2. 职称英语
  3. Scientists researching hypnosis have uncovered evidence that counte

Scientists researching hypnosis have uncovered evidence that counte

游客2025-02-22  9
问题              Scientists researching hypnosis have uncovered evidence that counters
       some of the skepticism about the technique. One skeptical hypothesis is that
       hypnosis may be the product of "vivid imagination", a now discredited charge
Line    stemming from the observation that many people who are hypnotizable can be
(5)      led to experience compellingly realistic auditory and visual hallucinations.
       Noting that an auditory hallucination and the act of imagining a sound are both
       self-generated and that, like real hearing, a hallucination is experienced as the
       product of an external source, Henry Szechtman used PET (positron emission
       tomography) to image the brain activity of hypnotized subjects invited to
(10)     imagine a scenario and then experiencing a hallucination. By monitoring
       regional blood flow in areas activated during both hearing and auditory
       hallucination but not during simple imagining, the investigators sought to
       determine where in the brain a hallucinated sound is mistakenly "tagged" as
       authentic and originating in the outside world.
(15)         Szechtman imaged the brain activity of eight very hypnotizable subjects
       who had been prescreened for their ability to hallucinate under hypnosis. During
       the session, the subjects were under hypnosis and lay in the PET scanner with
       their eyes covered, their brain activity being monitored under four conditions:
       at rest; while hearing an audiotape of a voice, while imagining hearing the voice
(20)     again; and during the auditory hallucination they experienced after being
       informed that the tape was playing once more, although it was not. The tests
       suggested that a region of the brain called the right anterior cingulate cortex
       was just as active while the volunteers were hallucinating as it was while they
       were actually hearing the stimulus. In contrast, that brain area remained
(25)     dormant while the subjects were imagining that they heard the stimulus.
            The second major objection raised by critics argues that hypnosis’ ability to
        blunt pain results from either simple relaxation or a placebo response.
       McGlashan established that while hypnosis was only as effective in reducing pain
       as a sugar pill for poorly hypnotizable people, highly hypnotizable subjects
(30)     benefited three times more from hypnosis than from the placebo. In response to
       these successes, Rainville devised experiments to determine which brain
       structures are involved in pain relief during hypnosis, attempting to locate the
       brain structures associated with the suffering component of pain, as distinct
       from its sensory aspects. Using PET, he and other scientists found that
(35)     hypnosis reduced the activity of the anterior cingulate cortex-an area known to
       be involved in pain-but did not affect the activity of the somatosensory cortex,
       where the sensations of pain are processed.
           Despite the value of these findings, the mechanisms underlying hypnotic
       pain relief are still poorly understood. The model favored by most researchers is
(40)     that the analgesic effect of hypnosis occurs in higher brain centers than those
       involved in registering the painful sensation, accounting for the fact that most
       autonomic responses that routinely accompany pain-such as increased heart
       rate-are relatively unaffected by hypnotic suggestions of analgesia. [br] The author’s attitude toward some researchers’ thesis that hypnotic pain relief is distinct from a placebo effect can best be described as one of
选项 A、complete agreement
B、reluctant support
C、subtle condescension
D、irreverent dismissal
E、strong opposition
答案 B
解析
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3968170.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)