The magic of NLP

NLP – Does it really work?
I have at last found a source of information detailing scientific research on NLP. The following German web site has a fascinating database that lists close to 180 references on academic and scientific research that has been conducted on NLP.

http://www.nlp.de/research/index.html

A total of 177 research papers were referenced.

26 research studies were written in a language other than English and I could not analyse them.

58 research studies were inconclusive, irrelevant to this report or drew no formal conclusions

The remaining studies often looked at more than one concept of NLP, indeed it would be virtually impossible not to, for example predicates and representational systems were often cited in the same paper, hence some of the studies may appear cited in more than one of the following breakdowns.

35 research studies looked at the validity of eye accessing cues. Only 8 of these studies (23%) supported the use and legitimacy of eye accessing cues. The rest, 27 (77%) stated that eye accessing cues appeared to have no significant positive or negative impact when utilised in personal interactions.

32 research studies looked at the validity of predicates. 21 of these studies (66%) found that the use of predicates had little to no influence in building or enhancing rapport. (An interesting observation about predicates however was that two of the studies demonstrated that there was a stronger correlation between personality type and predicates used than there was with any other factor they encountered.)

36 research studies looked at the concept of representational systems. 29 of these studies (80%) found no bona fide evidence to support the use of representational systems and concluded that they did not appear to play a significant role in communications.

5 out of 9 research studies undertaken (56%) found that phobia cures worked and were effective.

One Response

garry platt says:

February 21, 2000 at 4:30 pm

NLP – Does it really work?
I have at last found a source of information detailing scientific research on NLP. The following German web site has a fascinating database that lists close to 180 references on academic and scientific research that has been conducted on NLP.

http://www.nlp.de/research/index.html

A total of 177 research papers were referenced.

26 research studies were written in a language other than English and I could not analyse them.

58 research studies were inconclusive, irrelevant to this report or drew no formal conclusions

The remaining studies often looked at more than one concept of NLP, indeed it would be virtually impossible not to, for example predicates and representational systems were often cited in the same paper, hence some of the studies may appear cited in more than one of the following breakdowns.

35 research studies looked at the validity of eye accessing cues. Only 8 of these studies (23%) supported the use and legitimacy of eye accessing cues. The rest, 27 (77%) stated that eye accessing cues appeared to have no significant positive or negative impact when utilised in personal interactions.

32 research studies looked at the validity of predicates. 21 of these studies (66%) found that the use of predicates had little to no influence in building or enhancing rapport. (An interesting observation about predicates however was that two of the studies demonstrated that there was a stronger correlation between personality type and predicates used than there was with any other factor they encountered.)

36 research studies looked at the concept of representational systems. 29 of these studies (80%) found no bona fide evidence to support the use of representational systems and concluded that they did not appear to play a significant role in communications.

5 out of 9 research studies undertaken (56%) found that phobia cures worked and were effective.