The Psychology of Winning ~ Kiyosaki's ~ The Psychology of Winning

The Psychology of Winning ~ Kiyosaki's ~ The Psychology of Winning 

The Psychology of Winning ~ Kiyosaki's ~ The Psychology of Winning 

 

For women who insist on being financially independent and not depending on a man, family, company or government to take care of them. 

 

Rich Woman: A Book on Investing for Women

The Psychology of Winning ~ Kiyosaki's ~ The Psychology of Winning

This book highlights for us women why we need to take an interest in our financial future and stop burying our head in the sand, hoping that if we work hard and save, save, save that all will be well. Kim Kiyosaki teaches that investing and increasing our cash flow so that our money works hard for us rather than us having to work hard for money is the way to become financially free. She explains in very simple terms what it means to be financially free and how to get there by changing our thinking about money and investing. This is a very good book - highly recommended reading for all women. Read some of her other books and the Rich Dad Poor Dad collection, play the Cashflow game and see these truths come to life.

The Millionaire Next Door Thomas J Stanley

The Millionaire Next Door Thomas J Stanley      

                  

The Millionaire Next Door Thomas J Stanley 

 

Thomas J. Stanley is an American writer and business theorist. He is the author of several award winning books on America's wealthy, including the New York Times’ best sellers The Millionaire Next Door and The Millionaire Mind. He received a doctorate in business administration from the University of Georgia. He was on the faculty of the University at Albany, State University of New York. He taught marketing at the University of Tennessee, University of Georgia and Georgia State University (where he was named Omicron Delta Kappa's Outstanding Professor).^[1]

Contents

• 1 Books
• 2 Significant articles
• 3 References
• 4 Resources
• 5 External links

Books

Marketing to the Affluent, McGraw-Hill, 1988, ISBN 0-07-061047-9 Selling to the Affluent, McGraw-Hill, 1991, ISBN 0-07-061049-5 Networking with the Affluent and Their Advisors, McGraw-Hill, 1993, ISBN 0-07-061048-7 The Millionaire Next Door, Longstreet Press,1996, ISBN 978-1-56352-330-4 The Millionaire Mind, Andrews McMeel Publishing, LLC, 2000 ISBN 0-7407-1858-4 Millionaire Women Next Door, Andrews McMeel Publishing, LLC, 2004, ISBN 0-7407-4532-8 Stop Acting Rich: And Start Living Like A Real Millionaire, John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2009, ISBN 0-470-48255-9

Significant articles

"America's Affluent", American Demographics 1984
"Investment Management and the Affluent Customer", The Bankers Magazine 1984
"The Response of Affluent Consumers to Mail Surveys", Journal of Advertising Research 1986
"How to Network with Affluent Client Prospects", Marketing for Lawyers 1993
"How to Live Like a Millionaire", Reader's Digest, originally published as "Why You're Not as Wealthy as You Should Be", 1993
"Ways to Add Value for Clients", Journal of Accountancy 1994
"The Doctor who Manages his Own Investments Has a Fool for a Client", Medical Economics 2000

The Millionaire Next Door Thomas J Stanley 

 

 

Brian Tracy Eat That Frog!: 21 Great Ways to Stop Procrastinating

Brian Tracy Eat That Frog!: 21 Great Ways to Stop Procrastinating

                      

Brian Tracy Eat That Frog!: 21 Great Ways to Stop Procrastinating 

 

 

Brian Tracy Eat That Frog!: 21 Great Ways to Stop Procrastinating 

 

[hide]This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. This article needs more links to other articles to help integrate it into the encyclopedia. (February 2013) A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. (December 2012) This article has been nominated to be checked for its neutrality. (September 2011)

Brian Tracy
Born	January 5, 1944 (age 70) Charlottetown, PEI, Canada
Occupation	Author Public Speaker Professional speaker Entrepreneur Business Coach Keynote Speaker
Spouse(s)	Barbara Tracy (m. 1979)

Brian Tracy (born January 5, 1944) is a motivational speaker and author.

Contents

• 1 Politics
• 2 Quotes
• 3 Bibliography
• 4 References
• 5 External links

Politics

Tracy ran for governor in the 2003 California gubernatorial recall election that saw Gray Davis pushed out of power, and Arnold Schwarzenegger elected.^[1]
Tracy is a member of the board of trustees for the Heritage Foundation, a conservative Washington, D.C.-based public policy research institute.^[2]

Quotes

• "You are the architect of your own destiny; you are the master of your own fate; you are behind the steering wheel of your life. There are no limitations to what you can do, have, or be. Except the limitations you place on yourself by your own thinking.^[3]

Bibliography

• Maximum Achievement: Strategies and Skills That Will Unlock Your Hidden Powers to Succeed (1993) ISBN 0-671-86518-8
• Advanced Selling Strategies: The Proven System of Sales Ideas, Methods, and Techniques Used by Top Salespeople Everywhere (1995) ISBN 0-684-82474-4
• The Psychology of Selling: The Art of Closing Sales (1995) ISBN 978-0-7435-2069-0
• Jones and the Salesman (1999)
• The 100 Absolutely Unbreakable Laws of Business Success (2000) ISBN 1-57675-126-0
• The 21 Success Secrets of Self-Made Millionaires: How to Achieve Financial Independence Faster and Easier Than You Ever Thought Possible (2001) ISBN 1-58376-205-1
• Eat that Frog: 21 Ways to stop Procrastination and get More Done in Less Time (2001) ISBN 1-58376-202-7
• Get Paid More and Promoted Faster (2001) ISBN 1-58376-207-8
• Focal Point (2001) American Management Association ISBN 0-8144-7278-8
• Victory!: Applying the Proven Principles of Military Strategy to Achieve Success in Your Business and Personal Life (2002) ISBN 0-8144-0750-1
• Be a Sales Superstar: 21 Great Ways to Sell More, Faster, Easier in Tough Markets (2002) ISBN 1-57675-175-9
• Create Your Own Future: How to Master the 12 Critical Factors of Unlimited Success (2002) ISBN 0-471-25107-0
• Goals!: How To Get Everything You Want—Faster Than You Ever Thought Possible (2003) ISBN 978-1-57675-235-7
• Turbostrategy: 21 Powerful Ways to Transform your Business and Boost Your Profits Quickly (2003) ISBN 0-8144-7193-5
• Change Your Thinking, Change Your Life (2003) ISBN 0-471-44858-3
• Getting Rich Your Own Way: Achieve All Your Financial Goals Faster Than You Ever Thought Possible (2004) ISBN 0-471-65264-4
• Tracy, Brian (2004). Million Dollar Habits: Proven Power Practices to Double and Triple Your Income. Irvine, California: Entrepreneur Press. ISBN 978-1-93-215670-6.
• Time Power: A Proven System for Getting More Done in Less Time Than You Ever Thought Possible (2004) American Management Association ISBN 0-8144-7247-8
• Something for Nothing : The All-Consuming Desire that Turns the American Dream into a Social Nightmare (2005) ISBN 1-59555-038-0
• The Power of Charm: How to Win Anyone over in Any Situation (2006) American Management Association ISBN 0-8144-7357-1
• Crunch Point: The 21 Secrets to Succeeding When It Matters Most (2006) American Management Association ISBN 978-0-8144-7371-9
• Flight Plan: The Real Secret of Success (2008) ISBN 1-57675-497-9
• The Miracle of Self-discipline: The "No-Excuses" Way to Getting Things Done (2010) ISBN 1-908364-04-1
• Earn what You're Really Worth: Maximize Your Income at Any Time in Any Market (2012)
• The Ultimate Success Guide (2013)

 

The Wining Attitude By JOHN C MAXWELL AUDIOBOOK

The Wining Attitude By JOHN C MAXWELL AUDIOBOOK  

 

