Neuro-linguistic programming (NLP) is a theory of language, communication and thought together with an associated therapeutic method, which holds that people can improve the way they interact with the world by means of certain principles and techniques concerned with their use of language.^[1][2] It claims that people can use these principles and techniques to represent their world better, learn and communicate better, and ultimately have better, fuller, and richer lives.^[3] The title was coined by Richard Bandler and linguist John Grinder to represent a supposed theoretical connection between neurological processes ('neuro'), language ('linguistic') and behavioral patterns that have been learned through experience ('programming').^[4][5][6]

NLP was originally promoted by its founders in the 1970s, Bandler and Grinder as an extraordinarily effective and rapid form of psychological therapy^[7][8], capable of addressing the full range of problems which psychologists are likely to encounter, such as phobias, depression, habit disorder, psychosomatic illnesses, learning disorders. ^[9] It also espoused the potential for self-determination through overcoming learnt limitations^[10] and emphasized well-being and healthy functioning. Later, it was promoted as a 'science of excellence', derived from the study or 'modeling'^[11] of how successful or outstanding people in different fields obtain their results. It was claimed that these skills can be learned by anyone to improve their effectiveness both personally and professionally^[12]

Because of the absence of any firm empirical evidence supporting its sometimes extravagant claims, NLP has enjoyed little or no support from the scientific community. It continues to make no impact on mainstream academic psychology, and only limited impact on mainstream psychotherapy and counselling.^[2] However, it has some influence among private psychotherapists, including hypnotherapists, to the extent that they claim to be trained in NLP and ‘use NLP’ in their work. It has also had an enormous influence in management training, life coaching, and the self-help industry^[13].

History and founding

1970s

NLP originated when Richard Bandler, a student at University of California, Santa Cruz, was transcribing taped therapy sessions of the Gestalt therapist Fritz Perls as a project for the psychiatrist Robert Spitzer.^[14] Bandler believed he recognized particular word and sentence structures which facilitated the acceptance of Perls’ positive suggestions. Bandler took this idea to one of his university lecturers, John Grinder, a linguist, and together they produced what they termed the Meta Model, a model of what they believed to be influential word structures and how they work. They also 'modelled' the therapeutic sessions of the family therapist Virginia Satir.^[15]

They published an account of their work in The Structure of Magic in 1975, when Bandler was 25. The main theme of the book was that it was possible to analyse and codify the therapeutic methods of Satir and Perls. Exceptional therapy, even when it appears 'magical', has a discernible structure, which anyone could learn. Some of the book was based on previous work by Grinder on transformational grammar, the Chomskyan generative syntax that was current at the time.^[16] Some considered the importation of transformational grammar to psychotherapy to be Bandler and Grinder's main contribution to the field of psychotherapy.^[17] Bandler and Grinder also made use of ideas of Gregory Bateson, who was influenced by Alfred Korzybski, particularly his ideas about human modeling and that 'the map is not the territory'.^[18][19]

Impressed by the work with Fritz Perls and Virgina Satir, the British anthropologist Gregory Bateson agreed to write the preface and also introduced Bandler and Grinder to Milton Erickson, who would become the third model for NLP. Erickson, an American psychiatrist and founding member of the American Society for Clinical Hypnosis, was well known for his unconventional approach to therapy, for his ability to "utilize" anything about a patient to help them change, including their beliefs, favorite words, cultural background, personal history, or even their neurotic habits, and for treating the unconscious mind as creative, solution-generating, and often positive.

At that time the Californian human potential movement was developing into an industry. As well as a therapeutic method, its founders claimed that it was a study of communication and by the 1970s Grinder and Bandler were marketing it as a business tool, claiming that 'if any human being can do anything, so can you'. After 150 students paid $1,000 each for a ten-day workshop in Santa Cruz, Bandler and Grindler gave up academic writing to produce popular books from seminar transcripts, such as Frogs into Princes, which sold more than 270,000 copies. According to court documents, Bandler's NLP business made more than $800,000 in 1980.^[15]

1980s

In the early 1980s, NLP was hailed as an important advance in psychotherapy and counseling,^[20] and attracted some interest in counseling research and clinical psychology. In the mid 1980s, reviews in The Journal of Counseling Psychology^[21] and by the National Research Council (1988; NRC) committee^[22] found little or no empirical basis for the claims about preferred representational systems (PRS) or assumptions of NLP. Since then, NLP has been regarded by the academic, psychiatric and medical professions with suspicion or outright hostility.

In the 1980s, shortly after publishing Neuro-Linguistic Programming: Volume I^[23] with Robert Dilts and Judith Delozier, Grinder and Bandler fell out. Amidst acrimony and intellectual property lawsuits, the NLP brand was adopted by other training organisations.^[22] Some time afterwards, John Grinder collaborated with various people to develop a form of NLP called the New Code of NLP which claimed to restore a whole mind-body systemic approach to NLP^[24][19] Richard Bandler also published new processes based on submodalities and Ericksonian hypnosis.^[25]

1990s

In July 1996 after many years of legal controversy, Bandler filed a lawsuit against John Grinder and others, claiming retrospective sole ownership of NLP, and the sole right to use the term under trademark.^[26][27] At the same time, Tony Clarkson (a UK practitioner) successfully asked the UK High Court to revoke Bandler's UK registered trademark of "NLP", in order to clarify legally that 'NLP' was a generic term rather than intellectual property.^[28]

Despite the NLP community being splintered, most NLP material acknowledges the early work of the co-founders, Bandler and Grinder, and the development group that surrounded them in the 1970s.

2000s

In 2001, the law suits were settled with Bandler and Grinder agreeing to be known as co-founders of NLP. Since 1978, a 20 day NLP practitioner certification program had been in existence for training therapists to apply NLP as an adjunct to their professional qualifications. As NLP evolved, and the applications began to be extended beyond therapy, new ways of training were developed and the course structures and design changed. Course lengths and style vary from institute to institute. In the 1990s, following attempts to put NLP on a regulated footing in the UK, other governments began certifying NLP courses and providers, such as in Australia for example, where Neuro-linguistic programming is accredited under the Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF).^[29] However, NLP continues to be an open field of training with no 'official' best practice. With different authors, individual trainers and practitioners having developed their own methods, concepts and labels, often branding them as "NLP",^[30] the training standards and quality differ greatly.^[31] The multiplicity and general lack of controls has led to difficulty discerning the comparative level of competence, skill and attitude in different NLP trainings. According to Peter Schütz the length of training in Europe varies from 2–3 days for the hobbyist, to 35–40 days over at least nine months to achieve a professional level of competence.^[31]

In Europe, the European NLP therapy association has been promoting its training in line with European therapy standards.

In 2001, an off-shoot application of NLP, Neuro-linguistic psychotherapy (NLPt), was recognized by United Kingdom Council for Psychotherapy (UKCP) as an experimental constructivist form of psychotherapy.^[32]

It is my opinion that I am putting forward correct statement of NLP. I am indeed engaged in persuasion [for a balanced article should contain "pros" and "cons". There is a strong bout of "cons" already listed on the page later on, where it is explcitly stated that NLP is a "pseudoscience" and further articles that have been referenced which cannot be counter argued in wiki]. I am engaged in persuasion on a hot/contentious topic just like any and all logical thesis [on every statement in every wiki page].

