Home | News/Blog | Training | Consultancy | Events/Booking | Resources | People/Contact | Subscriptions | Accreditation | Legal | Sitemap |
NEWSFLASH!
Rodger Bailey, who developed Meta Programs into the Language and Behaviour Profile (LAB Profile) has re-engineered and updated it to version 2.0
I will update this page with links to the FREE training sessions he will post everyday until the online training starts in a week. (21 March 2017)
Rolling Eyes Over
Flawed University Research This July, notably during the Silly Season a research paper was lodged with the PLoSONE research database entitled The Eyes Dont Have It: Lie Detection and Neuro-Linguistic Programming thereby tarnishing the reputation of three universities: Hertfordshire, Edinburgh and British Columbia. The research team was led by Professor Richard Wiseman. The research study purported to show evidence that the Eye Accessing Cues model of Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) as used by NLP Practitioners to detect lying was false. In doing so they have created a classic Straw Man argument. Had they limited the scope of the research to the exposure of a simplistic urban myth, which undoubtedly has merit from good intentions, some of the results may have had validity. And welcome support of the NLP Community. The paper confirms the originators of NLP, Richard Bandler and John Grinder did not propose that eye accessing cues could be used to detect lying. However, the paper suggests that the notion is commonplace, but does not quantify these sources or give an indication as to how widespread this urban myth has spread. It suggests erroneously that these sources or people are NLP Practitioners who claim an insight into whether people are lying from their eye movements. Throughout the paper, the number of NLP Practitioners constantly changes; from the inference of all to many and some. If I dress a wound, take a blood pressure reading, or recommend eating more fruit, I may practise medicine but I would not call myself a medical practitioner. In the same way, people who use or practice NLP techniques and create YouTube video clips may not necessarily be NLP Practitioners. Such practitioners usually qualify after completing a course of skills training, rather than simply reading a book. Therefore to say that NLP Practitioners as a group claim lie detection skills with eye accessing cues is a fallacy of composition. The three experiments passed by the respective ethics committees of the universities overlooked the fact the NLP model was not, in fact, tested. The paper details a severely edited version detailing only eye accessing cues relating to vision. Furthermore a specific vision pattern was removed along with other accessing cues. This new Wisemans Chimera, presumably linked to the experiments as part of an NLP training Sheet was further altered by the addition of specific measures (of angles of degree) which are not mentioned in the original model. Therefore claiming the NLP model was tested, is false.
Examples of Eye Accessing Cues demonstrated by unimpeachable sources:
Images courtesy of BBC and Richard Dawkins. For a more in-depth critique about academic research and NLP, I recommend Andy Bradbury's well regarded website: The original press release EYE ACCESSING CUES Study by Edinburgh and Hertfordshire Univerities. |
|
PRESS RELEASE PSYCHOLOGY STUDY SUPPORTS NLP BY EXPLODING URBAN MYTH ABOUT LIE DETECTION. Steve Cowie, Managing Director of Odyssey Ltd and NLP Trainer, welcomes the results of the psychology research carried out by Edinburgh and Hertfordshire Universities. He states: The NLP community in the main, Im sure, will welcome the research which concludes that lie detection by a single eye accessing cue in isolation is false. It is disappointing that a few misguided individuals whether they have received rudimentary training or not have fanned the flames of this particular urban myth and claim it is NLP when it is not. Regrettably this appears to include the research team who also fallaciously compound their error by attributing the few unknown unskilled and uncounted proponents to the entire NLP community. The multiplicity of eye accessing cues (which were not discussed in any depth within the report) can, in conjunction with other micro-movements or gestures, known generally as tells, give an insight into how people make sense of their world. A comprehensive study of each individual participant is important to ensure that they use a cue consistently within each context. For example, a friend (not even trained in NLP) could tell, over time, when her husband was lying, by the particular micro-movement of his eyebrows. My constructive criticism of the research methodology carried out by the universities would include many limiting factors and criteria in the selection and calibration of the participants, for behavioural cues generated by participants may change between each of the three contexts in which the experiments were carried out. Of particular importance would be the skills training of researchers to observe and collect the complex set of multi-sensory data, over time, not just static visual cues. There is no indication of the depth of researcher training. Furthermore, there are some references of previous studies quoted at the end of the report that have been criticised as not being academically rigorous. Therefore the research integrity is seriously weakened. ENDS Steve Cowie MSc, is the Managing Director of Odyssey Ltd and an NLP Trainer. He is a Chartered Member of the Chartered Institute of Personnel & Development Amended 15 Jul 2012 19:00 |
|
Please call
free: 0800 019 0117 email steve {dot} cowie {at}
odyssey {dot} ltd {dot} uk |
© Odyssey Ltd 2004-17 All rights reserved