The Wining Attitude By JOHN C MAXWELL AUDIOBOOK

 

Definitions

An attitude can be defined as a positive or negative evaluation of people, objects, event, activities, ideas, or just about anything in your environment, but there is debate about precise definitions. Eagly and Chaiken, for example, define an attitude "a psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favor or disfavor."^[3] Though it is sometimes common to define an attitude as affect toward an object, affect (i.e., discrete emotions or overall arousal) is generally understood to be distinct from attitude as a measure of favorability.^[4]
This definition of attitude allows for one's evaluation of an attitude object to vary from extremely negative to extremely positive, but also admits that people can also be conflicted or ambivalent toward an object meaning that they might at different times express both positive and negative attitude toward the same object. This has led to some discussion of whether individual can hold multiple attitudes toward the same object.^[5]
Whether attitudes are explicit (i.e., deliberately formed) versus implicit (i.e., subconscious) has been a topic of considerable research. Research on implicit attitudes, which are generally unacknowledged or outside of awareness, uses sophisticated methods involving people's response times to stimuli to show that implicit attitudes exist (perhaps in tandem with explicit attitudes of the same object). Implicit and explicit attitudes seem to affect people's behavior, though in different ways. They tend not to be strongly associated with each other, although in some cases they are. The relationship between them is poorly understood.
On the other hand, the Iterative Reprocessing (IR) Model takes an integrated approach to understanding attitudes instead of distinguishing between implicit and explicit attitude. According to the IR model (Cunningham & Zelazo, 2007; Cunningham, Zelazo, Packer, & Van Bavel, 2007), attitudes are characterized as evaluation, which refers to process of unfolding an emergent property of multiple processes during a period of time. According to the theory, it is differences in information processing, not different attitudinal representations stored in discrete memory systems, that cause differences in evaluation (Van Bavel, Xiao, & Cunningham, 2012). The IR model proposes a connectionist framework. In this frame work, attitudes are defined as stable unit weights, whereas evaluations refer to the current pattern of activation of the units (Cunningham et al., 2007). Unit weights consist of valence and intensity (Van Bavel et al., 2012). Depending on the level of valence and intensity, the extent to which evaluation is influenced by context, motivation, and goals will be different (Van Bavel et al. 2012). The IR model suggests the involvement of numerous interactive neural systems in processing information (Van Bavel et al., 2012). According to the model, information is processed in a form of hierarchy. Iterations will be added to move to the next evaluative processing (Van Bavel et al., 2012). This model provides a greater understanding of how contextual information and motivational factors affect all stages of evaluative system including the prior states. In sum, instead of treating attitudes as two independent representations in memory, the model suggests that attitude refers to processing emergent properties in concert with contextual information and goal setting in a hierarchical order.

Jung's definition

Attitude is one of Jung's 57 definitions in Chapter XI of Psychological Types. Jung's definition of attitude is a "readiness of the psyche to act or react in a certain way" (Jung, [1921] 1971:par. 687). Attitudes very often come in pairs, one conscious and the other unconscious. Within this broad definition Jung defines several attitudes.
The main (but not only) attitude dualities that Jung defines are the following.

• Consciousness and the unconscious. The "presence of two attitudes is extremely frequent, one conscious and the other unconscious. This means that consciousness has a constellation of contents different from that of the unconscious, a duality particularly evident in neurosis" (Jung, [1921] 1971: par. 687).
• Extraversion and introversion. This pair is so elementary to Jung's theory of types that he labeled them the "attitude-types".
• Rational and irrational attitudes. "I conceive reason as an attitude" (Jung, [1921] 1971: par. 785).
• The rational attitude subdivides into the thinking and feeling psychological functions, each with its attitude.
• The irrational attitude subdivides into the sensing and intuition psychological functions, each with its attitude. "There is thus a typical thinking, feeling, sensation, and intuitive attitude" (Jung, [1921] 1971: par. 691).
• Individual and social attitudes. Many of the latter are "isms".

In addition, Jung discusses the abstract attitude. “When I take an abstract attitude...” (Jung, [1921] 1971: par. 679). Abstraction is contrasted with creationism. “CREATIONISM. By this I mean a peculiarity of thinking and feeling which is the antithesis of abstraction” (Jung, [1921] 1971: par. 696). For example: "I hate his attitude for being Sarcastic."

Measurements

Many measurements and scales are used to examine attitudes. Attitudes can be difficult to measure because measurement is arbitrary, meaning people have to give attitudes a scale to measure it against, and attitudes are ultimately a hypothetical construct that cannot be observed directly.
Following the explicit-implicit dichotomy, attitudes can be examined through direct and indirect measures.

Explicit

Explicit measures tend to rely on self-reports or easily observed behaviors. These tend to involve bipolar scales (e.g., good-bad, favorable-unfavorable, support-oppose, etc.).^[6] Explicit measures can also be used by measuring the straightforward attribution of characteristics to nominate groups, such as "I feel that baptists are....?" or "I think that men are...?"^[7] Likert scales and other self-reports are also commonly used.

Implicit

Implicit measures are not consciously directed and are assumed to be automatic, which may make implicit measures more valid and reliable than explicit measures (such as self-reports). For example, people can be motivated such that they find it socially desirable to appear to have certain attitudes. An example of this is that people can hold implicit prejudicial attitudes, but express explicit attitudes that report little prejudice. Implicit measures help account for these situations and look at attitudes that a person may not be aware of or want to show.^[8] Implicit measures therefore usually rely on an indirect measure of attitude. For example, the Implicit Association Test (IAT) examines the strength between the target concept and an attribute element by considering the latency in which a person can examine two response keys when each has two meanings. With little time to carefully examine what the participant is doing they respond according to internal keys. This priming can show attitudes the person has about a particular object.^[9]

Structure

This section requires expansion. (September 2012)

The classic, tripartite view offered by Rosenberg and Hovland ^[10] is that an attitude contains cognitive, affective, and behavioral components. Empirical research, however, fails to support clear distinctions between thoughts, emotions, and behavioral intentions associated with a particular attitude.^[11] A criticism of the tripartite view of attitudes is that it requires cognitive, affective, and behavioral associations of an attitude to be consistent, but this may be implausible. Thus some views of attitude structure see the cognitive and behavioral components as derivative of affect or affect and behavior as derivative of underlying beliefs.^[12]
Despite debate about the particular structure of attitudes, there is considerable evidence that attitudes reflect more than evaluations of a particular object that vary from positive to negative. Attitudes also have other characteristics, such as importance, certainty, or accessibility (measures of attitude strength) and associated knowledge.^[13]
There is also considerable interest in inter-attitudinal structure, which connects different attitudes to one another and to more underlying psychological structures, such as values or ideology.^[14]

Function

Another classic view of attitudes is that attitudes serve particular functions for individuals. That is, researchers have tried to understand why individuals hold particular attitudes or why they hold attitudes in general by considering how attitudes affect the individuals who hold them.^[15] Daniel Katz, for example, writes that attitudes can serve "instrumental, adjustive or utilitarian," "ego-defensive," "value-expressive," or "knowledge" functions.^[16] The functional view of attitudes suggests that in order for attitudes to change (e.g., via persuasion), appeals must be made to the function(s) that a particular attitude serves for the individual. As an example, the "ego-defensive" function might be used to influence the racially prejudicial attitudes of an individual who sees themselves as open-minded and tolerant. By appealing to that individual's image of themselves as tolerant and open-minded, it may be possible to change their prejudicial attitudes to be more consistent with their self-concept. Similarly, a persuasive message that threatens self-image is much more likely to be rejected.^[17]
Daniel Katz classified attitudes into four different groups based on their functions

1. Utilitarian: provides us with general approach or avoidance tendencies
2. Knowledge: help people organize and interpret new information
3. Ego-defensive: attitudes can help people protect their self-esteem
4. Value-expressive: used to express central values or beliefs

Utilitarian People adopt attitudes that are rewarding and that help them avoid punishment. In other words any attitude that is adopted in a person's own self-interest is considered to serve a utilitarian function. Consider you have a condo, people with condos pay property taxes, and as a result you don't want to pay more taxes. If those factors lead to your attitude that " Increases in property taxes are bad" you attitude is serving a utilitarian function.
Knowledge People need to maintain an organized, meaningful, and stable view of the world. That being said important values and general principles can provide a framework for our knowledge. Attitudes achieve this goal by making things fit together and make sense. Example:

• I believe that I am a good person.
• I believe that good things happen to good people.
• Something bad happens to Bob.
• So I believe Bob must not be a good person.