However I am not engaged in "selling". To be engaged in "selling" I would have to sell a specific product or service by a specific method [such as merely recommend XYZ-NLP-provider]. There are in facts many many providers out there. Instead I list a variety of well know NLP names, and further the entire context of the article that I have written is used to analogously to compare NLP with:

- psychotherapy [namely all psychotherapy is in fact found to be based upon subjective opinion, not objective fact at all. There is no skill whatsoever required in psychotherapy according to rigorous testing. This line of reasoning equally applies to a stock trader too. It has been found that a "blind man" or "monkey" can equal the very best Wall Street trader. Therefore, here is another area where so many people put in so much money, but rigorous research finds that it is better to get a blind money to choose stocks by random for one! [Work of Prof. Burton Malkiel "Random Walk Down Wall Street"]

- in fact taking it further since its inception, the field of psychology has been contentiously debated to be a "soft science" or worse. Everything in psychology and every era has been filled with skepticism of a type ordinarily not found in other subjects. This is because of the huge subjective nature of psychology. There are eras where the movement is "certain" that their methods are correct and will be correct for infinite time: such as Freudian movement; Behaviorism movement, and modernly we are at the juncture of the cognitive science movement [I even read a hearty article that stated something equivalent to 'finally objective data has been collected to ascertain that cognitive psychology is legitimate']. However even cognitive psychology is subject to great criticism for completely lacking a strong materialistic/physicalistic foundation.

- NLP vs. the academics of "business In fact "business" is a great analogy to compare NLP to. Business is about having "select principles" [different selection by different businesses] to guide the business. One business may focus on customer service, thinking that is the very best way to get results and repeat customers; whereas another thinks that whereas minimal levels of customer service is neccesary, any more wastes time. For example during rush-hour lunch lines in supermarkets, minimum customer service enables the cashier to get through the line faster. That is better than "good to great" customer service but which take more time, resulting in greater frustration by customers due to longer lines, and the ultimate result is "less repeat purchase and therefore less profit".

- NLP vs. sports coaching, motivation and "intervention". In reality, NLP does work but it works because

[a] there is a coach to intevene, break negative habits [which includes mindset] and focus on on positive habits [such as goal setting, maintaining a different physiology akin to that which they do in the Marines etc.]

[b] a coach can also elicit the Hawthorne effect whereby the feeling that one is being monitored by a chosen respected source has the effect of the client working harder and more efficiently.

[c] When one uses NLP by oneself, then the fact that there is a "train track" already laid down, a set of specific procedures, enables one to use it to direct one's mind towards the positive. Whether or not the "train track" is truly "scientific" is besides the point in the sense that if the user [a] engages it; [b] believes it then the user will get [c] efficacious psychological results. . It must be borne in mind that

The question may be asked : then how is NLP different from inherently ineffective "herbal pills" ? The answer is that whereas herbal pills can not create the physiological result that it purports; NLP does create the "psychological" results that it purports for it is based upon the "subjective experience" of the user. The point is that it is very easy to change one's own or another's subjective perception.

- NLP vs. BRAIN SCIENCE

[a] NLP uses methods equivalent to those used by Pavlov and B.F.Skinner. Whereas these methods work, they are not an elixar. They work on animals, who share the same equivalent nervous system as the human [at the level of the nerve cell].

[b] The brain - on a neurological level and basis highly malleable [not for all purposes though]. So brain modules and hemispheres always retain their position, but other neural links can be modified surprisingly easily]. UK's medical Prof. Ian Robertson talks about experiments whereby merely "imagining" playing the piano for example is sufficient to both retain and even enhance the neural connections on the "body map" located in the brain: areas to do with the fingers. This is possible due to the impressionability and malleability of the neurons. NLP incidentally uses procedures where "imagination is required and used alongside more specific Skinnerian-like conditioning".

BRAIN VS. MUSCLES

Whereas the brain is not muscle tissue, an analogy is apt: the brain adapts to the circumstances put to it on a neurological level such as NLP enables one to do; and the muscles of a human adapt when they are tasked by stretching or lifting weights. Whereas one cannot do whatever one likes with muscles , such as the inability to sculpture Mount Rushmore on one's bicepps; so too with the brain, it is highly malleable on a neurological basis, but one can not resculpt the entire brain such as move modules.

- What level of detail is required for a psychological system to be valid? Conventional psychologists argue that one must go behind the mass and dig deep [Freudian approach]. Whereas NLP implicitly argues that one does not need to "dig deep" but merely work with the "mask" [and/or change masks], and therefore the behavior of the person will change too to reflect the type of behavior he has been after [e.g. confident, positive, motivated, happy] far more often.

Definition of NLP

There are varying conceptual definitions all pointing to the same direction. NLP means "neuro linguistic programming".

- NLP is the "language of the brain" as distinguished from the "language used by man's mind such as English". The "language of the brain" is a metaphor to relay the manner that the neurons communicate by way of quadrillions of patterns^[33].

- NLP is referring to the use of language such as English [but it does not merely have to be language for it can also refer to other modalities such as vision] with which we use to perceive the nature and interpretation of reality^[34].

For example: if an adult sees a "carrot", then you will know it as an "carrot" by label^[35]. Further, the "carrot" will have many unique connotations unique to you, which will differ from another person^[36]. This is because we "learnt" about the carrot through experience and not merely by memorizing the definition from the dictionary. Example : some people experience "carrots" with pleasure whereas for others the "carrot" elicits a feeling of sickness. However it is the same objective item, so why does it elicit different subjective results? Why should a harmless carrot elicit feelings of sickness in some people? The answer is that every word, every entity elicits "feelings" : good or bad. NLP has methods with which to change one's connotations with the carrot from "sickness" elicitation to the feeling of a "state of health and hunger".

Subjective vs. Objective reality^[37]

There has been endless phillosophical arguments whether reality is subjective or objective. This means whether the external world we experience [such as a orange carrot] is really so, or whether in light of the fact that the external world must perpetually be experienced by our sense organs that trigger neural signals, at which time we "perceive" the external world; whether reality is therefore merely made-up and subjective [Plato].

There is logical "objective reality as perceived by us subjectively", or otherwise stated as "object-as-perceived"^[38]. The problem is if humans merely think that subjective reality is the "truth" [e.g. 1+1=11 !] All humans, due to the possession of over 50 specific innate brain biases [won Daniel Kahneman the Nobel Laureat^[39]] believe they are being "objective" but unless and until one deliberately uses the method of logic and reason, then it is usually unlikely that one is being objective.

Humans perceive reality with the cognitive faculty [reason and logic: with the pre-frontal lobe being heavily involved] and the emotional faculty [feelings: with the amygdala and/or parietal-bilateral lobe being involved^[40]]. One must use the cognitive faculty - rationality [the method of logic and reason] to determine the truth. However, as humans innnately and perpetually also possess the powerful "emotional faculty" with which they "feel" [things such as subjective feelings about a carrot], NLP is a powerful system of strategies to help re-program the brain to align one's subjective perception produced by feelings [e.g. "I hate carrots"] with objective reality [i.e. "carrots are good for you"].

Furthermore, NLP enables one to enhance one's feelings if there is reason to do so^[41]. For example, instead of merely "liking carrots", one can develop great passion for carrots; and as carrots are good for one, the human subject will be rationally better off consuming more carrots [and hopefully less junk food whilst they are at it].

The Power of NLP

NLP is so powerful that it is highly recommended to naysayers that instead of ignoring the nature of reality, results elicitated with NLP; that one acknowledge it and therefore have powerful tools with which to "resist manipulation" , and further to "persuade" others.

For example, whereas arguably it may be sufficient to use mere logic to persuade academic colleagues, outside this context; humans are innately and ordinarily persuaded by "rhetoric" and other psychological tools ^[42]

NLP vs. Psychotherapy, academia, intelligentsia

NLP is akin to CEO leading a small or a large business, asking the question: "How to get better results?" Alas, in business there is no magic ball into the future nor any secret to alchemy [hence even very rich and powerful brand name businesses with the best executives do go bankrupt such as Wang Computers].

