Are people who are more empathetic more susceptible to hypnosis?

There is some evidence that people higher in certain empathy-related traits are somewhat more responsive to hypnosis, but the relationship is modest, trait-specific, and not determinative. Empathy is only one of several factors that influence hypnotizability.

What the research shows (summary)

  • Hypnotizability is a relatively stable individual difference measured with standardized scales (e.g., Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Harvard Group Scale). It predicts how responsive a person is to hypnotic suggestions.

  • Studies find small-to-moderate positive correlations between hypnotizability and certain empathy-related traits, particularly:

    • Perspective-taking and tendency to become absorbed in others’ experiences (sometimes measured by the Interpersonal Reactivity Index subscales: Perspective Taking and Empathic Concern, and the Tellegen Absorption Scale).

    • Trait absorption and imaginative involvement (people who can become deeply absorbed in experiences are more hypnotizable and may also score higher on some empathy measures).

  • Other empathy components—especially cognitive empathy (ability to reason about others’ mental states) versus affective empathy (sharing others’ emotions)—show different patterns. Affective sharing is less consistently linked to hypnotizability than absorption/imaginal involvement.

  • Meta-analyses and reviews indicate the correlations are modest (not huge). Hypnotizability is influenced by many other factors too: motivation, expectancies/placebo effects, rapport with the hypnotist, attentional control, openness to experience, and situational factors.

Why the link might exist (mechanisms)

  • Absorption/imaginative capacity: People who can become deeply absorbed or imaginatively involved can more fully enter the hypnotic state and accept suggestions; such people may also experience stronger empathic immersion.

  • Social-cognitive factors: Empathic people may be more attuned to social cues and more willing to cooperate with the hypnotist, increasing responsiveness.

  • Emotional contagion vs. controlled perspective-taking: Emotional contagion (automatic sharing) could facilitate some emotional suggestions; deliberate perspective-taking may help follow role-guided suggestions.

Limitations and caveats

  • Correlation ≠ causation: Being empathetic doesn’t cause high hypnotizability; shared underlying traits (absorption, openness) likely contribute to both.

  • Individual differences matter: High empathy does not guarantee high hypnotizability, and many highly hypnotizable people do not score unusually high on empathy.

  • Measurement variability: Different empathy scales measure different constructs; results depend on which measure is used.

  • Clinical vs. laboratory hypnosis: Effects can differ in therapeutic settings where rapport and motivation are stronger.

Practical implications

  • If you’re a therapist: Empathic rapport can help build trust and expectancy, which supports hypnotic work—but it’s not a substitute for assessing hypnotizability and tailoring suggestions.

  • If you’re curious about your own hypnotizability: Try a standardized hypnotizability screening (administered by a trained clinician) or informal self-tests; consider your tendency for absorption and imaginative involvement along with empathy.


Was this article helpful?