Spend any time around hypnotists and you will hear a lot about depth. Light trance. Somnambulism. The Esdaile state. Ultra Depth. It sounds like a diver’s chart, with each level further from the surface. This post maps out the territory and separates what is tradition from what has been tested.
The traditional ladder
Hypnotists have been building depth scales for over a century. The details differ, but the scales used in most hypnosis training look broadly like this:
Light trance. Relaxation, heavy eyelids, slower breathing. You are aware of everything and may doubt you are hypnotized at all. Most everyday hypnotherapy happens here or just below.
Medium trance. Deeper physical relaxation, a sense of heaviness or floating, and responses such as arm catalepsy (a limb staying where it is put).
Somnambulism. The classic “deep” state and the working depth of stage hypnosis. Marked by amnesia on suggestion, anaesthesia on suggestion, and positive and negative hallucinations (seeing what is not there, or not seeing what is).
The Esdaile state. Often called the “hypnotic coma.” Described as profound physical stillness, spontaneous anaesthesia, and a blissful unwillingness to move or respond.
Beyond. Some schools describe further states: a catatonic state, the Sichort state taught in Ultra Depth, and “expanded” states such as Ultra-Height. These are the subject of later posts in this series.
Where the map comes from
It is worth knowing who drew it. The lower rungs come from 19th and early 20th century clinicians and researchers. The upper rungs come largely from the American lay-hypnosis tradition: Dave Elman in the 1950s and 60s, and later teachers such as Walter Sichort, Gerald Kein and Ines Simpson. Their descriptions rest on practitioner observation and client reports, not on laboratory study.
What research says about depth
Academic researchers approach the subject differently.
- They measure responsiveness, not depth. Standard scales such as the Stanford count how many suggestions a person responds to. This is a trait of the person more than a place they have been taken to.
- Depth is usually self-reported. When researchers do ask about depth, they simply ask people to rate it. Those ratings are influenced by suggestibility and by what the person expected to feel.
- Depth and results are loosely linked. It is generally held that how deep someone feels does not reliably predict how well therapy works, although some studies have found a connection. For demanding effects such as surgical pain control, being highly hypnotizable clearly matters.
- States beyond somnambulism have not been validated. There is no published research establishing the Esdaile, Sichort or similar states as distinct conditions with their own physiological signature.
That does not mean practitioners are making it up. People do report striking experiences in very deep hypnosis. It means the map is a practitioner’s map: useful for navigation, not surveyed by science.
Does deeper mean better?
Not necessarily. Most therapeutic work — habit change, confidence, anxiety, IBS — is done successfully in light to medium trance. Depth becomes more relevant for pain control, and for approaches that are designed to bypass conscious involvement altogether.
The bottom line
Depth is a helpful metaphor and a real experience. Treat the upper levels as descriptions from a tradition, and be cautious of anyone who presents them as settled science.
Next in the series: The Elman Induction: Deep Hypnosis in Under Five Minutes
This article is for general information and is not medical advice.