Advertisement

Meditation and Hypnosis at the Intersection Between Phenomenology and Cognitive Science

  • Michael Lifshitz
  • Emma P. Cusumano
  • Amir RazEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Studies in Neuroscience, Consciousness and Spirituality book series (SNCS, volume 2)

Abstract

Cognitive scientists increasingly turn to contemplative practices such as hypnosis and meditation to shed light on consciousness and cognition. By their very nature, such practices call scientists to address the qualitative, lived experience of the subject. Yet, while the rise of contemplative techniques in neuroscience research has highlighted the importance of incorporating subjective experience within the empirical sciences of mind, the practical reality of marrying first- and third-person methods remains largely unactualised. Given that hypnosis and meditation exert powerful influence on subjective experience, we propose that they can serve as potent instruments for elucidating the structures and mechanisms of conscious experience in cognitive science settings. Here we discuss the motivation for a so-called ‘neurophenomonological’ approach and outline recent findings from the domains of hypnosis and meditation. Concrete examples illustrate how such contemplative practices can go beyond their place as objects of investigation to emerge as complementary experimental tools, thereby advancing the synthesis of scientific and phenomenological studies of mind (This article draws on ideas and expositions that ML and AR authored in the introduction of a 2012 special issue on hypnosis and meditation in The Journal of Mind-Body Regulation (see volume 2, issue 1)).

Keywords

Attentional Blink Mindfulness Meditation Button Press Meditative Practice Contemplative Practice 
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.

