List of Studies in Neuro-linguistic Programming - Scientific Evaluation - Scientific Criticism

Scientific Criticism

The term "Neuro-linguistic programming" has been characterized as pseudo-scientific. Witkowski (2010) writes that "NLP represents pseudoscientific rubbish, which should be mothballed forever." Roderique-Davies (2009) states that "neuro" in NLP is "effectively fraudulent since NLP offers no explanation at a neuronal level and it could be argued that its use fallaciously feeds into the notion of scientific credibility". Witkowski (2010) also states that at the neuronal level NLP provides no explanation at all and has nothing in common with academic linguistics or programming. Similarly, experimental psychologist Corballis (1999) in his critique of lateralization of brain function (the left/right brain myth), states that "NLP is a thoroughly fake title, designed to give the impression of scientific respectability".

Witkowski (2010) states that NLP uses impressive sounding yet questionable expressions such as; pragmagraphics, surface structure, deep structure, accessing cues, non-accessing movement etc. Canadian skeptic and psychologist Barry Beyerstein (1995) also says that NLP contains terms such as eye accessing cues, metamodeling, metaprogramming, neurological levels, representational systems, and submodalities, intended to obfuscate and to give the false impression of a scientific discipline. He says, "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." Furthermore Beyerstein (1995) believed that NLP has helped popularize myths about the brain and neurology. He believes that the aphorism "you create your own reality" promotes a relativistic perspective and only seeks to gain immunity from scientific testing.

Grant Devilly (2005), a clinical psychologist, identified NLP as an early example of a power therapy. Devilly claims that these so called power therapies share characteristics of pseudo-science including: the promotion of unobtainable goals, rationalization traps, manufactured credibility, a set of specific beliefs, self generated persuasion, vivid appeals, the use of common misconceptions, and attacks on critics through the use of innuendo.

NLP has been criticized alongside theories and practices characterized as questionable, pseudoscience and/or discredited practices in therapy. Sources within therapy and psychology include books such as Crazy Therapies (1997), Science and Pseudo-science in Clinical Psychology (2002), and Tall Tales about the Mind and Brain (2007). Articles critical of NLP also appear in the Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience (2000), and The Skeptic's Dictionary (2003). NLP has more recently been used as a key example of pseudo-science to facilitate the understanding of the importance of rational and critical thinking in a number of academic subjects.

According to Witkowski (2010), NLP also appears on "the list of discredited therapies" published in the journal of Professional Psychology: Research and Practice. With reference to work by Carroll (2003), Della Sala (1999), Lilienfeld et al. (2003) and Singer and Lalich (1996) on "pseudoscientific, unvalidated, or "quack" psychotherapies" within clinical psychology, Norcross et al. included NLP for treatment of mental/behaviour disorders in a survey of the opinions of psychologists who rated NLP between possibly discredited and probably discredited, a rating similar to dolphin assisted therapy, equine therapy, psychosynthesis, scared straight programs, and emotional freedom technique (EFT). Norcross et al. listed "neurolinguistic programming for drug and alcohol dependence" seventh out of their list of the ten most discredited drugs and alcohol interventions, and it is listed as "certainly discredited" for addiction treatment in Evidence-based practices in addiction treatment: review and recommendations for public policy