The Hypnosis Technique Exchange (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HypnosisTechniqueExchange) has had a recent thread that developed – originating with a query regarding covert hypnosis courses and morphing into a discussion of the efficacy of Neurolinguistic Programming.
The original query was:
I hope that I won’t be bashed for asking this question. A while back I did a little research into covert hypnosis, and basically got no where. I am mostly looking into it for sales purposes…. Some people I click with in a weird way, and others I just have no chemistry with at all. Can this barrier be broken down with words? I have had some emails from some companies that claim that they have systems that work to subconsiously tell people what they need and make them more receptive to the suggestion. Well, that isn’t actually how they put it, but that would be what I would like to do.
My response . . .
In my experience, the vast majority of folks who are peddling “covert hypnosis” are either using a lot of hyperbole to suck folks into buying their programs which more times than not are really just regular hypnosis and nothing to do with covert operators or the programs have nothing to do with genuine hypnosis and are instead loose adaptations of social influence methods.
Stop looking for covert hypnosis and instead work on your social skills (rapport building is nice) along with genuine skills in social influence coupled with information on social psychology.
There are operators from hypnosis that can be combined with social influence to genuinely enhance your effectiveness as a communicator. However, keep in mind there are no Magick Bullets in influence and the folks who tout such pipe dreams are either vastly misunderstanding the genuine principles or they are liars out to manipulate you for their own financial gain.
Having said that, the Social Influence course at https://briandavidphillips.net/2012/03/03/dvt35-social-influence covers a great deal of very solid information. I built the course based upon current research in social psychology and communication (I have been teaching this area of communication at the university level for a bit more than two and half decades).
Don Gibbons took an interesting take on what I said and shifted it to NLP: “If we relied on common sense and ordinary observation, we would still believe that the Sun revolves around the Earth, and that a heavy object falls faster than a lighter one. Since Brian made his case so succinctly, I’m going to take the liberty of repeating his words, substituting NLP for covert hypnosis and see what we get” from which Dr. Gibbons adapted my statement to his thesis as follows:
“In my experience, the vast majority of folks who are peddling [“NLP”] are either using a lot of hyperbole to suck folks into buying their programs which more times than not are really just regular hypnosis and nothing to do with [“NLP”] or the programs have nothing to do with genuine hypnosis and are instead loose adaptations of social influence methods.
“Stop looking for [“NLP’] and instead work on your social skills (rapport building is nice) along with genuine skills in social influence coupled with information on social psychology.
“There are operators from hypnosis that can be combined with social influence to genuinely enhance your effectiveness as a communicator. However, keep in mind there are no Magick Bullets in influence and the folks who tout such pipe dreams are either vastly misunderstanding the genuine principles or they are liars out to manipulate you for their own financial gain.”
For more on Don’s take, see his Blog posting entitled, NLP: Where’s the Evidence? at http://hyperempiria.blogspot.com/2011/10/nlp-wheres-evidence.html
NLP is difficult to critique in the same way as it’s more often than not a loose collection of techniques rather than a particular protocol. There are particular presuppositions or principles in play – see https://briandavidphillips.net/2011/02/28/nlpdeepak for Dr. Joseph “Deepak” Vidmar’s excellent discussion of same – but for the most part people who employ NLP do so as separate techniques.
NLP has become more of a catch-all term for that collection of techniques or principles than representing a homogeneous approach. While some of the major players in the field may disagree with that assessment, many practitioners employ a few techniques and leave others out of it.
Some of the NLP debate becomes problematic in that there is often an assumption by some that the field is far more scientific than it is. Oh sure, there’s a LOT of linguistics in there, especially when one looks at the model as taught by John Grinder rather than the global hand waving of Richard Bandler. The very term Neurolinguistic Programming implies more rigor than is actually used by a large percentage of practitioners. It was born in the university with core modelling work from a linguist assisted by a mathematician but when it left the university (read, the Mind Fuck 101 histories for fascinating accounts) it lost much of that academic “baggage” and became a field of inherent contradictions. There are folks within NLP who use very rigorous approaches to working out efficacy and there are folks who are more the song-and-dance showmen more akin to a Nineteenth Century traveling snake oil salesman than a therapist. When dismissing the latter, it’s important not to diminish the former. In my opinion. Of course, one could globally throw out the whole business if that’s one’s prejudice or one could just sit mindlessly in the Temple of Nelp and accept anything and everything the Grande Guru of This or That throws at ’em from his High Dias of I-Know-What-I’m-Doing-Because-I-Say-So.
Embedded commands are generally included in NLP trainings but their actual use varies and certainly one can see a skill difference by particular practitioners (seriously, some folks are rather more than a whole lot heavy handed in their use). Regardless of how effective their appropriate use may be their application becomes both skill dependent and as much art as craft. Analog marking in written text is NOT the same as analog marking in spoken form. To take a script that has been written with odd capitalization and use that as an example of all use of embedded commands is very reductive as the use is so obvious as to become laughable. However, take the same paragraph and have someone read it with a appropriate intonation and variation in the appropriate places and the marks become less obvious and perhaps more effective. This sort of verbal play with words and tone comes in part from indirect hypnosis methods modeled from the likes of Milton Erickson and one can certainly find plenty of examples of academic studies that show efficacy.