References

  1. Allen, M., M. Dietz, K.S. Blair, M. van Beek, G. Rees, P. Vestergaard-Poulsen, et al. 2012. Cognitive-affective neural plasticity following active-controlled mindfulness intervention. The Journal of Neuroscience 32(44): 15601–15610.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Augustinova, M., and L. Ferrand. 2012. Suggestion does not de-automatize word reading: Evidence from the semantically based Stroop task. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 19(3): 521–527. doi: 10.3758/s13423-012-0217-y.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bandettini, P.A. 2012. Twenty years of functional MRI: The science and the stories. NeuroImage 62(2): 575–588. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.04.026.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barnier, A.J., R.E. Cox, A. O’Connor, M. Coltheart, R. Langdon, N. Breen, et al. 2008. Developing hypnotic analogues of clinical delusions: mirrored-self misidentification. [Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t]. Cognitive Neuropsychiatry 13(5): 406–430. doi: 10.1080/13546800802355666.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blakemore, S.J., D.A. Oakley, and C.D. Frith. 2003. Delusions of alien control in the normal brain. Neuropsychologia 41(8): 1058–1067. doi: 10.1016/s0028-3932(02)00313-5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brefczynski-Lewis, J.A., A. Lutz, H.S. Schaefer, D.B. Levinson, and R.J. Davidson. 2007. Neural correlates of attentional expertise in long-term meditation practitioners. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 104(27): 11483–11488. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0606552104.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brewer, J.A., P.D. Worhunsky, J.R. Gray, Y.-Y. Tang, J. Weber, and H. Kober. 2011. Meditation experience is associated with differences in default mode network activity and connectivity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1112029108.Google Scholar
  8. Buckner, R.L., J.R. Andrews‐Hanna, and D.L. Schacter. 2008. The brain’s default network. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1124(1): 1–38.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Callard, F., J. Smallwood, and D.S. Margulies. 2012. Default positions: How neuroscience’s historical legacy has hampered investigation of the resting mind. Frontiers in Psychology 3: 321.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cardeña, E., P. Jönsson, D.B. Terhune, and D. Marcusson-Clavertz. 2012. The neurophenomenology of neutral hypnosis. Cortex 49(2): 375–385. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2012.04.001.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Casiglia, E., P.S. Schiff, E. Facco, A. Gabbana, V. Tikhonoff, L. Schiavon, et al. 2010. Neurophysiological correlates of post-hypnotic alexia: A controlled study with Stroop test. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis 52(3): 219–233.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Christoff, K., D. Cosmelli, D. Legrand, and E. Thompson. 2011. Specifying the self for cognitive neuroscience. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 15(3): 104–112. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2011.01.001.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cohen Kadosh, R., A. Henik, A. Catena, V. Walsh, and L.J. Fuentes. 2009. Induced cross-modal synaesthetic experience without abnormal neuronal connections. Psychological Science 20(2): 258–265. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02286.x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Deeley, Q., D.A. Oakley, B. Toone, V. Giampietro, M.J. Brammer, S.C.R. Williams, et al. 2012. Modulating the default mode network using hypnosis. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis 60(2): 206–228.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Depraz, N., F.J. Varela, and P. Vermersch. 2000. The gesture of awareness: An account of its structural dynamics. In Investigating phenomenal consciousness: New methodologies and maps, Advances in consciousness research, vol. 13, ed. M. Velmans, 121–136. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Depraz, N., F.J. Varela, and P. Vermersch. 2003. On becoming aware: A pragmatics of experiencing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Farb, N.A.S., Z.V. Segal, H. Mayberg, J. Bean, D. McKeon, Z. Fatima, et al. 2007. Attending to the present: Mindfulness meditation reveals distinct neural modes of self-reference. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience 2(4): 313–322. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsm030.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fox, K.C.R., P. Zakarauskas, M. Dixon, M. Ellamil, E. Thompson, and K. Christoff. 2012. Meditation experience predicts introspective accuracy. PLoS One 7(9): e45370. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0045370.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gallagher, S. 2000. Philosophical conceptions of the self: Implications for cognitive science. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4(1): 14–21. doi: 10.1016/s1364-6613(99)01417-5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gallagher, S., and J. Brøsted Sørensen. 2006. Experimenting with phenomenology. Consciousness and Cognition 15(1): 119–134. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2005.03.002.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gard, T., B.K. Hölzel, A.T. Sack, H. Hempel, S.W. Lazar, D. Vaitl, et al. 2012. Pain attenuation through mindfulness is associated with decreased cognitive control and increased sensory processing in the brain. Cerebral Cortex 22(11): 2692–2702. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhr352.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Grant, J.A., J. Courtemanche, and P. Rainville. 2011. A non-elaborative mental stance and decoupling of executive and pain-related cortices predicts low pain sensitivity in Zen meditators. Pain 152(1): 150–156. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2010.10.006.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hasenkamp, W., C.D. Wilson-Mendenhall, E. Duncan, and L.W. Barsalou. 2012. Mind wandering and attention during focused meditation: A fine-grained temporal analysis of fluctuating cognitive states. NeuroImage 59(1): 750–760.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Iani, C., F. Ricci, E. Gherri, and S. Rubichi. 2006. Hypnotic suggestion modulates cognitive conflict: The case of the flanker compatibility effect. Psychological Science 17(8): 721–727.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Iani, C., F. Ricci, G. Baroni, and S. Rubichi. 2009. Attention control and susceptibility to hypnosis. Consciousness and Cognition 18(4): 856–863.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Khalsa, S.S., D. Rudrauf, A.R. Damasio, R.J. Davidson, A. Lutz, and D. Tranel. 2008. Interoceptive awareness in experienced meditators. Psychophysiology 45(4): 671–677. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2008.00666.x.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kihlstrom, J.F. 2008. The domain of hypnosis, revisited. In Oxford handbook of hypnosis, ed. M. Nash and A. Barnier, 21–52. Oxford: Oxford University.Google Scholar