The wise CEO therefore uses best practices approach: principles and models that are thought to work and be the best from the many different arenas in a business [e.g. Continuous improvement; PDMA; Kaizen; Demming; Innovation techniques; Seven Habits; Learning Organization; Peer-to-Peer Coaching; Strategy Maps; SWOT analysis; Brainstorming and so forth]. Similarly in NLP, the CEO is equivalent to the coach or the client-user: one uses "best practices" known as models from other psychotherapeutic methods, and some models invented in NLP. Then one attempts to use them to create change. If it does not work then one changes approach and uses another model. This is the reason that almost everyone both benefits in an NLP seminar and the drop-out rate is virtually non-existent, amongst literally tens of thousands of attendees.

In contrast with psychotherapy and academia, the model and approach used is different and that is to have pre-defined theory first, provable logically and empirically; and subject to peer review before certitude is reached by a consensus of experts in the field. This is a different approach^[43], but one that is excellent within the niche of academia.

The expression: those who can "do; and those who can't "teach" is apt here. In reality, both approaches are required for a comprehensive perspective upon the nature of reality. However, for the purposes of NLP - from both the practioner's point of view and the client, ultimately both are interested in "rapid results" and not tomes of theory, and therefore NLP is very practical, yet simple and powerful^[44]. The client is usually protected by a money-back guarantee, so if it does not work [rare or non-existent] then no one loses anything. This is once again akin to a customer in a business that can buy a good but if it does not satisfy one then one can return it [e.g. BestBuy or Argos]. Therefore, NLP uses the business approach of both "best practices" and the focus for the client is "results", not academic theory.

Is NLP a science or a pseudoscience [quakery] ?

Below you will see both arguments. This is the state of existence for many subjects, including NLP: a friction between professional business certified courses and licensed psychotherapists and academics.

It turns out that any and all psychology and psychotherapy is in fact a "myth" ^[45][46]based on the extensive work of reknowned FSU Prof. K. Anders Ericcson.

Those domains which are subject to expertise are domains where one can therefore develop "skill" in the specific activity. For example: chess expertise, math expertise, mental math expertise etc. However there are other domains which appear to the lay-person as a domain subject to expertise but there is no evidence that there is any domain-specific-skill involved and this includes stock trading, wine critic and psychotherapy.

Therefore, if this is so - then the argument is advanced that psychology or psychotherapy is not a "conventional science" but rather a "philosophy of mind" : abstract principles in order to get results. Similarly many "Get rich quick/er" schemes or "stock market trading strategies" is not a science but abstract principles. In fact, the entirety of the MBA and business school in the context of "improving profits - which afterall is the primary requirement of all businesses" is based upon abstract principles, not a science. This is supported by the abstraction from the work of Nassim Nicholas Taleb [Black Swan ; Fooled by Randomness] and the work of Prof.Phil Rosenzweig of "The Halo Effect".^[47]

The point is - psychology, psychotherapy, NLP, get rich strategies, stock market strategies and corporate business management improvement strategies all require "abstract principles" to be applied to the concrete facts in each domain. Without doing so then it is mere blindness. By applying abstract principles to reality, there is no guarantee of success. No human is omniscient. Humans continue to grapple with virtually infinite amount of information to make sense of reality by either/both abstract principles such as in philosophy, the above subject or 'hard sciences' whereever possible.

Support for NLP

Basic Key Principles

a. NLP uses coaching in similitude to sports coaching, whereby a coach re-directs one's attention to growth, training and the future.

Coaching is a method of directing, instructing and training a person or group of people, with the aim to achieve some goal or develop specific skills. There are many ways to coach, types of coaching and methods to coaching. Direction may include motivational speaking. Training may include seminars, workshops, and supervised practice.

b. NLP engages the 1 or more of the 6 Robert_Cialdini "Influence" principles, such as commitment and consistency, authority principle, contrast principle, social proof, likability and scarcity. One way of engaging one or more of these is by charging for an expensive seminar that is held over a number of days.

c. NLP both models hypnosis and elicits the hypnotic state [unconsciously]. Therefore it elicits change.

d. NLP ends up using what is regarded as the "best practices" from various psychological methods. For example, NLP uses methods of "conditioning" known in NLP as "anchoring", that was used by B.F.Skinner and Behavorism. However, the philosophy of Behaviorism is distinct from NLP.

e. NLP itself uses models from other psychological methods and has methods to model any human activity.

f. The nature of the brain in relation to learning [and re-learning] is that neurons and the brain is highly malleable^[48]

Detailed support for NLP

1. It is up to the academic community to find out what works and why it works [or not] on a theoretical level. This is important and often neglected by practioners of NLP. However practioners of NLP are in a business and aim to get results, and therefore are not interested in the theory. There has been little support in the academic community but things may be changing ^[49]

2. There are many aspects of NLP that work and are outstanding [e.g. modelling] and many other aspects that are mysticism [i.e. most probably eye accessing cues or subliminal commands - see criticism cited below]. Modelling is about duplicating results, which is familiar in the realm of ordinary scientific research. Science is about finding a model and creating predictable, duplicable results.

Criticism of modelling: [i] one must model the key aspects which produce results and this is not always obvious; [ii] the context that one is modelling is also of import. For example if one models/copies Warren Buffet without knowing about his theory, then one will buy stocks often when it is "too late", after Buffett has already purchased the stocks and therefore led to a change in the share price [already]. So there is arguably little benefit in "copying" Buffett without also modelling his theory [which has never been publicized by Buffett].

3a. Research has shown that "psychotherapy" generally is not a "skill"^[50]. ^[51]Instead, neophyte therapist could get just as much or as little results in their practice with clients as someone with 20 years of experience. In contrast many other areas of learning are skills such as playing chess or mastering Karate^[52]. The point is that it is possible to get results with any system, whether that system is called NLP or Psychotherapy.Further "anyone" even with no training [but confidence] can get results.It is better to have "some training" to portray authenticity, which helps convince people about one's own authority [see authority principle below].

3b. The "skill" in psychotherapy may merely be "problem solving" [which is a skill] ^[53] . Similarly "wine tasting" contrary to popular opinion is not a skill, but some wine tasters form lucrative businesses. The "skill" set is the skill of marketing oneself, persuading others and the gift of using words to elicit the buying response from those that value the "wine critic".

4. An NLP practioner is basically akin to a good sports coach. The coach helps the client focus on the right things ,focus on the future and not dwell on the past [in sports, but so too in NLP]. They use a variety of [probably fallacious] techniques in order to ultimately

[a] direct the client's mind towards the future: so the client can take proactive and positive action instead of being weighed down by their weak past behaviors;

[b] it also helps the client "break their old habitual pattern of thought or work". This is basically what any good sports coach engages in. The point though is that it works. Many people feel that they need "outside intervention".

5. NLP indirectly uses the work of Robert Cialdini [Professor and best-selling author on influence]. NLP gets the client to "agree", to "commit and be consistent", and if within a large seminar then to use "social proof/bubble effect". If the coach is "likable" and deemed a person of "authority" [whether or not they are an authority] then any one or all of these factors result in influencing the client to "change". Notice these are the same factors that move markets or auctions. Also often clients pay a lot of money up front to attend the seminar and are therefore "committed" [psychologically] to attempt to serious change.

Bandler and Grinder, amongst others claimed for years to be "doctors", which none of them were. They were therefore lieing but in an effective way to demonstrate "authority". The result is a booming business that made them very wealthy in contrast to other psychotherapists. The point is that principles like the "authority" principle work even if something is or is not snake-oil ! For the practical purposes of a client: as long as the program works, then that is fine.

6. NLP also ultimately uses hypnosis [whether or not it sets out to do so]. Hypnosis has now been validated [amongst many, but not all researchers] as being a distinct quality. For example: brain imaging studies show that hypnosis is distinct from the perrson merely imaging or pretending to imagine. Hypnosis works and therefore on this ground, NLP also works

NLP and science

At the time it was introduced, NLP was heralded as a breakthrough in therapy, and advertisements for training workshops, videos and books began to appear in trade magazines. The workshops provided certification. However, controlled studies shed such a poor light on the practice, and those promoting the intervention made such extreme and changeable claims that researchers began to question the wisdom of researching the area further.^[20] On the other hand, there are thousands of people attended NLP seminar regularly. For example, Tony Robbins draws 12,000 persons at the London's Excel Center. There is a small drop-out rate on Day 1 suggesting that it works for over 11,980 persons.