However, that’s only one aspect of NLP, there are plenty of folks who don’t use or don’t really care about embedded commands.
There are academic studies on certain aspects of NLP, certainly more than a single study that employed a chunky script for club enrollment. There are NOT many studies, I grant you that. This is in part due to the nature of academics. Folks are often steered away from inquiry in areas that – right or wrong – have the taste of pseudoscience and NLP’s history has given it just such a taste (so has hypnosis for the most part). So those who do approach it are often seen as a bit more than a whole lot foolish or warned against putting their careers at risk lest their reputations become associated with Tony Robbins firewalks and other silliness.
However, if one breaks down particular principles or techniques, one will find more studies. Certainly, in language teaching, there are a number studies – not many but enough to show that there is at least a modicum of inquiry out there. Of course, one could then make a case that as NLP is more a collection of techniques and concepts borrowed from other fields of inquiry it can safely be dismissed as a “school” of therapy. I would suggest not. Some but not all NLP is derivative but this neither invalidates nor affirms the general construct.
Even so, the lack of studies specifically referencing the broad construct NLP is not an appropriate reason to dismiss a field outright.
Even if some NLP is nonsense or misconstrued wishful thinking or out of date (the eye accessing cue material is still often taught in a rigid system that is no longer supported by studies, calibration, calibration, calibration is much more important than the rigid patters still often taught – the cues work but not in the rigid form often taught), this does not build a strong enough case to dismiss the entire package. Rather, it can only be said that this or that hasn’t been borne out by data.
As to the adaptation of my point from the covert hypnosis thread. Please bear in mind that I was NOT speaking of NLP as a field, I was addressing a question on covert hypnosis. Granted, some folks who sell covert hypnosis are using rebranded NLP and far too many folks who sell NLP repurpose it to sales with emphasis on manipulation and coercion.
“In my experience, the vast majority of folks who are peddling [“NLP”] are either using a lot of hyperbole to suck folks into buying their programs which more times than not are really just regular hypnosis and nothing to do with [“NLP”] or the programs have nothing to do with genuine hypnosis and are instead loose adaptations of social influence methods. Stop looking for [“NLP’] and instead work on your social skills (rapport building is nice) along with genuine skills in social influence coupled with information on social psychology.”
Some would say this same adaptation line – if applied toward NLP, could also be repurposed toward hypnotists or psychologists or crystal healers or preachers or the like. However, this does NOT indict the field only the faulty advertising. Among hypnotists, we see quite a few folks use claims that are not borne out by actual data or research and the over-use of hyperbole has damaged the reputation of the whole and yet these activities by slimeballs and creeps does NOT invalidate the actual efficacy of hypnosis (granted, there is a LOT more research to show positive effectiveness of hypnosis, in part because the history of folks bucking the trend is longer and so a respected field has come into being – and yet, I still come across folks whose Psychology 101 professors taught them that hypnosis doesn’t exist or it’s “just pretend” in a way that completely misunderstands the social role theories they seem to be teaching but really only use to dismiss an entire field – hint social role and suggestion compliance theories in regard to hypnosis don’t mean what most folks think they mean).
I absolutely agree that there are folks peddling NLP who do so with hyperbole and misdirection. I absolutely agree that there are folks who tout the manipulation capable with NLP who are overselling or misunderstanding the genuine possibilities. My students who have participated in my social influence courses at the university as well as the students of my critical thinking course in the HPTI program (http://www.hpti.org) will recall the Quintillian Paradigm and so understand my own deep prejudice against the use of social influence or rhetoric to manipulate.
However, while dismissing such snake oil salesmen, I would NOT wish to throw out techniques that can and do help folks. The Fast Phobia Cure does work for many people in terms of bringing immediate relief. Swish can be helpful. Some tried and true NLP techniques are essentially based upon a form of waking suggestion and I am okay with that (personally, I tend to use most NLP methods in my toolbox with a formal hypnotic induction – my business card says hypnotist so I place my sessions within that context and the ritual of a formal induction and the engagement of the unconscious in that way tends to enhance my results with such methods but just as I’ve used many “hypnotic” methods in a “waking” state without formal induction, I understand certain NLP methods work fine as is). Or . . . at least I have had good results in general.
Of course, in my response to the covert hypnosis query, I used a qualifying phrase “in my experience” . . . I was not speaking as a generalization for everyone’s experience and am perfectly happy to hear someone else’s experience that may be different from my own.
A word worth keeping in mind when discussing areas such as this is SOMBUNALL . . . some but not all NLP methods are shite. Or, if you prefer, “Sombunall of BDP’s posts almost sort of maybe could sort of make sense or not.”
I gots to go get me one of them big ol’ diases. 🙂
If you’re in Taipei and interested in hypnosis, check the services page linked to in the top left sidebar. Not in Taipei, check the store for recordings in the same menu area as well as links to lots and lots of info and goodies.
Brian
www.BrianDavidPhillips.com