Ego-Defensive This function involves psychoanalytic principles where people use defense mechanisms to protect themselves from psychological harm. Mechanisms include:

• Denial
• Repression
• Projection
• Rationalization

The ego-defensive notion correlates nicely with Downward Comparison Theory which holds the view that derogating a less fortunate other increases our own subjective well-being. We are more likely to use the ego-defensive function when we suffer a frustration or misfortune.
Value-Expressive

• Serves to express one's central values and self-concept.
• Central values tend to establish our identity and gain us social approval thereby showing us who we are, and what we stand for.

An example would concern attitudes toward a controversial political issue.

Formation

According to Doob (1947), learning can account for most of the attitudes we hold. The study of attitude formation is the study of how people form evaluations of persons, places or things. Theories of classical conditioning, instrumental conditioning and social learning are mainly responsible for formation of attitude. Unlike personality, attitudes are expected to change as a function of experience. In addition, exposure to the 'attitude' objects may have an effect on how a person forms his or her attitude. This concept was seen as the "Mere-Exposure Effect". Robert Zajonc showed that people were more likely to have a positive attitude on 'attitude objects' when they were exposed to it frequently than if they were not. Mere repeated exposure of the individual to a stimulus is a sufficient condition for the enhancement of his atitude toward it.^[18] Tesser (1993) has argued that hereditary variables may affect attitudes - but believes that they may do so indirectly. For example, consistency theories, which imply that we must be consistent in our beliefs and values. As with any type of heritability, to determine if a particular trait has a basis in our genes, twin studies are used.^[19] The most famous example of such a theory is Dissonance-reduction theory, associated with Leon Festinger, which explains that when the components of an attitude (including belief and behavior) are at odds an individual may adjust one to match the other (for example, adjusting a belief to match a behavior).^[20] Other theories include balance theory, originally proposed by Heider (1958), and the self-perception theory, originally proposed by Daryl Bem.^[21]

Change

Main article: Attitude change

Attitudes can be changed through persuasion and an important domain of research on attitude change focuses on responses to communication. Experimental research into the factors that can affect the persuasiveness of a message include:

1. Target Characteristics: These are characteristics that refer to the person who receives and processes a message. One such trait is intelligence - it seems that more intelligent people are less easily persuaded by one-sided messages. Another variable that has been studied in this category is self-esteem. Although it is sometimes thought that those higher in self-esteem are less easily persuaded, there is some evidence that the relationship between self-esteem and persuasibility is actually curvilinear, with people of moderate self-esteem being more easily persuaded than both those of high and low self-esteem levels (Rhodes & Woods, 1992). The mind frame and mood of the target also plays a role in this process.
2. Source Characteristics: The major source characteristics are expertise, trustworthiness and interpersonal attraction or attractiveness. The credibility of a perceived message has been found to be a key variable here; if one reads a report about health and believes it came from a professional medical journal, one may be more easily persuaded than if one believes it is from a popular newspaper. Some psychologists have debated whether this is a long-lasting effect and Hovland and Weiss (1951) found the effect of telling people that a message came from a credible source disappeared after several weeks (the so-called "sleeper effect"). Whether there is a sleeper effect is controversial. Perceived wisdom is that if people are informed of the source of a message before hearing it, there is less likelihood of a sleeper effect than if they are told a message and then told its source.
3. Message Characteristics: The nature of the message plays a role in persuasion. Sometimes presenting both sides of a story is useful to help change attitudes. When people are not motivated to process the message, simply the number of arguments presented in a persuasive message will influence attitude change, such that a greater number of arguments will produce greater attitude change.^[22]
4. Cognitive Routes: A message can appeal to an individual's cognitive evaluation to help change an attitude. In the central route to persuasion the individual is presented with the data and motivated to evaluate the data and arrive at an attitude changing conclusion. In the peripheral route to attitude change, the individual is encouraged to not look at the content but at the source. This is commonly seen in modern advertisements that feature celebrities. In some cases, physician, doctors or experts are used. In other cases film stars are used for their attractiveness.

Emotion and attitude change

Emotion is a common component in persuasion, social influence, and attitude change. Much of attitude research emphasized the importance of affective or emotion components. Emotion works hand-in-hand with the cognitive process, or the way we think, about an issue or situation. Emotional appeals are commonly found in advertising, health campaigns and political messages. Recent examples include no-smoking health campaigns and political campaign advertising emphasizing the fear of terrorism. Attitudes and attitude objects are functions of cognitive, affective and conative components. Attitudes are part of the brain’s associative networks, the spider-like structures residing in long term memory that consist of affective and cognitive nodes.
By activating an affective or emotion node, attitude change may be possible, though affective and cognitive components tend to be intertwined. In primarily affective networks, it is more difficult to produce cognitive counterarguments in the resistance to persuasion and attitude change.
Affective forecasting, otherwise known as intuition or the prediction of emotion, also impacts attitude change. Research suggests that predicting emotions is an important component of decision making, in addition to the cognitive processes. How we feel about an outcome may override purely cognitive rationales.
In terms of research methodology, the challenge for researchers is measuring emotion and subsequent impacts on attitude. Since we cannot see into the brain, various models and measurement tools have been constructed to obtain emotion and attitude information. Measures may include the use of physiological cues like facial expressions, vocal changes, and other body rate measures. For instance, fear is associated with raised eyebrows, increased heart rate and increase body tension (Dillard, 1994). Other methods include concept or network mapping, and using primes or word cues in the era .

Components of emotion appeals

Any discrete emotion can be used in a persuasive appeal; this may include jealousy, disgust, indignation, fear, blue, disturbed, haunted,and anger. Fear is one of the most studied emotional appeals in communication and social influence research.
Important consequences of fear appeals and other emotion appeals include the possibility of reactance which may lead to either message rejections or source rejection and the absence of attitude change. As the EPPM suggests, there is an optimal emotion level in motivating attitude change. If there is not enough motivation, an attitude will not change; if the emotional appeal is overdone, the motivation can be paralyzed thereby preventing attitude change.
Emotions perceived as negative or containing threat are often studied more than perceived positive emotions like humor. Though the inner-workings of humor are not agreed upon, humor appeals may work by creating incongruities in the mind. Recent research has looked at the impact of humor on the processing of political messages. While evidence is inconclusive, there appears to be potential for targeted attitude change is receivers with low political message involvement.
Important factors that influence the impact of emotion appeals include self efficacy, attitude accessibility, issue involvement, and message/source features. Self efficacy is a perception of one’s own human agency; in other words, it is the perception of our own ability to deal with a situation. It is an important variable in emotion appeal messages because it dictates a person’s ability to deal with both the emotion and the situation. For example, if a person is not self-efficacious about their ability to impact the global environment, they are not likely to change their attitude or behavior about global warming.
Dillard (1994) suggests that message features such as source non-verbal communication, message content, and receiver differences can impact the emotion impact of fear appeals. The characteristics of a message are important because one message can elicit different levels of emotion for different people. Thus, in terms of emotion appeals messages, one size does not fit all.
Attitude accessibility refers to the activation of an attitude from memory in other words, how readily available is an attitude about an object, issue, or situation. Issue involvement is the relevance and salience of an issue or situation to an individual. Issue involvement has been correlated with both attitude access and attitude strength. Past studies conclude accessible attitudes are more resistant to change.

