NLP and Coaching

By October 2, 2016 January 1st, 2017 ADI's, Uncategorized

NLP or Neuro-lingistic Programming and Coaching.

Again often linked with coaching and training courses NLP seems to be invading the fringes of driver training.

I’ll just copy the salient points from the Wiki article:

There is no scientific evidence supporting the claims made by NLP advocates and it has been discredited as a pseudoscience by experts.[1][12] Scientific reviews state that NLP is based on outdated metaphors of how the brain works that are inconsistent with current neurological theory and contain numerous factual errors.[13][14] Reviews also found that all of the supportive research on NLP contained significant methodological flaws and that there were three times as many studies of a much higher quality that failed to reproduce the “extraordinary claims” made by Bandler, Grinder, and other NLP practitioners.[2][12] Even so, NLP has been adopted by some hypnotherapists and also by companies that run seminars marketed as leadership training to businesses and government agencies.[3][13]


“In the early 1980s, NLP was advertised as an important advance in psychotherapy and counseling, and attracted some interest in counseling research and clinical psychology. However, as controlled trials failed to show any benefit from NLP and its advocates made increasingly dubious claims, scientific interest in NLP faded.[88][89] Numerous literature reviews and meta-analyses have failed to show evidence for NLP’s assumptions or effectiveness as a therapeutic method.[90] While some NLP practitioners have argued that the lack of empirical support is due to insufficient research testing NLP,[91] the consensus scientific opinion is that NLP is pseudoscience[92] and that attempts to dismiss the research findings based on these arguments “[constitute]s an admission that NLP does not have an evidence base and that NLP practitioners are seeking a post-hoc credibility.”[93] Surveys in the academic community have shown NLP to be widely discredited among scientists.[94] Among the reasons for considering NLP a pseudoscience are that evidence in favor of it is limited to anecdotes and personal testimony,[95] that it is not informed by scientific understanding of neuroscience and linguistics,[96] and that the name “neuro-linguistic programming” uses jargon words to impress readers and obfuscate ideas, whereas NLP itself does not relate any phenomena to neural structures and has nothing in common with linguistics or programming.[97] In fact, in education, NLP has been used as a key example of pseudoscience.[98]