There are three main criticisms of NLP. However, it is often far too easy to critize a system than to determine the positive sides. Similarly many great discoveries in science were not accepted for a substantial length of time. On the other hand, for something to be true as opposed to a pseudoscience, it must be subject to proof. NLP proves itself, not by the theory in academic eyes, but rather by the practical results. It is the fastest, most powerful and most effective psychological method since the dawn of man.

1. NLP pretends to be a science but is really pseudoscience, for its claims are not based on the scientific method.

However, it must be borne in mind that every other psychotherapeutic method is not a science either ^[54]Its very name is a pretence to a legitimate discipline like neuroscience, neurolinguistics, and psychology. However it must be remembered that the name "psychology" at the time of inception purported to be a science too. Those who advanced it like Freud have now been shown to be great at literary fiction not scientific fact.

It has a large collection of scientific sounding terms, like eye accessing cues, metamodeling, micromodeling, metaprogramming, neurological levels, presuppositions, primary representational systems, modalities and submodalities. Corballis (1999) argues that "NLP is a thoroughly fake title, designed to give the impression of scientific respectability". However on the other hand NLP cannot be a "fake title" for it is not "faking another title by the same name" so Corballis is quite wrong. It is akin to stating that "Bank of America" is a fake title because unlike "Bank of England", the "Bank of America" is not part of the U.S. Treasury ^[55] According to Beyerstein (1995) "though it claims neuroscience in its pedigree, NLP's outmoded view of the relationship between cognitive style and brain function ultimately boils down to crude analogies."^[56] On the other hand, this same criticism applies to the entire field of psychology and psychotherapy, so it is dishonest to merely narrow such criticism towards NLP. NLP purports to be a practical results-orientated strategy. That is what draws tens of thousands of clients at seminars thoroughout the world. Most of the clients sign-up up to very expensive [though fairly priced] secondary and tertiary seminars, because of the phenomenal results that they experience at the primary seminar with such persons as Tony Robbins, Paul McKenna, Richard Bandler, Chris Howard, Tad James amongst so many others.

With reference to all the 'neuromythologies' covered in his article, including NLP, he states "In the long run perhaps the heaviest cost extracted by neuromythologists is the one common to all pseudosciences—deterioration in the already low levels of scientific literacy and critical thinking in society.".^[56] On the other hand, whereas pseudo-science of all types indeed results in the deterioration of critical thinking skills, NLP gets outstanding results. Many go onto soaring and successful marriages [sometimes that means marriage with some other person], great levels of wealth, and outstanding mental and physical health.

Some state that proponents of NLP often deny that it is based on theory.^[57]

1. There is little or no evidence or research to support its often extravagant claims apart from the fact that wholly or almost every single client of an NLP seminar comes out a raving fan and indeed "changed" within a very short time limit. No other psychotherapeutic method can advance such rapid change. Heap (1988) remarks ^[2] that if the assertions made by proponents of NLP about representational systems and their behavioural manifestations are correct, then its founders have made remarkable discoveries about the human mind and brain, which would have important implications for human psychology, particularly cognitive science and neuropsychology. Yet there is no mention of them in learned textbooks or journals devoted to these disciplines. Neither is this material taught on psychology courses at pre-degree and degree level. When Heap spoke to academic colleagues who spend much time researching and teaching in these fields, they showed little awareness, if any, of NLP.^[2][58] Heap (1988) argued that to arrive at such important generalisations about the human mind and behaviour would certainly require prolonged, systematic, and meticulous investigation of human subjects using robust procedures for observing, recording, and analysing the phenomena under investigation. "There is just no other way of doing this". Yet the founders of NLP never revealed any such research or investigation, and there is no evidence of its existence.^[2] Indeed, Bandler himself claimed it was not his job to prove any of his claims about the workings of the human mind, "The truth is, when we know how something is done, it becomes easy to change" (ibid).^[59] Tosey and Mathison say that "the pragmatic and often anti-theoretical stance by the founders has left a legacy of little engagement between practitioner and academic communities"^[60][61].
2. A significant amount of experimental research suggests that the central claims of NLP are unjustified. See NLP and science for a description of the literature. The majority of empirical research was carried out in the 1980s and 1990s consisted of laboratory experimentation testing Bandler and Grinder's hypothesis^[62] that a person's preferred sensory mode of thinking can be revealed by observing eye movement cues and sensory predicates in language use.^[60] A research review conducted by Christopher Sharpley in 1984^[63], followed by another review in 1987 in response to criticism by Einspruch and Forman^[64], concluded that there was little evidence for its usefulness as an effective counseling tool. Reviewing the literature in 1988, Michael Heap also concluded that objective and fair investigations had shown no support for NLP claims about 'preferred representational systems'.^[2] The conclusions of Heap and Sharpley have been contested^[65][64][19] on the grounds that the studies demonstrated an incomplete understanding of the claims of NLP and that the interviewers involved in the many of the studies had inadequate training/competence in NLP.^[60]

A research committee^[22] working for United States National Research Council led by Daniel Druckman came to two conclusions. First, the committee "found little if any evidence to support NLP’s assumptions or to indicate that it is effective as a strategy for social influence. It assumes that by tracking another’s eye movements and language, an NLP trainer can shape the person’s thoughts, feelings, and opinions (Dilts, 1983^[66]). There is no scientific support for these assumptions."^[67] Secondly, the committee "were impressed with the modeling approach used to develop the technique. The technique was developed from careful observations of the way three master psychotherapists conducted their sessions, emphasizing imitation of verbal and nonverbal behaviors... This then led the committee to take up the topic of expert modeling in the second phase of its work."^[67] These studies marked a decline in research interest in NLP generally, and particularly in matching sensory predicates and its use in counsellor-client relationship in counseling psychology.^[68] Beyerstein (1995) argued that NLP was based on outmoded scientific theories, and that its 'explanation' of the relationship between cognitive style and brain function was no more than crude analogy.^[56]

In light of the above, is NLP equivalent applied psychology or is it equivalent to snake-oil like 'organ enlargement herbal pill advertisements'

NLP gets results such as the premise in applied psychology.

NLP is distinguished from snake-oil. Whereas 'snake-oil' does not get the purported results that is advertised [example: organ enlargement herbal pill], NLP does indeed get results. NLP may not get every type of result, but results are obtained whereby the client subjectively and strongly believes they have changed. This is the nature of all psychology.

The key "test" for NLP is whether the participants continue to purchase or do they exercise their money-back guarantee? Most people that take courses advance to the next course by paying a significant [though fair] amount of money in return for therapy or further knowledge of NLP.

Reference: hence the businesses of leading providers such as Tony Robbins, Richard Bandler, Tad James, Paul McKenna and so forth have continued to grow by leaps and bounds.

Is NLP dangerous ?

NO: NLP re-programs one akin to hypnosis but it does not over-ride "free will" in the context of getting one to abuse one's innate values. For example there is now many communities of seduction artists that use NLP but NLP cannot get another to do something against their will.

YES: NLP is the unnamed methodology used by all successful nasty dictators throughout history. What was not known is NLP, but what was perhaps known to a degree was psychological methods to persuade people.

INTERESTING: NLP is like a knife or like fire [very powerful]. It can be wield by the bad person to attempt to manipulate; but it can equally be wield by the good person both as a defence against the bad person, but also for many good purposes; such as knife being used for cutting food or fire being used to produce light and warmth at night-time. As NLP is widely known by many but a relative few compared to the earth's population, it is suggested that many more get to know it and use it both for the good and as a defence against potential manipulation by others.

