The True Story of the Worlds First Documented Alien Abduction: Hypnosis
Dr. Simon treated Betty and Barney for dissociative amnesia related to their inability to recall a period of missing time following a close encounter with a UFO. As we mentioned, they first became aware of a period of missing time on the morning of September 20, 1961, when they arrived home from an all-night drive through the White Mountains of New Hampshire. When Barney glanced at his wristwatch upon his arrival home, he noticed that it had stopped. Upon entering his house, he noticed that the kitchen clock read a little after 5 a.m. They had arrived home later than expected, even allowing for periods of slow driving and their observational stops. Characteristic of traumatic amnesia, Barney experienced extreme stress and denial over his inability to account for the apparent missing time. Six days after the event, Betty wrote a letter to NICAP Director Donald Keyhoe to report their close encounter with an anomalous craft and Barney’s emotional reaction to this period of amnesia. She wrote, “At this time we are searching for any clue that might be helpful to my husband, in recalling whatever it was he saw that caused him to panic. His mind has completely blacked out at this point. Every attempt to recall leaves him very frightened. We are considering the possibility of a competent psychiatrist who uses hypnosis.” This letter proves that Betty and Barney were immediately aware of a period of amnesia associated with the sighting of a craft that was at least as large as a four- engine plane, silent, and flying in a very erratic pattern.
Both Betty and Barney Hill were excellent hypnotic subjects. They reached a deep trance level characterized by highly focused and selectively attentive response. University studies have demonstrated that mental functioning in this deep trance stage does not correlate to the characteristics of light-stage hypnosis. There is an alteration of language processing in deep trance that we do not see in light trance: Words are interpreted much more literally, and communication focuses on words themselves rather than ideas. There is also a decrease in critical judgment and an increase in incongruity.5 As we come to understand the Hills’ responses to Dr. Simon’s questions, we will find many examples of literal interpretation, including a return to earlier biographical periods that invoked an acute emotional response. In deep hypnotic trance states, the Hills were cognitively aroused, yet dissociated from irrelevant cues. Because they were able to hyper-focus, Dr. Simon was able to facilitate their recall of the events of September 18–20, 1961, in great detail.
Empirical studies have demonstrated that although test subjects re- called accurate information, they may have unwittingly manufactured details that were not present previously. However, this is characteristic of recall in general. We remember those events that are most significant to us and forget those we identify as trivial. But if an event is so disturbing that it assaults human consciousness, our mind undergoes the adaptive process of repression or distortion. Simply stated, conscious recall and hypnotic regression both display similar characteristics: They are more of an adaptive process than a videotaped recording. As hypnosis.com puts it, “Each act of recall is a fresh creative process and not a memory retrieval of some fixed item from storage.”6 When extraordinary memories seem to defy what is commonly accepted as plausible, the individuals and the trained psychiatrist must rely upon their own experiences to determine the reality of the recall. They cannot simply be discarded as highly improbable. The memories must be viewed within the biographical con- text in which they occurred; further evidence to substantiate the claim must be examined. The focus of this book is to do just that.
There has been abundant skepticism over the ability of trance sub- jects to differentiate between real and imagined information recovered through hypnosis. These charges stem from the fact that good hypnotic subjects can experience trance-generated visual and auditory hallucinations, just as Barney did with the hallucinated dog. Empirical studies have revealed that hypnotic suggestion is capable of tricking the brain into registering a hallucinated sequence as real: The part of the brain that is responsible for reasoning and memory is equally active during a hallucinated auditory sequence and the real, audiotaped event. However, when test subjects were instructed to imagine the audiotaped sequence, the brain did not register it as real.7 One important point is worth mentioning: The majority of individuals who have experienced trance-generated hallucinations do not register them as real events after the hypnosis session has been terminated. For example, Barney did not establish the false memory that he had encountered a real dog.
The use of hypnosis to recover repressed memory has engendered more controversy than any other issue related to hypnosis. Cognitive science has established that most people are able to discern between fantasy and reality; however, certain fantasy-prone individuals have come to believe that information confabulated during a hypnotic session is real.
This mistake is particularly prevalent when adults are hypnotically regressed to early childhood. Although autobiographical memories usually remain intact, real events are often contaminated with fantasy material to fill in the gaps. This ability to confabulate under hypnosis has led to false memories that have resulted in personal trauma and legal intervention. In the Hill case, we are not examining decades-old memories. Only 28 months had passed since the UFO encounter, and Betty and Barney had retold their conscious, continuous memories of the event numerous times.
