ABSTRACT
The fundamental problem in hypnosis research is that it is faced with two dangers, which, like the rock and whirlpool of Scylla and Charybdis, are so situated that they must be encountered together, as if they were one. The more an investigator tries to avoid one of these two separate and distinct dangers, the more likely it becomes that he will succumb to the other. Investigators in the academic experimentalist's tradition have generally been most vulnerable to the danger of insufficient catalyst; investigators in the clinical practitioner's tradition have generally been most vulnerable to the danger of insufficient skepticism. Likewise, hypnotic processes are set into motion within the subject, strengthened, and brought to their fruition only when the positive psycho-logical catalysts of assured confidence, expectant enthusiasm, and persuasive authority are present in notable concentrations. Whereas contemporary experimentalists often tend to provide insufficient positive catalyst, in earlier periods the problem was typically apparent as a contest between positive and negative factors.
