- Wed Mar 24, 2021 5:10 am
I was really bogged down by the stimulus. The author introduces this experimental study to "help illuminate" the supposed (positive) connection between hypnosis, but it sounds to me that the data suggest it actually disproves such connection.
Also, the goal of the experimental study is to prove, or as it turns out to disprove, the supposed connection between hypnosis and increased power of recall, but both groups of subjects were hypnotized. Wouldn't that be a design flaw to begin with? An instructor mentioned "control group," but apparently "hypnosis" is not the factor the experiment attempts to control.
In addition, the data concern "confidence and detailedness of recollection," as opposed to "accuracy." So I don't think the author's presentation of the experiment touches upon "power of recall" at all.
Furthermore, the fact that the subjects in the second group were equally confident and detailed in their movie recollections, though they had not seen a film, as the first group in their music recollections, is grounds for false recollection, which seems to indicate that hypnosis does not increase power of recall, if not decrease it due to the false recollections.
Lastly, is the reason why (A) is incorrect is the difference between "some" and "many"? The fact that the subjects in the second group recalled a film that they did not see while under hypnosis supports the claim that the supposed connection between hypnosis and increased power of recall is overstated, but that finding, which qualifies for "some," would not qualify for "many," which is plural, requiring at least "two"? Thanks!