  28. Kirsch, I., and W. Braffman. 2001. Imaginative suggestibility and hypnotizability. Current Directions in Psychological Science 10(2): 57–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kosslyn, S.M., W.L. Thompson, M.F. Costantini-Ferrando, N.M. Alpert, and D. Spiegel. 2000. Hypnotic visual illusion alters color processing in the brain. The American Journal of Psychiatry 157(8): 1279–1284. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.157.8.1279.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lifshitz, M., and A. Raz. 2012. Hypnosis and meditation: Vehicles of attention and suggestion. The Journal of Mind–Body Regulation 2(1): 3–11.Google Scholar
  31. Lifshitz, M., N. Aubert-Bonn, A. Fischer, I.F. Kashem, and A. Raz. 2013. Using suggestion to modulate automatic processes: From Stroop to McGurk and beyond. Cortex 49(2): 463–473. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2012.08.007.Google Scholar
  32. Lutz, A. 2004. Introduction—the explanatory gap: To close or to bridge? Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 3(4): 325–330. doi: 10.1023/b:phen.0000048938.77185.44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lutz, A., and E. Thompson. 2003. Neurophenomenology – integrating subjective experience and brain dynamics in the neuroscience of consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies 10(9–10): 31–52.Google Scholar
  34. Lutz, A., J.D. Dunne, and R.J. Davidson. 2006. Meditation and the neuroscience of consciousness: An introduction. In Cambridge handbook of consciousness, ed. P.D. Zelazo, M. Moscovitch, and E. Thompson. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Lutz, A., H.A. Slagter, J.D. Dunne, and R.J. Davidson. 2008. Attention regulation and monitoring in meditation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 12(4): 163–169.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lynn, S.J., L.S. Das, N.H. Michael, and J.C. Williams. 2006. Mindfulness, acceptance, and hypnosis: Cognitive and clinical perspectives. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis 54(2): 143–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lynn, S.J., S. Barnes, A. Deming, and M. Accardi. 2010. Hypnosis, rumination, and depression: Catalyzing attention and mindfulness-based treatments. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis 58(2): 202–221.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lynn, S.J., A. Malaktaris, R. Maxwell, D.I. Mellinger, and D. van der Kloet. 2012. Do hypnosis and mindfulness practices inhabit a common domain? Implications for research, clinical practice, and forensic science. The Journal of Mind–Body Regulation 2(1): 12–26.Google Scholar
  39. MacLean, K.A., E. Ferrer, S.R. Aichele, D.A. Bridwell, A.P. Zanesco, T.L. Jacobs, et al. 2010. Intensive meditation training improves perceptual discrimination and sustained attention. Psychological Science 21(6): 829.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. MacLeod, C.M. 1991. Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin 109(2): 163.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. MacLeod, C.M., and K. Dunbar. 1988. Training and Stroop-like interference: Evidence for a continuum of automaticity. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition 14(1): 126.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mazzoni, G., E. Rotriquenz, C. Carvalho, M. Vannucci, K. Roberts, and I. Kirsch. 2009. Suggested visual hallucinations in and out of hypnosis. Consciousness and Cognition 18(2): 494–499.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. McGeown, W.J., G. Mazzoni, A. Venneri, and I. Kirsch. 2009. Hypnotic induction decreases anterior default mode activity. Consciousness and Cognition 18(4): 848–855.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McGeown, W.J., A. Venneri, I. Kirsch, L. Nocetti, K. Roberts, L. Foan, et al. 2012. Suggested visual hallucination without hypnosis enhances activity in visual areas of the brain. Consciousness and Cognition 21(1): 100–116. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2011.10.015.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Moore, A., T. Gruber, J. Derose, and P. Malinowski. 2012. Regular, brief mindfulness meditation practice improves electrophysiological markers of attentional control. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 6: 18.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mrazek, M.D., J. Smallwood, and J.W. Schooler. 2012. Mindfulness and mind-wandering: Finding convergence through opposing constructs. Emotion 12(3): 442.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Nisbett, R.E., and T.D. Wilson. 1977. Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review 84(3): 231–259. doi: 10.1037/0033-295x.84.3.231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Oakley, D.A., and P.W. Halligan. 2009. Hypnotic suggestion and cognitive neuroscience. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 13(6): 264–270.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Oakley, D.A., and P.W. Halligan. 2010. Psychophysiological foundations of hypnosis and suggestion. In Handbook of clinical hypnosis, 2nd ed, ed. Jay Lynn Steven, Judith W. Rhue, and I. Kirsch. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  50. Pagnoni, G. 2012. Dynamical properties of BOLD activity from the ventral posteromedial cortex associated with meditation and attentional skills. The Journal of Neuroscience 32(15): 5242–5249.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Pagnoni, G., M. Cekic, and Y. Guo. 2008. “Thinking about not-thinking”: Neural correlates of conceptual processing during Zen meditation. PLoS One 3(9): e3083.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Parris, B.A., Z. Dienes, and T.L. Hodgson. 2012. Temporal constraints of the word blindness posthypnotic suggestion on Stroop task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance 38(4): 833.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Priftis, K., S. Schiff, V. Tikhonoff, N. Giordano, P. Amodio, C. Umiltà, et al. 2011. Hypnosis meets neuropsychology: Simulating visuospatial neglect in healthy participants. Neuropsychologia 49(12): 3346–3350. