Talk:Hypnosis

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hypnosis article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5: 90 days

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

Psychology High‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Timeline Tracer (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Timeline Tracer, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Timeline TracerWikipedia:WikiProject Timeline TracerTemplate:WikiProject Timeline TracerTimeline Tracer articles

Alternative medicine

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Alternative medicine related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Alternative medicineWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative medicineTemplate:WikiProject Alternative medicineAlternative medicine articles

Skepticism Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Altered States of Consciousness High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Altered States of Consciousness, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of altered states of consciousness on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Altered States of ConsciousnessWikipedia:WikiProject Altered States of ConsciousnessTemplate:WikiProject Altered States of ConsciousnessAltered States of Consciousness articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education assignment: Research Methods in Clinical Psychology

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 6 March 2024 and 9 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Bridgethorst (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Bridgethorst (talk) 14:47, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Added Clinical observations of hypnosis section on page

Hello Wikipedia, for my Wikipedia Project I added a section into the hypnosis page that had a long list of sections to be included on the page. These involve a multitude of topics like Therapeutic Applications, "hypnosis" versus "hypnotism", and most importantly Clinical observations of hypnosis. Clinical observations of hypnosis is an important topic for users of Wikipedia to learn more about the process of hypnosis in the health field and the outcomes for chronically ill patients. The section added to the wikipedia page is about a meta-analysis study that included 85 controlled experiments with hypnotic induction. The results of the meta-analysis concluded that using hypnosis or hypnotic intervention is an effective tool in the pain relief of chronic illnesses. This is an important topic I believe should be on the wikipedia page as it is a beneficial tool for understanding the long lasting positive impacts hypnosis can hold. Bridgethorst (talk) 03:16, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, the section was removed as it was not written in an encyclopedic manner. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 16:44, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article not written from a neutral point of view

The majority of this article assumes that hypnosis is effective and it references cherry-picked "data" so as to make hypnosis seem as if it is proven to to work. The claims in the article are heavily disputed in the scientific and medical communities, yet only tiny mentions of that exist here. The article appears to be compiled almost completely by its supporters, and history of the Talk page containing contrary explanations and evidence have been excised. This is a very informative article, but it's also extremely one-sided. Cernansky (talk) 18:42, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SOFIXIT. Please explain the specific changes you want to make, with sources. I don't see this article as violating NPOV, but it does lean a touch credulous. So I'm open to seeing new sourcing. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 19:38, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

neologism

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Somebody has coded the foot of this article such that it has added this article to: Category:1820s_neologisms

In doing so, that somebody have made a very serious error in fact. The term that was a "neologism" in the 1820s was hypnotism. The entity was only (sloppily) referred to as "hypnosis" in the 1890s, due to the influence of various French authors.

I have done everything that I can to change the coding at the foot of this article that generates the appearance of "hypnosis" in the category to no avail. I know that it can be done, as I have seen similar differences-from-actual-article-title displayed in category listings before, but have no idea about how to go about reversing this serious historical error. Help please. Lindsay658 (talk) 00:49, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That change was made just a day or so ago by user:Doomhope without any supporting evidence, so undoing the change when challenged as you have done here is easy. I don't even have to have an opinion as to whether you are correct in your assertion. Providing a source would, of course, reinforce your assertion.

Don't put {{help}} templates in section headers, please. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:34, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Medical hypnosis is often considered pseudoscience or quackery"

This sentence is not backed up by evidence. The reference article is not even about hypnosis, it just mentions in the introduction "Treatments such as relaxation techniques, chiropractic, therapeutic massage, special diets, megavitamins, acupuncture, naturopathy, homeopathy, hypnosis and psychoanalysis are often considered as “pseudoscience” or “quackery” with no credible or respectable place in medicine, because in evaluation they have not been shown to “work”". And the article doesn't provide any references to actual surveys that would support that claim. @Bon courage, why did you choose to include that information? We don't even know in what field hypnosis is "often considered a quackery", who thinks it's a quackery? Most people, scientists?

The edit I made, which was canceled by @Bon courage, offered another comparison to placebo, which is supported by evidence that shows similarities in their mechanism. Can you tell me why you think that information is not valid and why you canceled it? Skalidrisalba (talk) 15:53, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cite 23 is also used to support the "pseudoscience" terminology in the field of clinical psychology.

That said, we really should move the references out of the lede and rely on citations in the body, per WP:LEDE. Regardless, the label of pseudoscience seems legitimate. I think the addition of your cite comparing it to placebo would be legitimate somewhere in the body of the article, but there's no reason to remove the pseudoscience label. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 16:06, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cite 23 explains that hypnosis can induce false memories, it does not claim hypnosis is a pseudoscience, but merely that some claims about it are not validated…

Besides, it is extremely odd that in the same paragraph where that quackery claim is on the wiki hypnosis page, the first sentence is “Hypnosis-based therapies for the management of irritable bowel syndrome and menopause are supported by evidence.”. Why would it be regarded as pseudoscience if we’ve proved some of it works?

That sentence, not only is extremely biased, but does not have any valid reference to it, so why should we keep it? Skalidrisalba (talk) 16:39, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]