Attitude-behavior relationship

The effects of attitudes on behaviors represents a significant research enterprise within psychology. Two theoretical approaches have dominated this research: the theory of reasoned action^[23] and, its theoretical descendant, the theory of planned behavior,^[24] both of which are associated with Icek Ajzen. Both of these theories describe the link between attitude and behavior as a deliberative process, with an individual actively choosing to engage in an attitude-related behavior. An alternative model, called MODE for "Motivation and Opportunity as Determinants" was proposed by Russell H. Fazio, which focuses on motivations and opportunities for deliberative attitude-related behavior to occur. MODE is a Dual process theory that expects deliberative attitude-behavior linkages - like those modeled by the theory of planned behavior - only occur when individuals have motivation to reflect upon their own attitudes.^[25]
The theory of reasoned action (TRA), is a model for the prediction of behavioral intention, spanning predictions of attitude and predictions of behavior. The subsequent separation of behavioral intention from behavior allows for explanation of limiting factors on attitudinal influence (Ajzen, 1980). The Theory of Reasoned Action was developed by Martin Fishbein and Icek Ajzen (1975, 1980), derived from previous research that started out as the theory of attitude, which led to the study of attitude and behavior. The theory was "born largely out of frustration with traditional attitude–behavior research, much of which found weak correlations between attitude measures and performance of volitional behaviors" (Hale, Householder & Greene, 2003, p. 259).
The theory of planned behavior was proposed by Icek Ajzen in 1985 through his article "From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior." The theory was developed from the theory of reasoned action, which was proposed by Martin Fishbein together with Icek Ajzen in 1975. The theory of reasoned action was in turn grounded in various theories of attitude such as learning theories, expectancy-value theories, consistency theories,[2] and attribution theory.[3] According to the theory of reasoned action, if people evaluate the suggested behavior as positive (attitude), and if they think their significant others want them to perform the behavior (subjective norm), this results in a higher intention (motivation) and they are more likely to do so. A high correlation of attitudes and subjective norms to behavioral intention, and subsequently to behavior, has been confirmed in many studies.[4]
A counter-argument against the high relationship between behavioral intention and actual behavior has also been proposed, as the results of some studies show that, because of circumstantial limitations, behavioral intention does not always lead to actual behavior. Namely, since behavioral intention cannot be the exclusive determinant of behavior where an individual's control over the behavior is incomplete, Ajzen introduced the theory of planned behavior by adding a new component, "perceived behavioral control." By this, he extended the theory of reasoned action to cover non-volitional behaviors for predicting behavioral intention and actual behavior.

See also

Find more about Attitude at Wikipedia's sister projects
	Definitions and translations from Wiktionary
	Media from Commons
	Quotations from Wikiquote
	Source texts from Wikisource
	Textbooks from Wikibooks
	Learning resources from Wikiversity

• Cognitive dissonance
• Elaboration likelihood model
• Propositional attitude
• Social psychology
• Teenage rebellion
• Theory of reasoned action
• Theory of planned behaviour
• Expectancy-value theory
• Attitude polarization

An attitude is an expression of favor or disfavor toward a person, place, thing, or event (the attitude object). Prominent psychologist Gordon Allport once described attitudes "the most distinctive and indispensable concept in contemporary social psychology.".^[1] Attitude can be formed from a person's past and present.^[2] Attitude is also measurable and changeable as well as influencing the person's emotion and behavior.
In lay language, attitude may refer to the distinct concept of mood, or be especially synonymous with teenage rebellion.

NLP Anchoring Technique Explained

NLP Anchoring Technique Explained

                     

NLP Anchoring Technique Explained

 

History and conception

Early development

According to Bandler and Grinder, NLP comprises a methodology termed modeling and a set of techniques that were derived from its initial applications by Bandler and Grinder.^[35][36] Many of those methods that have come to be considered fundamental were derived from the initial modeling by Bandler and Grinder of the work of Virginia Satir, Milton Erickson and Fritz Perls.^[37] Bandler and Grinder also drew upon theories of Gregory Bateson, Alfred Korzybski and Noam Chomsky, particularly transformational grammar,^[21][35][38] as well as ideas and techniques from Carlos Castaneda.^[39] Bandler and Grinder claim that the therapeutic "magic" as performed in therapy by Perls, Satir and Erikson, and by performers in any complex human activity, had a structure that could be codified using their methodology and thereby learned by others. Their 1975 book The Structure of Magic I: A Book about Language and Therapy is intended to be a codification of the therapeutic techniques of Perls and Satir.^[35][40]
Bandler and Grinder say that they modeled Virginia Satir, to produce what they termed the Meta-Model (via their process of modeling), a model for gathering information and challenging a client's language and underlying thinking.^[35][40][41] By challenging linguistic distortions, specifying generalizations, and recovering deleted information in the client's statements, the transformational grammar concepts of surface structure were said to yield a more complete representation of the underlying deep structure and to have therapeutic benefit.^[42][43] Also derived from Satir were anchoring, future pacing and representational systems.^[44] In contrast, the Milton-Model—a model of the purportedly hypnotic language of Milton Erickson—was described by Bandler and Grinder as "artfully vague" and metaphoric.^[45] The Milton-Model is used in combination with the Meta-Model as a softener, to induce "trance" and to deliver indirect therapeutic suggestion.^[46] However, adjunct lecturer in linguistics Stollznow, describes Bander and Grinder's reference to such experts as namedropping. Other than Satir, the people they cite as influences did not collaborate with Bandler or Grinder. Chomsky himself has no association with NLP whatsoever; his original work was intended as theory not therapy. Stollznow writes, "[o]ther than borrowing terminology, NLP does not bear authentic resemblance to any of Chomsky's theories or philosophies - linguistic, cognitive or political."^[21]
According to Weitzenhoffer, "the major weakness of Bandler and Grinder's linguistic analysis is that so much of it is built upon untested hypotheses and is supported by totally inadequate data."^[47] Weitzenhoffer adds that Bandler and Grinder misuse formal logic and mathematics,^[48] redefine or misunderstand terms from the linguistics' lexicon (e.g., nominalization),^[49] create a scientific façade by needlessly complicating Ericksonian concepts with unfounded claims,^[50] make factual errors^[51] and disregard or confuse concepts central to the Ericksonian approach.^[52]
More recently (circa 1997), Bandler has claimed, "NLP™ [sic] is based on finding out what works and formalizing it. In order to formalize patterns I utilized everything from linguistics to holography...The models that constitute NLP™ [sic] are all formal models based on mathematical, logical principles [sic] such as predicate calculus and the mathematical equations underlying holography."^[53] However, there is no mention of the mathematics of holography nor of holography in general in McClendon's,^[54] Spitzer's^[44] or Grinder's^[55] account of the development of NLP.
On the matter of the development of NLP, Grinder recollects:^[56]

My memories about what we thought at the time of discovery (with respect to the classic code we developed - that is, the years 1973 through 1978) are that we were quite explicit that we were out to overthrow a paradigm and that, for example, I, for one, found it very useful to plan this campaign using in part as a guide the excellent work of Thomas Kuhn (The Structure of Scientific Revolutions) in which he detailed some of the conditions which historically have obtained in the midst of paradigm shifts. For example, I believe it was very useful that neither one of us were qualified in the field we first went after - psychology and in particular, its therapeutic application; this being one of the conditions which Kuhn identified in his historical study of paradigm shifts.