Humans with big goals are often faced with big obstacles and big problems. Whereas the use of reason and logic enables one to drive oneself forward oftentimes, humans are subject to negative neurological conditioning creating a state of learned helplessness . NLP is a powerful way to overcome states of helplessness, change perception in times of subjective feeling of overwhelm and trouble; and a psychological method to persist towards rational goals.

Support for NLP

Basic Key Principles

a. NLP uses coaching in similitude to sports coaching, whereby a coach re-directs one's attention to growth, training and the future.

Coaching is a method of directing, instructing and training a person or group of people, with the aim to achieve some goal or develop specific skills. There are many ways to coach, types of coaching and methods to coaching. Direction may include motivational speaking. Training may include seminars, workshops, and supervised practice.

b. NLP engages the 1 or more of the 6 Robert_Cialdini "Influence" principles, such as commitment and consistency, authority principle, contrast principle, social proof, likability and scarcity. One way of engaging one or more of these is by charging for an expensive seminar that is held over a number of days.

c. NLP both models hypnosis and elicits the hypnotic state [unconsciously]. Therefore it elicits change.

d. NLP ends up using what is regarded as the "best practices" from various psychological methods. For example, NLP uses methods of "conditioning" known in NLP as "anchoring", that was used by B.F.Skinner and Behaviorism. However, the philosophy of Behaviorism is distinct from NLP.

e. NLP itself uses models from other psychological methods and has methods to model any human activity.

f. The nature of the brain in relation to learning [and re-learning] is that neurons and the brain is highly malleable^[69]

Detailed support for NLP

1. It is up to the academic community to find out what works and why it works [or not] on a theoretical level. This is important and often neglected by practioners of NLP. However practioners of NLP are in a business and aim to get results, and therefore are not interested in the theory. There has been little support in the academic community but things may be changing ^[70]

2. There are many aspects of NLP that work and are outstanding [e.g. modelling] and many other aspects that are mysticism [i.e. most probably eye accessing cues or subliminal commands - see criticism cited below]. Modelling is about duplicating results, which is familiar in the realm of ordinary scientific research. Science is about finding a model and creating predictable, duplicable results.

Criticism of modelling: [i] one must model the key aspects which produce results and this is not always obvious; [ii] the context that one is modelling is also of import. For example if one models/copies Warren Buffet without knowing about his theory, then one will buy stocks often when it is "too late", after Buffett has already purchased the stocks and therefore led to a change in the share price [already]. So there is arguably little benefit in "copying" Buffett without also modelling his theory [which has never been publicized by Buffett].

3a. Research has shown that "psychotherapy" generally is not a "skill"^[71]. ^[72]Instead, neophyte therapist could get just as much or as little results in their practice with clients as someone with 20 years of experience. In contrast many other areas of learning are skills such as playing chess or mastering Karate^[73]. The point is that it is possible to get results with any system, whether that system is called NLP or Psychotherapy.Further "anyone" even with no training [but confidence] can get results.It is better to have "some training" to portray authenticity, which helps convince people about one's own authority [see authority principle below].

3b. The "skill" in psychotherapy may merely be "problem solving" [which is a skill] ^[74] . Similarly "wine tasting" contrary to popular opinion is not a skill, but some wine tasters form lucrative businesses. The "skill" set is the skill of marketing oneself, persuading others and the gift of using words to elicit the buying response from those that value the "wine critic".

4. An NLP practioner is basically akin to a good sports coach. The coach helps the client focus on the right things ,focus on the future and not dwell on the past [in sports, but so too in NLP]. They use a variety of [probably fallacious] techniques in order to ultimately

[a] direct the client's mind towards the future: so the client can take proactive and positive action instead of being weighed down by their weak past behaviors;

[b] it also helps the client "break their old habitual pattern of thought or work". This is basically what any good sports coach engages in. The point though is that it works. Many people feel that they need "outside intervention".

5. NLP indirectly uses the work of Robert Cialdini [Professor and best-selling author on influence]. NLP gets the client to "agree", to "commit and be consistent", and if within a large seminar then to use "social proof/bubble effect". If the coach is "likable" and deemed a person of "authority" [whether or not they are an authority] then any one or all of these factors result in influencing the client to "change". Notice these are the same factors that move markets or auctions. Also often clients pay a lot of money up front to attend the seminar and are therefore "committed" [psychologically] to attempt to serious change.

Bandler and Grinder, amongst others claimed for years to be "doctors", which none of them were. They were therefore lieing but in an effective way to demonstrate "authority". The result is a booming business that made them very wealthy in contrast to other psychotherapists. The point is that principles like the "authority" principle work even if something is or is not snake-oil ! For the practical purposes of a client: as long as the program works, then that is fine.

6. NLP also ultimately uses hypnosis [whether or not it sets out to do so]. Hypnosis has now been validated [amongst many, but not all researchers] as being a distinct quality. For example: brain imaging studies show that hypnosis is distinct from the perrson merely imaging or pretending to imagine. Hypnosis works and therefore on this ground, NLP also works

NLP and science

At the time it was introduced, NLP was heralded as a breakthrough in therapy, and advertisements for training workshops, videos and books began to appear in trade magazines. The workshops provided certification. However, controlled studies shed such a poor light on the practice, and those promoting the intervention made such extreme and changeable claims that researchers began to question the wisdom of researching the area further.^[20] On the other hand, there are thousands of people attended NLP seminar regularly. For example, Tony Robbins draws 12,000 persons at the London's Excel Center. There is a small drop-out rate on Day 1 suggesting that it works for over 11,980 persons.

There are three main criticisms of NLP. However, it is often far too easy to critize a system than to determine the positive sides. Similarly many great discoveries in science were not accepted for a substantial length of time. On the other hand, for something to be true as opposed to a pseudoscience, it must be subject to proof. NLP proves itself, not by the theory in academic eyes, but rather by the practical results. It is the fastest, most powerful and most effective psychological method since the dawn of man.

1. NLP pretends to be a science but is really pseudoscience, for its claims are not based on the scientific method.

However, it must be borne in mind that every other psychotherapeutic method is not a science either ^[75]Its very name is a pretence to a legitimate discipline like neuroscience, neurolinguistics, and psychology. However it must be remembered that the name "psychology" at the time of inception purported to be a science too. Those who advanced it like Freud have now been shown to be great at literary fiction not scientific fact.

It has a large collection of scientific sounding terms, like eye accessing cues, metamodeling, micromodeling, metaprogramming, neurological levels, presuppositions, primary representational systems, modalities and submodalities. Corballis (1999) argues that "NLP is a thoroughly fake title, designed to give the impression of scientific respectability". However on the other hand NLP cannot be a "fake title" for it is not "faking another title by the same name" so Corballis is quite wrong. It is akin to stating that "Bank of America" is a fake title because unlike "Bank of England", the "Bank of America" is not part of the U.S. Treasury ^[55] According to Beyerstein (1995) "though it claims neuroscience in its pedigree, NLP's outmoded view of the relationship between cognitive style and brain function ultimately boils down to crude analogies."^[56] On the other hand, this same criticism applies to the entire field of psychology and psychotherapy, so it is dishonest to merely narrow such criticism towards NLP. NLP purports to be a practical results-orientated strategy. That is what draws tens of thousands of clients at seminars thoroughout the world. Most of the clients sign-up up to very expensive [though fairly priced] secondary and tertiary seminars, because of the phenomenal results that they experience at the primary seminar with such persons as Tony Robbins, Paul McKenna, Richard Bandler, Chris Howard, Tad James amongst so many others.

