MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970620456 · doi:10.2190/l111-3x0r-w5pw-738m

Brief Hypnotic Suggestibility Training: A Confirmation of its Effectiveness and a Test of Self-Report Validity

2003· article· en· W1970620456 on OpenAlex
Donald R. Gorassini

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueImagination Cognition and Personality · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPain Management and Placebo Effect
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuggestibilityPsychologyHypnosisTest (biology)Clinical psychologyApplied psychologyDevelopmental psychologyMedicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Participants who pretested low in hypnotic suggestibility were, prior to a retest, either given a four-minute version of the Carleton Skill Training Package or encouraged to try hard. Large pre- to posttest gains in behavioral and nonvolitional suggestibility scores occurred in the training condition only. In order to evaluate the possibility that nonvolition self-reports of trained participants were faked, self-ratings of nonvolition were elicited under anonymous as well as public conditions. Training-induced gains in nonvolition were as great when the ratings were made anonymously as when they were made in public. The implications of these findings are discussed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.306
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it