Spinal and supraspinal modulation of pain responses by hypnosis, suggestions, and distraction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mechanisms underlying pain modulation by hypnosis and the contribution of hypnotic induction to the efficacy of suggestions being still under debate, our study aimed, (1) to assess the effects of identical hypoalgesia suggestions given with and without hypnotic induction, (2) to compare hypnotic hypoalgesia to distraction hypoalgesia and (3) to evaluate whether hypnotic suggestions of increased and decreased pain share common psychophysiological mechanisms. To this end, pain ratings, nociceptive flexion reflex amplitude, autonomic responses and electroencephalographic activity were measured in response to noxious electrical stimulation of the sural nerve in 20 healthy participants, who were subjected to four conditions: suggestions of hypoalgesia delivered with and without hypnosis induction (i.e. hypnotic-hypoalgesia and suggested-hypoalgesia), distraction by a mental calculation task and hypnotic suggestions of hyperalgesia. As a result, pain ratings decreased in distraction, suggested-hypoalgesia and hypnotic-hypoalgesia, while it increased in hypnotic-hyperalgesia. Nociceptive flexion reflex amplitude and autonomic activity decreased during suggested-hypoalgesia and hypnotic-hypoalgesia but increased during distraction and hypnotic-hyperalgesia. Hypnosis did not enhance the effects of suggestions significantly in any measurement. No somatosensory-evoked potential was modulated by the four conditions according to strict statistical criteria. The absence of a significant difference between the hypnotic hypoalgesia and hyperalgesia conditions suggests that brain processes as evidenced by evoked potentials are not invariably related to pain modulation. Time-frequency analysis of electroencephalographic activity showed a significant differentiation between distraction and hypnotic hypoalgesia in the theta domain. These results highlight the diversity of neurophysiological processes underlying pain modulation through different psychological interventions.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".