With reference to all the 'neuromythologies' covered in his article, including NLP, he states "In the long run perhaps the heaviest cost extracted by neuromythologists is the one common to all pseudosciences—deterioration in the already low levels of scientific literacy and critical thinking in society.".^[56] On the other hand, whereas pseudo-science of all types indeed results in the deterioration of critical thinking skills, NLP gets outstanding results. Many go onto soaring and successful marriages [sometimes that means marriage with some other person], great levels of wealth, and outstanding mental and physical health.

Some state that proponents of NLP often deny that it is based on theory.^[76]

1. There is little or no evidence or research to support its often extravagant claims apart from the fact that wholly or almost every single client of an NLP seminar comes out a raving fan and indeed "changed" within a very short time limit. No other psychotherapeutic method can advance such rapid change. Heap (1988) remarks ^[2] that if the assertions made by proponents of NLP about representational systems and their behavioural manifestations are correct, then its founders have made remarkable discoveries about the human mind and brain, which would have important implications for human psychology, particularly cognitive science and neuropsychology. Yet there is no mention of them in learned textbooks or journals devoted to these disciplines. Neither is this material taught on psychology courses at pre-degree and degree level. When Heap spoke to academic colleagues who spend much time researching and teaching in these fields, they showed little awareness, if any, of NLP.^[2][58] Heap (1988) argued that to arrive at such important generalisations about the human mind and behaviour would certainly require prolonged, systematic, and meticulous investigation of human subjects using robust procedures for observing, recording, and analysing the phenomena under investigation. "There is just no other way of doing this". Yet the founders of NLP never revealed any such research or investigation, and there is no evidence of its existence.^[2] Indeed, Bandler himself claimed it was not his job to prove any of his claims about the workings of the human mind, "The truth is, when we know how something is done, it becomes easy to change" (ibid).^[77] Tosey and Mathison say that "the pragmatic and often anti-theoretical stance by the founders has left a legacy of little engagement between practitioner and academic communities"^[60][61].
2. A significant amount of experimental research suggests that the central claims of NLP are unjustified. See NLP and science for a description of the literature. The majority of empirical research was carried out in the 1980s and 1990s consisted of laboratory experimentation testing Bandler and Grinder's hypothesis^[62] that a person's preferred sensory mode of thinking can be revealed by observing eye movement cues and sensory predicates in language use.^[60] A research review conducted by Christopher Sharpley in 1984^[63], followed by another review in 1987 in response to criticism by Einspruch and Forman^[64], concluded that there was little evidence for its usefulness as an effective counseling tool. Reviewing the literature in 1988, Michael Heap also concluded that objective and fair investigations had shown no support for NLP claims about 'preferred representational systems'.^[2] The conclusions of Heap and Sharpley have been contested^[65][64][19] on the grounds that the studies demonstrated an incomplete understanding of the claims of NLP and that the interviewers involved in the many of the studies had inadequate training/competence in NLP.^[60]

A research committee^[22] working for United States National Research Council led by Daniel Druckman came to two conclusions. First, the committee "found little if any evidence to support NLP’s assumptions or to indicate that it is effective as a strategy for social influence. It assumes that by tracking another’s eye movements and language, an NLP trainer can shape the person’s thoughts, feelings, and opinions (Dilts, 1983^[66]). There is no scientific support for these assumptions."^[67] Secondly, the committee "were impressed with the modeling approach used to develop the technique. The technique was developed from careful observations of the way three master psychotherapists conducted their sessions, emphasizing imitation of verbal and nonverbal behaviors... This then led the committee to take up the topic of expert modeling in the second phase of its work."^[67] These studies marked a decline in research interest in NLP generally, and particularly in matching sensory predicates and its use in counsellor-client relationship in counseling psychology.^[68] Beyerstein (1995) argued that NLP was based on outmoded scientific theories, and that its 'explanation' of the relationship between cognitive style and brain function was no more than crude analogy.^[56]

Concepts and methods

Modeling of Fritz Perls, Virginia Satir, and Milton Erickson

NLP began with the studies of three "master psychotherapists"^[67], Fritz Perls, Virginia Satir, and Milton Erickson. ^[78] Grinder and Bandler reviewed many hours of audio and video of the three therapists and spent months imitating how they worked with clients, in order to replicate or 'model' the communication patterns which supposedly made these individuals more successful than their peers.^[79] The studies were an attempt to identify why particular psychotherapists were so effective with their patients. Rather than take a purely theoretical approach, Bandler and Grinder sought to observe what the therapists were doing, categorize it, and 'model' it.^[80]

Bandler and Grinder aimed to learn and codify the "know-how" (as opposed to "know-what" [facts] or "know-why" [science]) that set these experts apart from their peers. The expert therapists knew what they were doing but there were tacit aspects of this knowledge (i.e., subtleties which cannot be explained or codified and can only be transmitted via training or gained through personal experience). In the initial phase of the modeling process, Bandler and Grinder spent months observing, in person and via recordings, and imitating how their models worked with clients.^[19] The initial part ("unconscious uptake") of the modeling process involved putting aside prior knowledge or expectations:

While the style and approach of these psychotherapists were apparently different, Bandler and Grinder believed that all experts in human communication (including Perls, Satir and Erickson) have patterns in common that could be learnt by others:

[...] when you watch and listen to Virginia Satir and Milton Erickson do therapy, they apparently could not be more different [...] People also report that the experiences of being with them are profoundly different. However, if you examine their behavior and the essential key patterns and sequences of what they do, they are similar. [...] The same was true of Fritz Perls [...] when he was operating in what I consider a powerful and effective way, he was using the same sequences of patterns that you will find in their work.

— Bandler and Grinder 1979, ^[62]

They claimed that there were a few common traits expert communicators – whether top therapists, top executives or top salespeople – all seemed to share:

• Everything they did in their work was in active pursuit of a clearly held goal or objective, rather than reacting to change.^[81]
• They were exceedingly flexible in approach and refused to be tied down to using their skills in any one fixed way of thinking or working.^[82][81]
• They had a strong awareness of the non-verbal feedback (unconscious communication and metaphor) they were getting, and responded to it ^[82][81] - usually in kind rather than by analyzing it ^[83]
• They enjoyed the challenges of difficult ("resistant") clients, seeing them as a chance to learn rather than an intractable "problem"
• They respected the client as someone doing the best they knew how (rather than judging them as "broken" or "working")
• They had certain common skills and things they were aware of and noticed, that were intuitively "wired in".^[82][84]
• They worked with precision, purpose and skill.^[85][84]
• They kept trying different approaches until they learned enough about the structure holding a problem in place to change it.^[82][81]

As a result, they claimed that there were only three behaviour patterns underlying successful communication in therapy, business and sales:

1. To know what outcome you want, to be flexible in your behaviour,
2. To generate different kinds of behaviour to find out what response you get, and
3. To have enough sensory experience to notice when you get the responses that you want.^[81]

The methods of observation and imitation Bandler and Grinder used to learn and codify the initial models of NLP came to be known as Modeling. Proponents maintain that NLP Modeling is not confined to therapy but can be applied to all human learning.^[86] Another aspect of NLP modeling is understanding the patterns of one's own behaviors in order to 'model' the more successful parts of oneself.

Meta model

The meta model can be seen as a heuristic that responds to the words and phrases that reveal unconscious limitations and faulty thinking — the distortions, generalizations and deletions in language. Bandler and Grinder observed similar patterns in the communication of Fritz Perls and Virginia Satir (and gleaned from a set of transformational grammar language categories). The meta model seeks to recover unspoken information, and to challenge generalization the other distorted messages that involve restrictive thinking and beliefs.^[18] The intent is to help someone develop new choice in thinking and behavior. By listening to and carefully responding to the distortions (generalizations and deletions) in a client's sentences, the practitioner seeks to respond to the syntactic form of the sentence rather than the content itself.

