ABSTRACT
This chapter shows that the role of imagination in hypnotic responding has been hampered by a tendency for theorists of both persuasions to underestimate and misunderstand the possible role of compliance in all areas of hypnotic responding. In the mid 1970s, there seemed to be some hope that the protagonists in this debate might be reaching some important points of agreement; the most important of which was an emphasis on the role of imagination. Given the potential for the operation of compliance in experimental situations it would not be surprising if it were to operate in hypnotic contexts. Compliance would include the reluctant performance of antisocial acts because of social pressures to do so; as when Sheridan and King induced subjects to give harmful doses of electric shock to a live puppy. Although compliance may be influenced by the pressures of the situation, there is no reason why compliant responding should necessarily be unstable within the hypnotic context.
