Why hypnosis works better for some people than others
Hypnotizability, how it is measured, and what to do if hypnosis doesn’t seem to work on you.
Hypnosis works better for some people because people differ in hypnotizability: how strongly they respond to hypnotic suggestions. Most people sit in the middle, a minority respond strongly, and a minority barely respond.[1] The trait is fairly stable over decades.[9] But it explains only part of who benefits, so a low score does not mean hypnosis cannot help you.[14]
What is hypnotizability?
The American Psychological Association’s hypnosis division defines it as “an individual’s ability to experience suggested alterations in physiology, sensations, emotions, thoughts, or behavior during hypnosis.”[1][2] Put simply: when a voice suggests your arm feels light, does it actually feel light, and does it rise without effort?
Two researchers who reviewed the field call this variation between people the most well-established finding from decades of experimental hypnosis research.[3]
How is it measured?
- Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C (SHSS:C). A test of 12 suggestions, and your score is how many you pass. It is the most commonly used measure, and scores are similar across language versions.[4][5]
- Harvard Group Scale, Form A (HGSHS:A). A group version used to screen people for research. It takes over an hour, which is why German researchers proposed a 5-item short form.[6][7]
- Newer scales. The Sussex-Waterloo Scale adds ratings of what people actually experienced, not only what they did.[8]
These tests have limits. A 2021 review argued that pass-or-fail scoring throws away information and that the standard scales have outlived their usefulness for current research.[3]
How many people are highly hypnotizable?
A 2025 paper summarizes the usual picture: about 10–15% of people are high (they pass all or most items), 70–80% are medium, and 10–15% are low (they pass none or only a few).[1] A UK sample of the Harvard scale gave a similar spread to earlier Western studies.[7]
Treat those percentages loosely. Scores fall along a range, and researchers commonly label the top and bottom 10–15% of scorers as “high” and “low.”[8] So the size of each group partly reflects where the lines are drawn.
Does it change over your life?
Not much in adulthood. Stanford researchers retested 50 people who were first tested as students between 1958 and 1962. The correlations between scores were .64 after 10 years, .82 after 15 years and .71 after 25 years. The median person’s score moved by only 1 point on the 12-item scale.[9] The authors said this stability compares well with other measures of individual differences.
What is different in the brain?
A 2012 Stanford study scanned 12 highly and 12 low hypnotizable adults at rest. High scorers had stronger functional connectivity between the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, a region involved in executive control, and the salience network, which includes the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex. These differences were not explained by brain structure in those regions.[10] That is a small study, so read it as a lead, not a brain test. For what changes during a session, see what happens in your brain during hypnosis.
Can you become more hypnotizable?
Training helps, but less than early studies suggested. In a 1986 study, low and medium scorers were taught strategies for responding, practiced, and watched a model respond. Afterwards, over half of the low scorers and over two-thirds of the medium scorers scored as high.[11]
Later work was more cautious. When trained low scorers were asked to report honestly, their scores were lower, which suggests part of the gain came from trying to please the experimenter.[12] Another study found that gains went along with more use of imagination.[13]
Does low hypnotizability mean hypnosis won’t help?
Not necessarily. It depends on the goal:
- Pain from direct suggestion. In 85 lab pain studies, high scorers got a 42% clinically meaningful reduction in pain and medium scorers 29%. Low scorers gained little.[15]
- Clinical outcomes overall. In a meta-analysis of 10 clinical studies, hypnotizability explained about 6% of the variation in results. The authors questioned whether testing it in clinics is worth it.[14] Other reviews found stronger links, with correlations from 0.31 to 0.53.[16]
So hypnotizability tilts the odds. It does not decide them. For which conditions have good evidence, see does hypnosis work?
What to do if hypnosis doesn’t seem to work on you
- Judge the outcome, not the feeling. Many people expect to feel “under.” Track the thing you want to change, such as time to fall asleep, instead of how deep the session felt.
- Give it several sessions. See how often to practice hypnosis.
- Imagine along actively. In one training study, the people whose responses improved most were also the ones using their imagination more.[13]
- Make the goal specific. A vague goal gives the session nothing clear to suggest. See how to write a session goal.
- Switch to what has better evidence if it still does nothing. For insomnia that is CBT-I. For anxiety disorders it is CBT. Hypnosis is optional, not the only route.
Hypnova writes hypnosis sessions around your goal. It is a wellness app, and none of the studies above tested it.
Frequently asked questions
What percentage of people can be hypnotized?
Most people respond to at least some hypnotic suggestions. One recent paper puts about 10–15% of people in the high range, 70–80% in the medium range and 10–15% in the low range. Those bands are partly a convention: researchers often define “high” and “low” as roughly the top and bottom 10–15% of scores.
Can you train yourself to be more hypnotizable?
Somewhat. Training programs that teach people how to imagine along with suggestions have raised scores in lab studies. But when participants were asked to report honestly, the gains were smaller, which suggests part of the increase was people trying to meet expectations.
Can hypnosis help if I have low hypnotizability?