The philosopher Robert Todd Carroll responded that Grinder has not understood Kuhn's text on the history and philosophy of science, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Carroll replies: (a) individual scientists never have nor are they ever able to create paradigm shifts volitionally and Kuhn does not suggest otherwise; (b) Kuhn's text does not contain the idea that being unqualified in a field of science is a prerequisite to producing a result that necessitates a paradigm shift in that field and (c) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions is foremost a work of history and not an instructive text on creating paradigm shifts and such a text is not possible—extraordinary discovery is not a formulaic procedure. Carroll explains that a paradigm shift is not a planned activity, rather it is an outcome of scientific effort within the current (dominant) paradigm that produces data that can't be adequately accounted for within the current paradigm—hence a paradigm shift, i.e. the adoption of a new paradigm. In developing NLP Bandler and Grinder were not responding to a paradigmatic crisis in psychology nor did they produce any data that caused a paradigmatic crisis in psychology. There is no sense in which Bandler and Grinder caused or participated in a paradigm shift. "What did Grinder and Bandler do that makes it impossible to continue doing psychology...without accepting their ideas? Nothing.", argues Carroll.^[57]

Commercialization and evaluation

By the late 1970s, the human potential movement had developed into an industry and provided a market for some NLP ideas. At the center of this growth was the Esalen Institute at Big Sur, California. Perls had led numerous Gestalt therapy seminars at Esalen. Satir was an early leader and Bateson was a guest teacher. Bandler and Grinder claimed that in addition to being a therapeutic method, NLP was also a study of communication and began marketing it as a business tool, claiming that, "if any human being can do anything, so can you".^[41] After 150 students paid $1,000 each for a ten-day workshop in Santa Cruz, California, Bandler and Grinder gave up academic writing and produced popular books from seminar transcripts, such as Frogs into Princes, which sold more than 270,000 copies. According to court documents relating to an intellectual property dispute between Bandler and Grinder, Bandler made more than $800,000 in 1980 from workshop and book sales.^[41]
A community of psychotherapists and students began to form around Bandler and Grinder's initial works, leading to the growth and spread of NLP as a theory and practice.^[58] For example, Tony Robbins trained with Grinder and utilized a few ideas from NLP as part of his own self-help and motivational speaking programmes.^[59] Bandler led several unsuccessful efforts to exclude other parties from using NLP.^[60] Meanwhile, the rising number of practitioners and theorists led NLP to become even less uniform than it was at its foundation.^[21] Prior to the decline of NLP, scientific researchers began testing its theoretical underpinnings empirically, with research indicating a lack of empirical support for NLP's essential theories.^[16] The 1990s were characterized by fewer scientific studies evaluating the methods of NLP than the previous decade. Witkowski attributes this to a declining interest in the debate as the result of a lack of empirical support for NLP from its proponents.^[16]

Main components and core concepts

NLP can be understood in terms of three broad components and the central concepts pertaining to those:

• Subjectivity. According to Bandler and Grinder:
  • We experience the world subjectively thus we create subjective representations of our experience. These subjective representation of experience are constituted in terms of five senses and language. That is to say our subjective conscious experience is in terms of the traditional senses of vision, audition, tactition, olfaction and gustation such that when we—for example—rehearse an activity "in our heads", recall an event or anticipate the future we will "see" images, "hear" sounds, "taste" flavours, "feel" tactile sensations, "smell" odours and think in some (natural) language.^[61][62] Furthermore it is claimed that these subjective representations of experience have a discernible structure, a pattern. It is in this sense that NLP is sometimes defined as the study of the structure of subjective experience.^[63]
  • Behavior can be described and understood in terms of these sense-based subjective representations. Behavior is broadly conceived to include verbal and non-verbal communication, incompetent, maladaptive or "pathological" behavior as well as effective or skillfull behavior.^[64][65]
  • Behavior (in self and others) can be modified by manipulating these sense-based subjective representations.^{[66][67][68][69][70][71]}
• Consciousness. NLP is predicated on the notion that consciousness is bifurcated into a conscious component and a unconscious component. Those subjective representations that occur outside of an individual's awareness comprise what is referred to as the "unconscious mind".^[72]
• Learning. NLP utilizes an imitative method of learning—termed modeling—that is claimed to be able to codify and reproduce an exemplar's expertise in any domain of activity. An important part of the codification process is a description of the sequence of the sensory/linguistic representations of the subjective experience of the exemplar during execution of the expertise.^{[73][74][75][76]}

Techniques or set of practices

Further information: Methods of neuro-linguistic programming

An "eye accessing cue chart" as it appears as an example in Bandler & Grinder's Frogs into Princes (1979). The six directions represent "visual construct", "visual recall", "auditory construct", "auditory recall", "kinesthetic" and "auditory internal dialogue".

According to one study by Steinbach,^[77] a classic interaction in NLP can be understood in terms of several major stages including establishing rapport, gleaning information about a problem mental state and desired goals, using specific tools and techniques to make interventions, and integrating proposed changes into the client's life. The entire process is guided by the non-verbal responses of the client.^[77] The first is the act of establishing and maintaining rapport between the practitioner and the client which is achieved through pacing and leading the verbal (e.g., sensory predicates and keywords) and non-verbal behavior (e.g., matching and mirroring non-verbal behavior, or responding to eye movements) of the client.^[37]
Once rapport is established, the practitioner may gather information (e.g., using the Meta-Model questions) about the client's present state as well as help the client define a desired state or goal for the interaction. The practitioner pays particular attention to the verbal and non-verbal responses as the client defines the present state and desired state and any "resources" that may be required to bridge the gap.^[77] The client is typically encouraged to consider the consequences of the desired outcome, and how they may affect his or her personal or professional life and relationships, taking into account any positive intentions of any problems that may arise (i.e. ecological check).^[77] Fourth, the practitioner assists the client in achieving the desired outcomes by using certain tools and techniques to change internal representations and responses to stimuli in the world.^[78][79] Finally, the changes are "future paced" by helping the client to mentally rehearse and integrate the changes into his or her life.^[77] For example, the client may be asked to "step into the future" and represent (mentally see, hear and feel) what it is like having already achieved the outcome.
According to Stollznow (2010), "NLP also involves fringe discourse analysis and "practical" guidelines for "improved" communication. For example, one text asserts "when you adopt the "but" word, people will remember what you said afterwards. With the "and" word, people remember what you said before and after."^[21]

