A discussion on the definition of compounding as related to hypnotic suggestion has me thinking a bit on how I approach the subject.

Some folks who haven’t had direct instruction on the effect, think of it as repeating a suggestion in order to strengthen it (often in long monotonous fashion). Others will reference Gil Boyne or Ormond McGil.

McGil and Boyne both have the concept of compounding in their work but it goes back further. Elman discussed it and I believe some of the early suggestibility stuff explored it a bit.

Traditionally, compounding is considered as the strengthening of response to suggestion. This may in part be based upon simple repetition, that is part of the package.

The prinicple behind compounding is that when a suggestion is accepted and followed, all previous suggestions become stronger. The more suggestions are accepted and acted upon, the more powerfully other suggestions become. It’s building a compliance set based upon imaginative involvement (that part is IMHO). Repetition and compounding both have their usefulness.

Those who use repetition ad infinitim (such as Gerald Kein’s Direct Drive Method) are using the principle in part – and the comment about it being repetition to distraction is very right on the money as something like Direct Drive can really drive you bonkers from the sheer boredom of just delivering the suggestions repeated ad infinitim (Kein has suggested starting things up and then using a tape on loop playback just to preserve one’s voice). However, the real beauty of the phenomenon is when you fire in a series of unrelated suggestions and find that as you get going and get compliance and acceptance to later suggestions, the earlier ones also begin acting stronger, the response time and acceptance and the action upon those suggestions becomes faster and stronger and more powerful . . . both to the new suggestions and to the previous ones. Compliance set + imaginative involvement + expectation + critical factor bypass = compounding and other good things. The effect is very obvious in stage presentations but is just as useful for therapeutic purposes.

Personally, while I find repetition to have it’s uses to reinforce, I prefer to use compounding related to a series of similar (but not quite the same) suggestions in turn related to the set of behaviors or beliefs I wish to affect and to compound them through the use of round robin style suggestions interspersed with hypnotic effect suggestions (aka, suggestibility tests) that are unrelated to the specific issue but which demonstrate that "hypnosis" is going on . . . albeit, my approach is to use it to strengthen both previous and subsequent suggestions through imaginative involement and overload experience . . . "and as you begin to feel ________________ [insert set here] you begin to feel your arm getting lighter and lighter as invisible balloons pull it higher and higher as _______________ [insert set here] and you now notice these are happy balloons and the higher they go the more you accept these suggestions and the happier you feel and as you try to pull it down the more you try the higher they go and the more you accept all of these wonderful suggestions for your benefit and the happier you feel and as you feel happier you notice you’re ______________ [insert set here]" etc. The so-called hypnotic test of arm raising and unbendable arm reinforces that something special is happening and that in turn excites the imagination further along with even deeper critical factor bypass. I realize most hypnotists don’t like to use "tests" of this type in session as they consider them to be stage hypnotist’s gimmicks or they are worried that if the client fails them then the rest of the session will fail . . . I do not find this to be true, on the contrary, I have found that once I’ve built a session to the point where response to these type of basic tests becomes automatic and powerful, the client responds even more powerfully to other processes. In my opinion, if all you do in your session is a progressive relaxation induction, all you know for certain is that the client is relaxed. I want to ensure powerful imaginative involvement which results in the critical factor bypass leading to accepting and acting upon suggestions.

While these factors are not necessarily related in that failing with a previous suggestion does not follow that a later one will fail. However, I have found that if an earlier suggestion poofs and one later builds a compliance set with later suggestions, the earlier ones tend to also become more powerful. This is in part due to habitual response build up or the "yes set" response where you get them to comply to a series of suggestions that are easier to comply with and then pop ’em with the money shot suggestion . . . so to speak.

At least that’s my take on it.

You are free to disagree if you like, it’s merely a model and it works.

All the best,
Brian

Brian David Phillips, PhD, CH [phillips@nccu.edu.tw]Certified Hypnotherapist
Associate Professor, NCCU, Taipei, Taiwan
http://www.briandavidphillips.com