It can. In a meta-analysis of clinical studies, hypnotizability explained only about 6% of the difference in outcomes. It matters more for some goals, such as pain relief from direct suggestion, where low scorers gained little in lab studies.
How do I find out how hypnotizable I am?
Researchers and some clinicians use standard scales such as the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C, or the Harvard Group Scale. Outside a study, the simpler test is practical: try a few sessions aimed at one goal and track whether that goal changes.
See how you respond
Try a few sessions built around one goal and track what changes. 300+ ready-made sessions free to start.
Download freeSources and further reading
- Zimmerman et al. — A general factor of hypnotizability revealed by confirmatory factor analysis
International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 2025;73:123–139. Introduction quotes the APA Division 30 definition of hypnotizability and summarizes the high, medium and low ranges. DOI: 10.1080/00207144.2024.2393856.
- Elkins et al. — Advancing research and practice: the revised APA Division 30 definition of hypnosis
International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 2015;63:1–9. Definitions of hypnosis and hypnotizability. DOI: 10.1080/00207144.2014.961870.
- Acunzo and Terhune — A critical review of standardized measures of hypnotic suggestibility
International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 2021;69:50–71. Strengths and limits of current scales. DOI: 10.1080/00207144.2021.1833209.
- Lichtenberg et al. — Israeli norms for the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C
International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 2009;57:227–237. Compares a Hebrew version of the 12-item scale with US and European versions. DOI: 10.1080/00207140802665492.
- Soukhtanlou et al. — Persian norms for the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C
International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 2021;69:253–260. 321 participants; describes SHSS:C as the most commonly used measure. DOI: 10.1080/00207144.2021.1876503.
- Riegel et al. — German norms of the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A, and a 5-item short version
International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 2021;69:112–123. Data from 1,276 people across six studies. DOI: 10.1080/00207144.2021.1836645.
- Oakley et al. — United Kingdom norms for the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A
International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 2020;68:80–104. Large UK sample compared with earlier Western norms. DOI: 10.1080/00207144.2020.1682257.
- Lush et al. — The Sussex-Waterloo Scale of Hypnotizability (SWASH)
Neuroscience of Consciousness, 2018;2018:niy006. 418 participants; describes how high and low groups are usually defined. DOI: 10.1093/nc/niy006.
- Piccione, Hilgard and Zimbardo — On the degree of stability of measured hypnotizability over a 25-year period
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1989;56:289–295. 50 people retested over 25 years on the Stanford scale, Form A. DOI: 10.1037//0022-3514.56.2.289.
- Hoeft et al. — Functional brain basis of hypnotizability
Archives of General Psychiatry, 2012;69:1064–1072. Resting-state fMRI and structural MRI in 12 high and 12 low hypnotizable adults. DOI: 10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2011.2190.
- Gorassini and Spanos — A social-cognitive skills approach to the successful modification of hypnotic susceptibility
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1986;50:1004–1012. Training low and medium scorers with strategy information, practice and modeling. DOI: 10.1037//0022-3514.50.5.1004.
- Bates — The effect of demands for honesty on the efficacy of the Carleton Skills-Training program
International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 1992;40:88–102. 30 low scorers trained, with or without honesty instructions. DOI: 10.1080/00207149208409650.
- Gearan, Schoenberger and Kirsch — Modifying hypnotizability: a new component analysis
International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 1995;43:70–89. Two training programs compared; gains correlated with use of imagination. DOI: 10.1080/00207149508409376.
- Montgomery, Schnur and David — The impact of hypnotic suggestibility in clinical care settings
International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 2011;59:294–309. Meta-analysis of 10 clinical studies (283 participants). DOI: 10.1080/00207144.2011.570656.
- Thompson et al. — The effectiveness of hypnosis for pain relief: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 85 controlled experimental trials
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 2019;99:298–310. Lab-induced pain in healthy volunteers. DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.02.013.
- Rosendahl, Alldredge and Haddenhorst — Meta-analytic evidence on the efficacy of hypnosis for mental and somatic health issues: a 20-year perspective
Frontiers in Psychology, 2023;14:1330238 (published January 2024). Overview of 49 meta-analyses, including moderators of outcome. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1330238.
Evidence checked September 19, 2026. This is an editorial research summary by the Hypnova team, not a systematic review or a clinical assessment. Cited studies evaluate their own interventions; they do not establish that Hypnova produces the same outcomes. This article is educational and does not replace individualized care.
Keep reading
Sleep hypnosis setup: headphones, volume and timing
When to press play, which headphones stay comfortable lying down, how loud is safe, and how to set up your phone for a sleep hypnosis session tonight.
Is hypnosis real? A straight answer, with the evidence
Yes, hypnosis is real, but it is not mind control. What researchers mean by hypnosis, what brain scans show, and what it has been shown to help.
Hypnosis for anxiety: what the research shows
A plain review of hypnosis trials for anxiety: medical procedures, test anxiety and anxiety disorders, and how it compares with CBT and SSRIs.