Neurophysiological Studies in Hypnosis (Contingent Negative Variations)

  • G. Peterfy
  • B. Dubrovsky
  • M. Dongier


Cerebral psychosomatics (study of the brain as the target organ following psychological events) is a most important area. Its progress can lead, in particular, to the disappearance of the psychogenesis versus organogenesis controversies (or environment versus heredity) which have been going on interminably in psychiatry. So far it had been difficult to show any neurophysiological changes under hypnosis (e.g., in EEG or evoked potentials). The technique of event related slow potentials (ERSP), developed in the past eighteen years, seems much more promising, in particular the contingent negative variation (CNV) and the post-imperative negative variation (PINV).


Specific Phobia Contingent Negative Variation Neurophysiological Change Contingent Negative Variation Amplitude Hypnotic State 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Dongier, M., Event related slow potential changes in psychiatry, in Biological Diagnosis of Brain Disorders Bogoch, S. (ed.), Spectrum, Flushing, New York, pp. 47–49, 1974.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dubrovsky, B., Garcia-Rill, E., Tepper, J., and Vanagas, J. Some Aspects of the Methodology of Recording Slow Potential Changes. In Biological Diagnosis of Brain Disorders Bogoch, S. (Ed.), pp. 300–309, Spectrum Publications, New York, 1974.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dubrovsky, B.O., Simkus, R., Garcia-Rill, E., and Dongier, M. Effects of Changes in Carbon Dioxide Tension in Abnormally Prolonged Contingent Negative Variation. Biological Psychiatry. 11: 535–541, 1976.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dubrovsky, B., Barbas, H., and Solyom, L., Characteristics of CNV in patients suffering from specific phobias. Biological Psychiatry. 13, 531–540, 1978.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Peterfy, G., Present status of hypnosis. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 109 397–403, 1973.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rizzo, P.A., Amabile, G., Furma, R., Capotali, M., Pierelli, F., Spadaro, M., Zauasi, M., and Morocutti, C. Brain Slow Potentials and Hypnosis, Biol. Psychiatry, 15, 499–506, 1980.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Timsit-Berthier, M., Rousseay, J.C. and Delaunoy, J., Rgactivité de l’onde d’attente et des ondes négatives postimpêratives, Rev. EEG Neurophysiol. 1: 245–248, 1971.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Walter, W.G., Cooper, R., Aldridge, V.J., McCallum, W.C., and Winter, A.L. Contingent negative variation: an electric sign of sensorimotor association and expectancy in the human brain. Nature (London), 203: 380–384, 1964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Weinberg, H. The contingent negative variation: its relation to feedback and expectant attention. Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 33: 219–228, 1973.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Peterfy
    • 1
  • B. Dubrovsky
    • 1
  • M. Dongier
    • 1
  1. 1.McGill UniversityCanada

Personalised recommendations