Elizabeth Loftus, Ph.D., from the University of Washington in Seattle, spearheaded the effort to determine how false memories are formed through external suggestion. She found that law officers and clinical psychologists sometimes ask their subjects to use their imaginations to con- struct hypothetical events that do not exist in reality. This exercise has led to false confessions and criminal accusations.
In a 1997 Scientific American article, Loftus described how these questionable techniques came under fire in the late 1980s, following a legal test case that involved a nurse’s aide from Wisconsin. The woman experienced an extreme stress reaction following her daughter’s traumatic event. A psychiatrist applied time-regression hypnosis and other suggestive techniques, including imagination exercises called guided imagery to inadvertently create false memories of childhood events. This psychiatrist’s poor judgment and lack of skill induced false memories including satanic worship, cannibalism, bestiality, and rape. Under this medical doctor’s care she was diagnosed with dissociative personality disorder following the recovery of more than 120 personalities. This psychiatrist’s question- able therapy led his patient to believe that she had experienced severe childhood sexual and physical abuse. When reason returned, she realized that the psychiatrist had used suggestive questioning under hypnosis to plant false memories. In 1997, she settled out of court for $2.4 million in a malpractice lawsuit. It is this type of experience that has cast hypnosis in a poor light.
Her suspicion regarding the type of imagination exercises that resulted in false memory formation in the Wisconsin case led Loftus and her colleagues to design to explore the formation of false memories. In one study they asked test subjects to rate the likelihood that they experienced certain events during their childhood. Two weeks later, they instructed the participants to imagine that they had participated in certain fictitious events using imagination exercises. In one study, 24 percent of the participants developed a false memory that the imagined event had occurred. It is interesting to note that 12 percent of those who did not participate in the imagination exercise also developed a false memory. External suggestions received from others were instrumental in constructing false memories. However, they did not occur in 76 percent of the experimental subjects and 88 percent of the control group. Further research has confirmed that time regression to childhood is not reliable in and of itself. The experienced evaluator can only differentiate true memories from false ones through corroboration. It is the malleability of memory and the fallibility of hypnosis that has cast hypnosis in a poor light and sent up red flags in the psychological research community. In a 1967 article in Psychiatric Opinion, Dr. Simon wrote, “In the investigation with the Hills, I had to be continually on the alert for distortions, honestly made by them, and had to test their revelations against the continuum of the entire picture. Even when they appeared to be ‘lying’ they were telling the truth, if one could work out the general semantics of the situation.” Throughout the hypnosis, Dr. Simon scrutinized the Hills’ testimony for distortions, and questioned them extensively when he thought he had heard an inconsistency.
The reality of the Hills’ abduction memories was less important to Dr. Simon than the amelioration of their symptoms. In the introduction to The Interrupted Journey he wrote, “The charisma of hypnosis has tended to foster the belief that hypnosis is the magical and loyal road to the TRUTH. In one sense this is so, but it must be understood that hypnosis is the pathway to the truth as it is felt and understood by the patient. The truth is what he believes to be the truth and this may or may not be consonant with the ultimate nonpersonal truth. Most frequently it is. In his 1967 article, he explained that he employed a special technique— not the consonant medical technique—and that his special technique was more “positive” and “certain.”
Having made this information clear to the Hills, commencing on February 22, 1964, Dr. Simon conducted individual hypnotic regressions with them. To ensure that information could not be shared, and to ensure confidentiality, he used a soundproof examining room. He proceeded very care- fully, noticing that prosaic memories were recalled accurately prior to the exploration of the period of amnesia. When emotionally charged, traumatic memories were recovered, they often caused considerable agony. In these events Dr. Simon demonstrated sound professional judgment by bringing the sessions to a premature closure. It was not until all hypnosis sessions were completed in April 1964 that Dr. Simon removed the posthypnotic amnesia in small segments for the purpose of assimilation and integration into the Hills’ conscious memories. This was accomplished in conjunction with traditional psychotherapy, which lasted until June 27. Thereafter, Dr. Simon and the Hills remained in close contact through telephone conversations, letters, and periodic visits.