Insert Table 5 Here

Table 5 shows the sample weighted mean correlations between hypnotizability and the TAS broken down by type of response estimate and hypnotic susceptibility scale categories. A one-way ANOVA was used to determine whether there were significant differences in the size of the TAS and hypnotizability correlation due to the type of susceptibility scale.

For the objective measures, significant differences in the size of the TAS and hypnotic susceptibility relationship among the hypnotic susceptibility scales were found, F (4,141) = 7.27, p < .001. The CURSS: O had a significantly lower mean sample weighted correlation than the HIP, t (30) = 3.75, p < .001, and the "Other" categories, t (39) = 2.21, p < .05. The CURSS: O was not significantly different from either the HGSHS or the SHSS: C. The HGSHS had a significantly lower mean sample weighted correlation than the HIP, t (67) = 4.49, p < .001, the SHSS: C, t (83) = 2.03, p < .05, and the "Other" categories, t (86) = 3.02, p < .01. The HIP had significantly higher sample weighted mean correlations than either the SHSS: C, t (34) = 2.35, p < .05 and the "Other" categories, t (37) = 2.14, p < .05.

There were no significant differences in terms of the size of the Absorption and hypnotic susceptibility correlation for those measures that used subjective response estimates, (F (3,37) = 0.89, ns).