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.08.008.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Pyka, M., M. Burgmer, T. Lenzen, R. Pioch, U. Dannlowski, B. Pfleiderer, et al. 2011. Brain correlates of hypnotic paralysis—a resting-state fMRI study. NeuroImage 56(4): 2173–2182.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Raichle, M.E. 2010. Two views of brain function. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 14(4): 180–190.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Rainville, P., and D.D. Price. 2003. Hypnosis phenomenology and the neurobiology of consciousness. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis 51(2): 105–129. doi: 10.1076/iceh.51.2.105.14613.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Raz, A., and J. Buhle. 2006. Typologies of attentional networks. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 7(5): 367–379.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Raz, A., and N.K.J. Campbell. 2011. Can suggestion obviate reading? Supplementing primary Stroop evidence with exploratory negative priming analyses. Consciousness and Cognition 20(2): 312–320. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2009.09.013.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Raz, A., T. Shapiro, J. Fan, and M.I. Posner. 2002. Hypnotic suggestion and the modulation of Stroop interference. Archives of General Psychiatry 59(12): 1155.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Raz, A., K.S. Landzberg, H.R. Schweizer, Z.R. Zephrani, T. Shapiro, J. Fan, et al. 2003. Posthypnotic suggestion and the modulation of Stroop interference under cycloplegia. Consciousness and Cognition 12(3): 332–346.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Raz, A., J. Fan, and M.I. Posner. 2005. Hypnotic suggestion reduces conflict in the human brain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 102(28): 9978–9983.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Raz, A., I. Kirsch, J. Pollard, and Y. Nitkin-Kaner. 2006. Suggestion reduces the stroop effect. Psychological Science 17(2): 91–95. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01669.x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Raz, A., M. Moreno-Íniguez, L. Martin, and H. Zhu. 2007. Suggestion overrides the Stroop effect in highly hypnotizable individuals. Consciousness and Cognition 16(2): 331–338.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Rochat, P., and D. Zahavi. 2011. The uncanny mirror: A re-framing of mirror self-experience. Consciousness and Cognition 20(2): 204–213. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2010.06.007.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Schmicking, D. 2010. A toolbox of phenomenological methods. In Handbook of phenomenology and cognitive science, ed. S. Gallagher and D. Schmicking, 35–56. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Schneider, W., and R.M. Shiffrin. 1977. Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search, and attention. Psychological Review 84(1): 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Siderits, M., E. Thompson, and D. Zahavi (eds.). 2011. Self, no-self? Perspectives from analytical, phenomenological, and Indian traditions. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Slagter, H.A., A. Lutz, L.L. Greischar, A.D. Francis, S. Nieuwenhuis, J.M. Davis, et al. 2007. Mental training affects distribution of limited brain resources. PLoS Biology 5(6): e138.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Slagter, H.A., R.J. Davidson, and A. Lutz. 2011. Mental training as a tool in the neuroscientific study of brain and cognitive plasticity. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 5: 17. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2011.00017.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Steinbock, A.J. 2004. Affection and attention: On the phenomenology of becoming aware. Continental Philosophy Review 37(1): 21–43. doi: 10.1023/B:MAWO.0000049298.44397.be.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Stroop, J.R. 1935. Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology 18(6): 643–662. doi: 10.1037/h0054651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Tang, Y.Y., Y.H. Ma, J. Wang, Y.X. Fan, S.G. Feng, Q.L. Lu, et al. 2007. Short-term meditation training improves attention and self-regulation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 104: 17152–17156.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Taylor, V.A., J. Grant, V. Daneault, G. Scavone, E. Breton, S. Roffe-Vidal, et al. 2011. Impact of mindfulness on the neural responses to emotional pictures in experienced and beginner meditators. NeuroImage 57(4): 1524–1533.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Taylor, V.A., V. Daneault, J. Grant, G. Scavone, E. Breton, S. Roffe-Vidal, et al. 2012. Impact of meditation training on the default mode network during a restful state. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience 8(1): 4–14. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsr087.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Terhune, D.B., E. Cardeña, and M. Lindgren. 2010. Disruption of synaesthesia by posthypnotic suggestion: An ERP study. Neuropsychologia 48(11): 3360–3364.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. van Leeuwen, S., W. Singer, and L. Melloni. 2012. Meditation increases the depth of information processing and improves the allocation of attention in space. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 6: 133. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00133.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. Varela, F.J. 1996. Neurophenomenology: A methodological remedy for the hard problem. Journal of Consciousness Studies 3: 330–349.Google Scholar
  78. Varela, F.J. 1998. A science of consciousness as if experience mattered. In Toward a science of consciousness II: The second Tucson discussions and debates, vol. 2, ed. S.R. Hameroff, A.W. Kaszniak, and A.C. Scott, 31–44. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  79. Varela, F.J., E.T. Thompson, and E. Rosch. 1992. The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  80. Woody, E., and H. Szechtman. 2011. Using hypnosis to develop and test models of psychopathology. Mind-Body Regulation 1(1): 4–16.Google Scholar
  81. Zeidan, F., K.T. Martucci, R.A. Kraft, N.S. Gordon, J.G. McHaffie, and R.C. Coghill. 2011. Brain mechanisms supporting the modulation of pain by mindfulness meditation. The Journal of Neuroscience 31(14): 5540–5548. doi: 10.1523/jneurosci.5791-10.2011.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Institute of Community and Family PsychiatryMcGill University and the Jewish General HospitalMontréalCanada

Personalised recommendations