For example, if someone said, "everyone must love me," the message is overly general as it does not specify any particular person or group of people. Examples of meta model responses include "which people, specifically?" or "all people?" and questions to define the criteria that would be acceptable for this person to know when he or she is experiencing the state of "love". The practitioner also understands that words such as "must" also indicates necessity or lack of choice on the part of the speaker. A meta-model response might be, "what would happen if they did/didn't?" Practitioners choose when to respond and when not to, using softeners and linkage phrases from the Milton model to maintain rapport.

Milton model

In contrast to the Meta Model of NLP, which seeks to specify information, is the Milton Erickson-inspired Milton model described by Bandler and Grinder as "artfully vague"^[87]. In it the communicator makes statements that seem specific but allow the listener to fill in their own meaning for what is being said. It makes use of pacing and leading, ambiguity, metaphor, embedded suggestion, and multiple-meaning sentence structures. It has been described as "a way of using language to induce and maintain trance in order to contact the hidden resources of our personality".^[88] The Milton model has three primary aspects: First, to assist in building and maintaining rapport with the client. Second, to overload and distract the conscious mind so that unconscious communication can be cultivated. Third, to allow for interpretation in the words offered to the client.^[89]

After spending months closely studying Erickson's language (verbal and non-verbal) and imitating the way that Erickson worked with clients, Bandler and Grinder published the Milton model in 1976/1977 under the title The Patterns of Milton H. Erickson Volumes I & II^[90]. In the preface, Erickson said, "Although this book [...] is far from being a complete description of my methodologies, as they so clearly state it is a much better explanation of how I work than I, myself, can give. I know what I do, but to explain how I do it is much too difficult for me."^[90] Erickson was known for his use of unconventional approaches, including the use of stories, and for deeply entering the world of his clients. The Milton model is a way of communicating based on the hypnotic language patterns of Milton Erickson.^[91]

Representational systems and accessing cues

The basic assumption of NLP is that internal mental processes such as problem solving, memory, and language consist of visual, auditory, kinesthetic, (and possibly olfactory and gustatory) representations (often shortened to VAK or VAKOG) that are engaged when people think about problems, tasks, or activities, or engage in them. Internal sensory representations are constantly being formed and activated. Whether making conversation, talking about a problem, reading a book, kicking a ball, or riding a horse, internal representations have an impact on performance.^[22] NLP techniques generally aim to change behavior through modifying the internal representations, examining the way a person represents a problem, and building desirable representations of alternative outcomes or goals. In addition, Bandler and Grinder claimed that the representational system use could be tracked using eye movements, gestures, breathing, sensory predicates, and other cues in order to improve rapport and social influence.^[62]

Some of these ideas of sensory representations and associated therapeutic ideas appear to have been imported from gestalt therapy shortly after its creation in the 1970s.^[62]

Accessing cues

Bandler and Grinder claimed that matching and responding to the representational systems people use to think is generally beneficial for enhancing rapport and influence in communication.^[62] They proposed several models for this purpose including eye accessing cues and sensory predicates. The direction of eye accesses was considered an indicator of the type of internal mental process (see the eye accessing cue chart).

The sensory predicates, breathing posture and gestures were also considered important.^[62] In the sensory predicate model, if someone said:

• "that rings true for me", rings predicates auditory processing.
• "that's clearer now", the sensory predicates clearer indicates some internal visual representation.
• "I can see a bright future for myself", the sensory predicates see and bright indicates some internal visual processing.
• "I can grasp a hold of the concept", the sensory predicates grasp and hold indicates primarily kinesthetic processing

These verbal cues are often coupled with posture changes, eye movements, skin color, or breathing shifts. Essentially, it was claimed that the practitioner could ascertain the current sensory mode of thinking from external cues such as the direction of eye movements, posture, breathing, tone of voice, and the use of sensory-based predicates.

Preferred representational systems

The majority of research (as published in the Journal of Counseling Psychology in the early 1980s^[63]) focused on Bandler and Grinder's claim ^[62] that a preferred representational system (PRS) exists and is effective in counseling-client influence. Put simply, they claimed that some people prefer visual, auditory, or kinesthetic processing. Further, a therapist (or communicator) could be more influential by matching the other's preferred system. Christopher Sharpley's review of counselling psychology literature on PRS found that it could not be reliably assessed, it was not certain that it even existed, and it could not be demonstrated to reliably assist counselors.^[63] Buckner (published after Sharpley) found some support for the notion that eye movements can indicate visual and auditory components of thought in that moment.^[92]

While some NLP training programs and books still feature PRS, many have modified or dropped it. Richard Bandler, for example, de-emphasized its importance in an interview with the Enhancing Human Performance subcommittee.^[22] John Grinder, in the New Code of NLP, emphasizes individual calibration and sensory acuity, precluding such a rigidly specified model as the one described above. Responding directly to sensory experience requires an immediacy which respects the importance of context. Grinder also stated in an interview that a representational system diagnosis lasts about 30 seconds.^[19]

Submodalities

Submodalities are the fine details of sensory representational systems or modalities. In the late 1970s, the use of visual imagery was common in goal setting, sports psychology, and meditation. Not only did Bandler and Grinder begin to explore imagery in all sensory modalities (Visual, Auditory, Kinesthetic, Gustatory, and Olfactory), they also were interested in the qualities/properties of internal representations, the "submodalities".^[93]

Bandler and Grinder observed^[62] that for some people, by increasing the brightness, changing the color or location of an internal imagery, intensity of their state also increased. They observed similar patterns in different sensory modalities (e.g. Auditorial and Kinesthetic systems) in other people and changes depending on context.

This work with submodalities inspired a number of novel interventions within NLP, therapeutic, and personal development settings. For example, the swish pattern is proposed to reduce unwanted habits. It involves first deciding on a positive alternative. The desired alternative may be in the form of a representation of the self, resourceful and happy. The internal representations that previously triggered unwanted behavior are identified and recoded in the form of something that is uninteresting to the participant, typically small and dark. The desirable outcome recoded in a form of something that is highly motivating, typically bright, colourful, and large. After the initial preparation, the participant is asked to bring to mind the representation of the unwanted behavior. As this is brought to mind the participant immediately makes it small and dark and brings forth an image of the desired alternative. The process is repeated and revised as required. To test it, the participant then put himself into the context where the old behavior used to be triggered. The process is considered successful if the participant remains resourceful when recalling the context where the unwanted behavior used to occur and automatically thinks of the desired alternative.^[94]

Techniques

Rapport

NLP proposed a number of simple techniques involving matching, pacing and leading for establishing rapport with people.^[62] There are a number of techniques explored in NLP that are supposed to be beneficial in building and maintaining rapport such as: matching and pacing non-verbal behavior (body posture, head position, gestures, voice tone, and so forth) and matching speech and body rhythms of others (breathing, pulse, and so forth).^[62]

Anchoring

Anchoring is the process by which a particular state or response is associated (anchored) with a unique anchor. An anchor is most often a gesture, voice tone or touch but could be any unique visual, auditory, kinesthetic, olfactory or gustatory stimulus. It is claimed that by recalling past resourceful states one can anchor those states to make them available in new situations. A psychotherapist might anchor positive states like calmness and relaxation, or confidence in the treatment of phobias and anxiety, such as in public speaking.^[95] Proponents state that anchors are capable of being formed and reinforced by repeated stimuli, and thus are analogous to classical conditioning.

