Complexity and measurement of hypnotic susceptibility: a comment on Coe and Sarbin's alternative interpretation.

Coe and Sarbin's claim that a single role skill dimension accounts for individual differences in hypnotizability is not supported by an empirical analysis. We suggest that current measures of hypnotic susceptibility are not only factorially complex but contain a sizable nonhypnotic variance component. Implications for the assessment of "true" hypnotic susceptibility are discussed.