The reading in Lilenfield chapter 9 identified many examples, myths, and misconceptions that I was able to connect to some of my thoughts about hypnosis. Hypnosis has been around for over two centuries and is labeled as a method performed by hypnotists that alter one's perceptions, thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. I think that there is a large range of suggestibility of those who are hypnotized, different than the following statistic presented "... a person who responds to six out of 12 suggestions without being hypnotized might respond to seven or eight after hypnosis."
I have had one actual experience with hypnosis as a spectator at my high school. It was a stage performance in which the hypnotist used a quick induction method to determine who was most suggestible to be hypnotized. The things that my classmates performed and said were crazy, most of which they would have thought twice of in real life. One of the most drastic changes was in one of our star football players, who acted like a nerd and became completely vulnerable in front of everyone. The results of this hypnosis seem to contradict my reading and research, because many of the things that my classmates did, they would have never done in real life.
One's suggestibility to hypnosis is the way in which they respond to hypnotizing process. The reason that some of my classmates acted so wildly, was because they had a high suggestibility to hypnosis whereas when the hypnotist was performing her induction method, I felt nothing at all, therefore I must have a lower suggestibility. A lower suggestibility results in fewer responds to hypnosis than a high suggestibility. I'm not sure for the reasoning behind this, but I believe that it has a lot to do with one's beliefs, and in order to be hypnotized, they must believe that hypnosis is real and they are able to be affected by it. I think that hypnosis is real for the most part, but I don't believe myself to be susceptible to the practice- which is could be why I didn't respond to the hypnotist.