Applications

Psychotherapeutic

Early books about NLP had a psychotherapeutic focus given that the early models were psychotherapists. As an approach to psychotherapy, NLP shares similar core assumptions and foundations in common with some contemporary brief and systemic practices,^[80][81][82] such as solution focused brief therapy.^[83][84] NLP has also been acknowledged as having influenced these practices^[82][85] with its reframing techniques^[86][87] which seeks to achieve behavior change by shifting its context or meaning,^[88] for example, by finding the positive connotation of a thought or behavior.
The two main therapeutic uses of NLP are: (1) as an adjunct by therapists^[89] practicing in other therapeutic disciplines; (2) as a specific therapy called Neurolinguistic Psychotherapy^[90] which is recognized by the United Kingdom Council for Psychotherapy^[91] with accreditation governed at first by the Association for Neuro Linguistic Programming^[92] and more recently by its daughter organization the Neuro Linguistic Psychotherapy and Counselling Association.^[93] Neither Neuro-Linguistic Programming nor Neuro-Linguistic Psychotherapy are NICE-approved.^[94]
According to Stollznow (2010) "Bandler and Grinder's infamous Frogs into Princes and their other books boast that NLP is a cure-all that treats a broad range of physical and mental conditions and learning difficulties, including epilepsy, myopia and dyslexia. With its promises to cure schizophrenia, depression and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and its dismissal of psychiatric illnesses as psychosomatic, NLP shares similarities with Scientology and the Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR)."^[21] A systematic review of experimental studies by Sturt et al (2012) concluded that "that there is little evidence that NLP interventions improve health-related outcomes." ^[95] In his review of NLP, Stephen Briers writes, "NLP is not really a cohesive therapy but a ragbag of different techniques without a particularly clear theoretical basis...[and its] evidence base is virtually non-existent."^[96] Eisner writes, "NLP appears to be a superficial and gimmicky approach to dealing with mental health problems. Unfortunately, NLP appears to be the first in a long line of mass marketing seminars that purport to virtually cure any mental disorder...it appears that NLP has no empirical or scientific support as to the underlying tenets of its theory or clinical effectiveness. What remains is a mass-marketed serving of psychopablum."^[97]
André Muller Weitzenhoffer—a friend and peer of Milton Erickson—wrote, "Has NLP really abstracted and explicated the essence of successful therapy and provided everyone with the means to be another Whittaker, Virginia Satir, or Erickson?...[NLP's] failure to do this is evident because today there is no multitude of their equals, not even another Whittaker, Virginia Satir, or Erickson. Ten years should have been sufficient time for this to happen. In this light, I cannot take NLP seriously...[NLP's] contributions to our understanding and use of Ericksonian techniques are equally dubious. Patterns I and II are poorly written works that were an overambitious, pretentious effort to reduce hypnotism to a magic of words." ^[98]
Clinical psychologist Stephen Briers questions the value of the NLP maxim—a presupposition in NLP jargon—"there is no failure, only feedback".^[99] Briers argues that the denial of the existence of failure diminishes its instructive value. He offers Walt Disney, Isaac Newton and J.K. Rowling as three examples of unambiguous acknowledged personal failure that served as an impetus to great success. According to Briers, it was "the crash-and-burn type of failure, not the sanitised NLP Failure Lite, i.e. the failure-that-isn't really-failure sort of failure" that propelled these individuals to success. Briers contends that adherence to the maxim leads to self-deprecation. According to Briers, personal endeavour is a product of invested values and aspirations and the dismissal of personally significant failure as mere feedback effectively denigrates what one values. Briers writes, "Sometimes we need to accept and mourn the death of our dreams, not just casually dismiss them as inconsequential. NLP's reframe casts us into the role of a widower avoiding the pain of grief by leap-frogging into a rebound relationship with a younger woman, never pausing to say a proper goodbye to his dead wife." Briers also contends that the NLP maxim is narcissistic, self-centered and divorced from notions of moral responsibility.^[100]

Other uses

Although the original core techniques of NLP were therapeutic in orientation their genericity enabled them to be applied to other fields. These applications include persuasion,^[60] sales,^[101] negotiation,^[102] management training,^[103] sports,^[104] teaching, coaching, team building, and public speaking.

Scientific evaluation

Empirical validity

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.^[19]
Focusing primarily on preferred representational systems, reviews by Sharpley (1984)^[105] and—in response to criticism from Einspruch and Forman (1987)^[106]—Sharpley (1987)^[18] concluded that there was little evidence for NLP's usefulness as an effective counseling tool. Reviewing the literature, Heap (1988) also concluded that objective and fair investigations had shown no support for NLP's claims about preferred representational systems.^[107]
A research committee^[60] working for the United States National Research Council led by Daniel Druckman came to two conclusions. First, the committee "found little if any" evidence to support NLP's assumptions or to indicate that it is effective as a strategy for social influence. "It assumes that by tracking another's eye movements and language, an NLP trainer can shape the person's thoughts, feelings, and opinions (Dilts, 1983^[108]). There is no scientific support for these assumptions."^[17] Secondly, the committee members "were impressed with the modelling approach used to develop the technique. The technique was developed from careful observations of the way three master psychotherapists conducted their sessions, emphasizing imitation of verbal and nonverbal behaviours... This then led the committee to take up the topic of expert modeling in the second phase of its work."^[17] Von Bergen et al. (1997) state that "the most telling commentary on NLP may be that in the latest revision of his text on enhancing human performance, Druckman (Druckman & Bjork 1991) omitted all reference to Neurolinguistic Programming."^[14] According to Gelso and Fassinger (1990) Sharpley's literature review, marked a decline in empirical research of NLP, and particularly in matching sensory predicates and its use in the counselor-client relationship in counseling psychology.^[109]
NLP practitioners and academics Mathison and Tosey have argued that the experimental approach is not always appropriate for researching NLP, instead proposing that NLP should be researched phenomenologically.^[110][111] Gareth Roderique-Davies (2009) responded that "Phenomenological research is free from hypotheses, pre-conceptions and assumptions, and seeks to describe rather than explain. Given the claims made by proponents of NLP, this adds little to the credibility debate and would produce reports concerning the experience from the perspective of the individual rather than confirmation of the supposed efficacy. The fact remains that NLP proponents make specific claims about how NLP works and what it can do and this compels providing evidence to substantiate these claims."^[112] He argued that the proposal to conduct phenomenology research using NLP modeling "constitutes an admission that NLP does not have an evidence base and that NLP practitioners are seeking a post-hoc credibility."^[112]
Rowan (2008)^[113] addresses recent efforts by some NLP proponents (e.g., Wake (2008);^[114] Mathison and Tosey (2008)^[115]) to give NLP epistemic foundation in constructivism. According to Rowan, "Constructivism (and constructionism, which is closely similar) in all its forms questions the existence of a fixed external reality, ready to be discovered by scientists...The basic case is that knowledge, scientific or otherwise, is not obtained by objective means but is constructed through social discourse." Rowan argues that the only philosophical commitment that is explicitly and implicitly present in NLP is a "broad and undiscriminating pragmatism—let's see what works." Rowan explains that Bandler and Grinder adopted concepts from their examplars—Erickson, Satir and Perls—without scrutiny or criticism, as per their pragmatism. Rowan explains that Bandler and Grinder at no point—for example—subjected Erickson's concept of "The Unconscious" to any critical analysis, they took it entirely for granted. Rowan argues that this is entirely antithetical to constructivism and that these notionally constructivist NLP proponents do not understand constructivism or its implications. Taking constructivism seriously necessitates challenging Bandler and Grinder and their exemplars on all their assumptions, according to Rowan. Rowan suggests that these authors' commitment to constructivism doesn't extend beyond lip service and name dropping. Rowan charges: "Let me put it even more simply: you cannot be based on constructivism and hold in an unquestioned way a belief in the Unconscious. But it is even worse than this – in NLP they shift from one definition of the Unconscious to another. In Neurolinguistic Psychotherapy (Wake, 2008), on p.49, we are accepting the Freudian unconscious, on p.56 we are accepting the hypnotic notion of the unconscious, on pp.59–62 we are going with the definition of Morris Massey, on p.135 we have a whole farrago of 21 functions of the unconscious, quoted from Tad James, an exponent of 'Quantum Linguistics' and 'Time Line Therapy'. This can only be described as undiscriminating...this is not constructivism, but something different, and highly dubious."
More recent systematic reviews of all NLP-related research conclude that that the efficacy of NLP and the validity of its core tenets has not been demonstrated;^[16][95] this is a view that is shared by some NLP proponents that are calling for rigorous scientific research.^{[102][116][117]} Reviewers Witkowski (2010) and Sturt et al (2012) agree that NLP lacks an evidence base but disagree on the invalidity of NLP: Witkowski^[16]—expressing the consensus scientific opinion—states, "My analysis leads undeniably to the statement that NLP represents pseudoscientific rubbish, which should be mothballed forever"; Sturt et al—in common with some NLP proponents—state that "[t]he study conclusion [of no effect] reflects the limited quantity and quality of NLP research, rather than robust evidence of no effect." Reviewing Sturt et al (2012) Murray (2013) affirms their conclusion and adds that "[c]ollectively, the academic research base yields nominal support for paying for NLP training or services."^[118]

