHs, as compared to LH participants, exhibited (a) longer latency of the eyeblink startle reflex, (b) reduced N100 responses to startle stimuli, and (c) higher PPI of eyeblink startle and of the P200 and P300 waves. Hypnosis yielded smaller N100 waves to startle stimuli and greater PPI of this component than in the waking condition. sLORETA analysis revealed that, for the N100 (107 msec) elicited during startle trials, HHs had a smaller activation in the left parietal lobe (BA2/40) than LHs. Auditory pulses of pulse-with prepulse trials in HHs yielded less activity of the P300 (280 msec) wave than LHs, in the cingulate and posterior cingulate gyrus (BA23/31). The present results, on the whole, are in the opposite direction to PPI findings on hypnotizability previously reported in the literature. These results provide support to the neuropsychophysiological model that HHs have more effective sensory integration and gating (or filtering) of irrelevant stimuli than LHs.