Approaches To The Study of Hypnotic Dreams: Charles T. Tart
Approaches To The Study of Hypnotic Dreams: Charles T. Tart
Approaches To The Study of Hypnotic Dreams: Charles T. Tart
Charles T. Tart
University of California, Davis
Originally published in 1969 in Perceptual and Motor Skills, 28, 864. Copyright 1969 Charles T. Tart (see detail)
Article
Schneck (1969) rightly points out that there are important differences in the use of the term "hypnotic dream" in clinical and experimental
settings, and the fallacy of defining this phenomenon exclusively in terms of the hypnotist's operations, viz., the verbalization of a "hypnotic
induction" and the specific suggestion to "experience a dream" while hypnotized. Schneck's quote from my general review article (Tart, 1965)
should not be taken to mean that I favor this operational definition but only as indicating usage in the literature.
On the other hand, I can not agree with an equation of "the hypnotic dream" and "the nocturnal dream" for a variety of reasons. There is no doubt
that some hypnotic dreams read like some nocturnal dreams, and that similar psychodynamics may be inferred by the practicing clinician in such
cases. Inspection of reported nocturnal dreams, however, will reveal tremendous intra-and inter-subject variability on many important
dimensions. Understanding of both hypnotic and night dreams has been hampered by lack of recognition of this variability: indeed, there may be
many qualitatively distinct types of nocturnal dreams (see, e.g., "high" dreams and "lucid" dreams in Tart, 1969, pp. 169-174, 145-158) and I
have reported elsewhere on what seem to be qualitatively distinct types of experiences which have usually been lumped together as "hypnotic
dreams" in the experimental literature (Tart, 1966).
A comprehensive approach to the study of hypnotic dreams (and nocturnal dreams) must focus on all responses Ss make to suggestions to
dream not just those that resemble nocturnal dreams. What is a "failure to respond adequately" to such a suggestion? Given a response, what is
the range of responses observed? What dimensions adequately describe these for nomothetic research without destroying the idiographic
meaning? Are variations along these dimensions lawfully related to other factors, such as my finding that the "profundity" of a hypnotic dream
was related to overall hypnotic responsiveness (Tart, 1966)? Are their clusterings of attributes that identify one or several entities that we may
call hypnotic dream types? If so, how much do these clusters share with (types of) nocturnal dreams?
Schneck's observations, and those of other clinicians, are of great value in indicating parallelism between some hypnotic dreams and some
nocturnal dreams, but this parallelism should not obscure the need for study on a broader scale.
References
SCHNECK, J. Observations on hypnotic dreams. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1969, 28, 458.
TART, C. The hypnotic dream: methodological problems and a review of the literature. Psychological Bulletin, 1965, 63, 87.99.
TART C. Types of hypnotic dreams and their relation to hypnotic depth. Journal of Abnormal and social Psychology, 1966, 71, 377-382.
TART C. Altered states of consciousness: a book of readings. New York: Wiley, 1969