Scientific criticism

Neuro-linguistic programming has been characterized as a New Age^[57][119] pseudoscience. Witkowski (2010) writes that "NLP represents pseudoscientific rubbish, which should be mothballed forever."^[16] The name Neuro-linguistic programming has also been criticized. 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."^[112] 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.^[16] Similarly, experimental psychologist Corballis 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"^[20] and describes NLP as a "cult" activity with "little scientific credibility".^[120] According to psycholinguist Willem Levelt "[NLP] is not informed about the literature, it starts from insights that have been rendered out of date long ago, concepts are not apprehended or are a mere fabrication, conclusions are based upon wrong presumptions. NLP theory and practice have nothing to do with neuroscientific insights, nor with linguistics, nor with informatics and theory of programming."^{[121][122][123]}
Neuroscientists Sergio Della Sala and Barry Beyerstein wrote, "[NLP] began with some now outmoded information from legitimate psychology, linguistics and neuroscience that even most experts accepted back in the 1960s, when NLP first arrived on the scene. The nice thing about real science, as opposed to pseudoscience, is the former eventually corrects its mistakes as new discoveries emerge. NLP remains mired in the past or the never-was."^[124] According to Beyerstein (1995)^[119] and Witkowski (2010), NLP jargon—such as pragmagraphics, metamodeling, metaprogramming, submodalities—is intended to impress, obfuscate and give the false impression that NLP is a scientific discipline.^[16] Beyerstein 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."^[119] Furthermore Beyerstein (1995) believed that NLP has helped popularize myths about the brain and neurology and that that the aphorism "you create your own reality" promotes an epistemologically relativistic perspective, the purpose of which is to gain immunity from scientific testing. Reviewing various applications of brain lateralization mythology to education and psychotherapy, neuroscientist Lauren Julius Harris writes, "[t]he scientifically most pretentious of these [applications] is known as Neurolinguistic Programming".^[125]
Bradley and Biederman (1985)^[126] explain that the study of human communication is conventionally divided into syntactics, semantics and pragmatics and that these subfields of linguistics are indivisible and interdependent. After Watzlawick, Bradley and Biederman argue that "[s]uperimposed on these three aspects of communication is the context in which the communication occurs" and that this context is vital to understanding communication. Bradley and Biederman argue that Bandler and Grinder focus on syntactics and semantics and disregard pragmatics and context which are "the most intricate and important aspects" of communication. Bradley and Biederman argue that to this extent Bandler and Grinder have produced a very superficial analysis of verbal and non-verbal communication. It is also argued that this major deficiency in NLP cannot be remediated "as long as Bandler & Grinder refuse to acknowledge the need for empirical research." Furthermore, "their theory is not clearly articulated; its terminology, premises, and assumptions are either specified in an ambiguous manner or not specified at all". Responding to Bandler and Grinder's maxim that they aren't interested in the "truth" but only in "what works", Bradley and Biederman state, "[i]t has yet to be empirically demonstrated that their [Bandler and Grinder] approach works". For example, a central supposition of NLP—that there exists a connection "between a client's distorted perceptions of the world and his/her distorted linguistic representations"—is undergirded only by faith and intuition. Bradley and Biederman highlight that on the one hand Bandler and Grinder posit that there is no veridical relationship between reality and perception (an idea drawn from the phenomenology of Husserl) yet on the other hand they offer only personal testimony—something which according to their own theoretical position is unreliable—in support of the accuracy of their theory.
Tye (1994)^[127] is concerned to reconcile the failure of empirical research to validate NLP and the anecdotes that NLP proponents present in defence of the efficacy of NLP. Tye draws a comparison between shamanism and NLP, describing what he terms a "psycho shaman effect". According to Tye, "[l]ike NLP techniques, the psycho shaman effect is a collection of already existing, well understood and accepted ideas. Specifically it has three components: cognitive dissonance, placebo effect and therapist charisma". Tye thus attributes the apparent efficacy of NLP to nonspecific effects.
Craft (2001)^[128] considers NLP to be ostensibly based on social constructivism—and indeed several NLP proponents claim that it is so^[114][115]—and proceeds to evaluate NLP modeling in those terms. According to Craft, constructivist theories of learning conceive of an expert instructor and a novice in apprenticeship that gradually grows in "confidence, understanding and competence" via a process of dialogue that results in a negotiated shared experience and meaning. The notion of knowledge being created discursively is central to social constructivism yet absent in NLP modeling. Craft argues that NLP modeling contains no appreciation of the expert instructor (i.e. the person who is skilled in the activity of teaching itself) nor of the peculiarities of constructivist teaching and learning. For these reasons Craft is not convinced by the claims of NLP proponents; Craft doubts that "merely copying, without negotiation, can really lead to expert performance". Craft contends that the theory of situated cognition contradicts the assumptions of NLP modeling in that NLP modeling is in effect concerned with mimicry of expertise that is divorced from its actual ("real life") context of performance. Observation of "'surface features' of another person's behaviour...[and even] deeper aspects of another person's performance, which may include beliefs, physiology, strategies, sub-modalities, etc" is insufficient to enculturate a novice into a specific domain of knowledge, argues Craft. Craft contends that NLP is dogmatic in its promotion of modeling as the most effective method of skill acquisition when there may be such things as learning styles. Lastly—and in common with Rowan (2008) but for different reasons^[113] (see Empirical validity)—Craft argues that NLP is inconsistent with social constructivism. According to social constructivism reality is socially constructed. One of the main NLP maxims—presuppositions in NLP jargon—is Korzybski's pronouncement that "The map is not the territory". To paraphrase Craft, according to social constructivism there is no "territory" as such, no reality "out there", so the map-territory distinction is meaningless within a social constructivist epistemology.
Devilly argues that the so-called power therapies—such as NLP—gain popularity because they are promoted, like other pseudoscience, using a set of social influence tactics. These include making extraordinary claims (e.g., a one-session cure for any trauma-related memory), creating a rationalization trap by obtaining incremental commitments from students learning the power therapy (e.g., first lesson is free and subsequent courses increase in price), manufacturing source credibility and sincerity by creating a guru-like leader that is most qualified in the power therapy, creating a self-regulated body composed of those that have completed a course in the power therapy, and defining an enemy to facilitate in-group/out-group thinking and behavior and to serve as a scapegoat.^[19]
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 also been used as a key example of pseudoscience to facilitate the understanding of the importance of rational and critical thinking in a number of academic subjects.^[23][24][25]
According to Witkowski (2010), NLP also appears on "the list of discredited therapies" published in the Journal of Professional Psychology: Research and Practice.^[16] 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. (2006) included NLP for treatment of mental/behavior disorders in a survey^[22] 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 programmes, and emotional freedom technique (EFT). Norcross et al. (2010) listed "neurolinguistic programming for drug and alcohol dependence" seventh out of their list of the ten most discredited drugs and alcohol interventions,^[33] and it is listed as "certainly discredited" for addiction treatment in Evidence-based practices in addiction treatment: review and recommendations for public policy.^[34]

NLP as quasi-religion

Sociologists and anthropologists—amongst others—have categorized NLP as a quasi-religion belonging to the New Age and/or Human Potential Movements.^{[129][130][131][132][133][134][135][136][137][138]} Medical anthropologist Jean M. Langford categorizes NLP as a form of folk magic; that is to say, a practice with symbolic efficacy—as opposed to physical efficacy—that is able to effect change through nonspecific effects (e.g., placebo). To Langford, NLP is akin to a syncretic folk religion "that attempts to wed the magic of folk practice to the science of professional medicine".^[139] Bandler and Grinder were (and continue to be^[140][141]) influenced by the shamanism described in the books of Carlos Castaneda. Several ideas and techniques have been borrowed from Castaneda and incorporated into NLP including so-called double induction^[39] and the notion of "stopping the world"^[142] which is central to NLP modeling. Tye (1994)^[127] characterizes NLP as a type of "psycho shamanism". Fanthorpe and Fanthorpe (2008)^[143] see a similarity between the mimetic procedure and intent of NLP modeling and aspects of ritual in some syncretic religions. Hunt (2003)^[129] draws a comparison between the concern with lineage from an NLP guru—which is evident amongst some NLP proponents—and the concern with guru lineage in some Eastern religions.
In Aupers and Houtman (2010)^[133] Bovbjerg identifies NLP as a New Age "psycho-religion" and uses NLP as a case-study to demonstrate the thesis that the New Age psycho-religions such as NLP are predicated on an instrinsically religious idea, namely concern with a transcendent "other". In the world's monotheistic faiths, argues Bovbjerg, the purpose of religious practice is communion and fellowship with a transcendent 'other', i.e. a God. With the New Age psycho-religions, argues Bovbjerg, this orientation towards a transcendent 'other' persists but the other has become "the other in our selves", the so-called unconscious: "[t]he individual's inner life becomes the intangible focus of [psycho-]religious practices and the subconscious becomes a constituent part of modern individuals' understanding of the Self." Bovbjerg adds, "[c]ourses in personal development would make no sense without an unconscious that contains hidden resources and hidden knowledge of the self." Thus psycho-religious practice revolves around ideas of the conscious and unconscious self and communicating with and accessing the hidden resources of the unconscious self—the transcendent other. According to Bovbjerg the notion that we have an unconscious self underlies many NLP techniques either explicitly or implicitly. Bovbjerg argues, "[t]hrough particular practices, the [NLP practitioner qua] psycho-religious practitioner expects to achieve self-perfection in a never-ending transformation of the self."
Bovbjerg's secular critique of NLP is echoed in the conservative Christian perspective of the New Age as represented by Jeremiah (1995)^[144] who argues that, "[t]he ′transformation′ recommended by the founders and leaders of these business seminars [such as NLP] has spiritual implications that a non-Christian or new believer may not recognise. The belief that human beings can change themselves by calling upon the power (or god) within or their own infinite human potential is a contradiction of the Christian view. The Bible says man is a sinner and is saved by God's grace alone."
The quasi-religiosity of New Age belief and practice—even to the extent of "self-improvement" technique—was affirmed in a series of US court cases brought by employees against their employers whom mandated corporate New Age training. The plaintiffs claimed that these trainings conflicted with their religious beliefs.^[145][146] On this subject, Young—in Heuberger and Nash (1994)^[147]—specifies, "[s]uch New Age methods include meditation, yoga, biofeedback, centering, guided visualizations, affirmations, Akido-based exercise [sic], self-hypnosis, fire walking, and Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP)".

Intellectual property disputes

By the end of 1980, the collaboration between Bandler and Grinder ended.^[41] On 25 September 1981, Bandler instituted a civil action against Grinder and his company, seeking injunctive relief and damages for Grinder's commercial activity in relation to NLP. On 29 October 1981, judgement was made in favor of Bandler.^[148] As part of a settlement agreement Bandler granted to Grinder a limited 10-year license to conduct NLP seminars, offer certification in NLP and use the NLP name on the condition that royalties from the earnings of the seminars be paid to Bandler. In July 1996 and January 1997, Bandler instituted a further two civil actions against Grinder and his company, numerous other prominent figures in NLP and 200 further initially unnamed persons. Bandler alleged that Grinder had violated the terms of the settlement agreement reached in the initial case and had suffered commercial damage as a result of the allegedly illegal commercial activities of the defendants. Bandler sought from each defendant damages no less than US$10,000,000.00.^[149][150] In February 2000, the Court found against Bandler, stating that "Bandler has misrepresented to the public, through his licensing agreement and promotional materials, that he is the exclusive owner of all intellectual property rights associated with NLP, and maintains the exclusive authority to determine membership in and certification in the Society of NLP."^[151][152]
On this matter Stollznow (2010)^[21] comments, "[i]ronically, Bandler and Grinder feuded in the 1980s over trademark and theory disputes. Tellingly, none of their myriad of NLP models, pillars, and principles helped these founders to resolve their personal and professional conflicts."
In December 1997, Tony Clarkson instituted civil proceedings against Bandler to have Bandler's UK trademark of NLP revoked. The Court found in favor of Clarkson; Bandler's trademark was subsequently revoked.^[153][154]
By the end of 2000, Bandler and Grinder entered a release where they agreed, amongst other things, that "they are the co-creators and co-founders of the technology of Neuro-linguistic Programming" and "mutually agree to refrain from disparaging each other's efforts, in any fashion, concerning their respective involvement in the field of NeuroLinguistic Programming." ^[155]
As a consequence of these disputes and settlements, the names NLP and Neuro-linguistic Programming are not owned by any party and there is no restriction on any party offering NLP certification.^{[156][157][158][159][160]}

Associations, certification, and practitioner standards

The names NLP and Neuro-linguistic Programming are not owned by any person or organisation, they are not trademarked intellectual property^[161][162] and there is no central regulating authority for NLP instruction and certification.^[160][163] There is no restriction on who can describe themselves as an NLP Master Practitioner or NLP Master Trainer and there are a multitude of certifying associations;^[112] this has led Devilly (2005) to describe such training and certifying associations as granfalloons, i.e. proud and meaningless associations of human beings.^[19]
There is great variation in the depth and breadth of training and standards of practitioners, and some disagreement between those in the field about which patterns are, or are not, actual NLP.^[18][164] NLP is an open field of training with no "official" best practice. With different authors, individual trainers and practitioners having developed their own methods, concepts and labels, often branding them as NLP,^[57] the training standards and quality differ greatly.^[165] In 2009, a British television presenter was able to register his pet cat as a member of the British Board of Neuro Linguistic Programming (BBNLP), which subsequently claimed that it existed only to provide benefits to its members and not to certify credentials.^[166]

NLP Anchoring Technique Explained

 

Neuro-linguistic programming (NLP) is an approach to communication, personal development, and psychotherapy created by Richard Bandler and John Grinder in California, United States in the 1970s. Its creators claim a connection between the neurological processes ("neuro"), language ("linguistic") and behavioral patterns learned through experience ("programming") and that these can be changed to achieve specific goals in life.^[1][2] Bandler and Grinder claim that the skills of exceptional people can be "modeled" using NLP methodology, then those skills can be acquired by anyone.^{[3][4][5][6][7]} Bandler and Grinder also claim that NLP can treat problems such as phobias, depression, habit disorder, psychosomatic illnesses, myopia,^[8] allergy, common cold^[9] and learning disorders, often in a single session.^{[10][11][12][13]} NLP has been adopted by some hypnotherapists and in seminars marketed to business and government.^[14][15]
Reviews of empirical research find that NLP's core tenets are poorly supported.^[16] The balance of scientific evidence reveals NLP to be a largely discredited pseudoscience. Scientific reviews show it contains numerous factual errors,^[14][17] and fails to produce the results asserted by proponents.^[16][18] According to Devilly (2005),^[19] NLP has had a consequent decline in prevalence since the 1970s. Criticisms go beyond lack of empirical evidence for effectiveness, saying NLP exhibits pseudoscientific characteristics,^[19] title,^[20] concepts and terminology as well.^[21][22] NLP is cited as an example of pseudoscience when teaching scientific literacy at the professional and university level.^{[23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32]} NLP also appears on peer reviewed expert-consensus based lists of discredited interventions.^[16] In research designed to identify the "quack factor" in modern mental health practice, Norcross et al. (2006) ^[22] list NLP as possibly or probably discredited for treatment of behavioral problems. Norcross et al. (2010) list NLP in the top ten most discredited interventions^[33] and Glasner-Edwards and Rawson (2010) list NLP therapy as "certainly discredited".^[34]