Anchoring appears to have been imported into NLP from family systems therapy as part of the 'model' of Virginia Satir.^[96]

Swish

Swish is a novel visualization technique for reducing unwanted habits. The process involves disrupting a pattern of thought that usually leads to an unwanted behavior such that it leads to a desired alternative. The process involves visualizing the trigger or 'cue image' that normally leads to the unwanted behavior pattern, such as a smoker's hand with a cigarette moving towards the face. The cue image is then switched a number of times with a visualization of a desired alternative, such as a self-image looking resourceful and fulfilled. The swish is tested by having the person think of the original cue image that used to lead to the undesired behavior, or by presenting the actual cue such as a cigarette to the client, while observing the responses. If the client stays resourceful then the process is complete. The name swish comes from the sound made by the practitioner/trainer as the visualizations are switched.^[97][98] Swish also makes use of submodalities, for example, the internal image of the unwanted behavior is typically shrunk to a small and manageable size and the desired outcome (or self-image) is enhanced by making it brighter and larger than normal.^[25] The swish was first published by Richard Bandler.^[25]

Reframing

In NLP, reframing is the process whereby an element of communication is presented so as to transform an individual's perception of the meanings or "frames" attributed to words, phrases and events.^[99] By changing the way the event is perceived "responses and behaviors will also change. Reframing with language allows you to see the world in a different way and this changes the meaning. Reframing is the basis of jokes, myths, legends, fairy tales and most creative ways of thinking."^[100] The concept was common to a number of therapies prior to NLP.^[21] For example, it appeared in the approaches of Virginia Satir, Fritz Perls and Milton Erickson and in strategic therapy of Paul Watzlawick.^[101] There are examples in children's literature. Pollyanna, for example, would play The Glad Game whenever she felt downhearted to remind herself of the things that she could do, and not worry about the things that she could not change.^[102]

Six step reframe

An example of reframing is found in the six-step reframe which involves distinguishing between an underlying intention and the consequent behaviors for the purpose of achieving the intention by different and more successful behaviors. It is based on the notion that there is a positive intention behind all behaviors, but that the behaviors themselves may be unwanted or counterproductive in other ways. NLP uses this staged process to identify the intention and create alternative choices to satisfy that intention.

Ecology and congruency

Ecology in NLP deals with the relationships between a client and his or her natural, social and created environments and how a proposed goal or change might retreat to his or her relationships and environment. It is a frame within which the desired outcome is checked against the consequences client's life and mind as systemic processes. It treats the client's relationship with self as a system and his or her relationship with others as subsystems that interact so when someone considers a change it is important therefore to take into account the consequences on the system as a whole.^[103] Like gestalt therapy^[104] a goal of NLP is to help the client choose goals and make changes that achieve a sense of personal congruency and integrity with personal and other aspects of the client's life.

Parts integration

Parts Integration creates a metaphor of different aspects (parts) of ourselves which are in conflict due to different goals, perceptions and beliefs. 'Parts integration' is the process of 'identifying' these parts and negotiating (or working) with each of these parts separately & together, with a goal of resolving internal conflict. Successful parts negotiation occurs by listening to and providing opportunities to meet the needs of each part and adequately addressing each part's interests so that they are each satisfied with the desired outcome. It often involves negotiating with the conflicting parts of a person to achieve resolution. Parts integration appears to be modeled on 'parts' from family therapy and has similarities to ego-state therapy in psychoanalysis in that it seeks to resolve conflicts that constitute a "family of self" within a single individual.

Uses

Psychotherapy

In contrast to mainstream psychotherapy, NLP does not concentrate on diagnosis, treatment and assessment of mental and behavioral disorders. Instead, it focuses on helping clients to overcome their own self-perceived, or subjective, problems. It seeks to do this while respecting their own capabilities and wisdom to choose additional goals for the intervention as they learn more about their problems, and to modify and specify those goals further as a result of extended interaction with a therapist. The two main therapeutic uses of NLP are use as an adjunct by therapists^[105] practicing in other therapeutic disciplines, or as a specific therapy called Neurolinguistic Psychotherapy (NLPt)^[106] which is a recognized by the UKCP.^[107]

Interpersonal communications and persuasion

While the main goals of Neuro-linguistic programming are therapeutic, the patterns have also been adapted for use outside of psychotherapy including business communication, management training^[108], sales^[109], sports^[110], and interpersonal influence^[22].

For some, the techniques, such as anchoring, reframing, therapeutic metaphor and hypnotic suggestion, were intended to be used in the therapeutic setting. Research in counseling psychology found rapport to be no more effective than existing listening skills taught to counselors.^{[citation needed]} Furthermore, Druckman found weak empirical support for PRS and little theoretical support in counseling psychology and the experimental literature for NLP as a technique for social influence.^[22] Sharpley concluded that most of the other techniques available in NLP were already available in counseling.

Outside of psychotherapy, the meta model, for example, is seen by some as a promising business management communication technique.^[111]

See also

• Gestalt therapy
• Hypnotherapy
• Family systems therapy
• The map is not the territory
• Provocative therapy
• Cognitive science
• Persuasion
• Sapir–Whorf hypothesis

Notes and references

Further reading

• Bandler, R., Grinder, J. (1979) Frogs into Princes: Neuro Linguistic Programming. Real People Press. 149 pages. ISBN 0911226192
• Bandler, R., Grinder, J. (1975) The Structure of Magic I: A Book About Language and Therapy Science and Behavior Books. 198 pages. ISBN 0831400447
• Bandler, R., Grinder, J. (1981) Reframing: Neuro-Linguistic Programming and the Transformation of Meaning Real People Press. ISBN 0911226257
• Bandler, R., Andreas, S. (ed) and Andreas, C. (ed) (1985) Using Your Brain-for a Change ISBN 0911226273
• Bradbury, A., Neuro-Linguistic Programming: Time for an Informed Review. Skeptical Intelligencer 11, 2008.
• Dilts, R., Hallbom, T., Smith, S. (1990) Beliefs: Pathways to Health & Well-being
• Dilts, R. (1990) Changing belief systems with NLP Meta Publications. ISBN 0916990249
• Grinder, M. Lori Stephens (Ed) (1991) Righting the Educational Conveyor Belt ISBN 1555520367
• Laborde, G. (1987) Influencing with Integrity: Management Skills for Communication and Negotiation
• Grinder, J., Bandler, R. (1976) Patterns of the Hypnotic Techniques of Milton H. Erickson Volume I ISBN 091699001X
• Newbrook, Mark, 'Linguistic aspects of "Neurolinguistic programming"', Skeptical Intelligencer 11, 2008.
• O'Connor, J., Seymour, J. Dilts, R. (foreword), Grinder, J. (preface) (1995) Introducing Neuro-linguistic Programming: The New Psychology of Personal Excellence Aquarian Press. 224 pages. ISBN 1852740736
• Satir, V., Grinder, J., Bandler, R. (1976) Changing with Families: A Book about Further Education for Being Human Science and Behavior Books. ISBN 083140051X
• Tosey P. & Mathison, J., "Fabulous Creatures Of HRD: A Critical Natural History Of Neuro-Linguistic Programming ", University of Surrey Paper presented at the 8th International Conference on Human Resource Development Research & Practice across Europe, Oxford Brookes Business School, 26th – 28th June 2007.

External links

Associations

• The Society of NLP: Richard Bandler[3], Christina Hall[4]
• http://www.imnlp-p.org European Association of NLP
• International Trainers Academy of NLP (ITA), initiated by John Grinder & Carmen Bostic St Clair
• The International Neuro-Linguistic Programming Trainer's Association (INLPTA), initiated by Wyatt Woodsmall
• Association for Neuro Linguistic Programming[5]
• American Board of NLP, initiated by Tad James
• List of German associations
• Professional Guild of NLP, UK-based
• International Association for NLP (IANLP)
• Neuro-linguistic psychotherapy: EANLPt - European accrediting organisation for NLPt, Neuro-linguistic psychotherapy & counselling Association (NLPtCA)

Research

• NLP and learning research (University of Surrey) hosted The First International Neuro-Linguistic Programming Research Conference
• Article on scientific validity of NLP
• Database and review of academic research
• Glossary of commonly used NLP terms
• Lee Lady's comments about history and development of NLP
• Extensive Library of articles in independent collaborative space for NLP
• Archives of NLP Magazine

Skeptics

• The Skeptic's Dictionary - Critical essay on NLP by Robert T. Carroll
• Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience