I was very motivated to take an NLP course as well just due to the heavy advertising and popularity :v This made me think about my decision again. Amazing article.
If the evidence of the efficacy of the therapy that we are weighing is a statistical analysis of whether the person is satisfied that the problem they went in with is no longer a problem, then I would choose the therapy with the higher score on that analysis.
If the evidence of efficacy that we are weighing is based upon the claims that the therapist is making upon the mechanisms at play in the therapy, then I would ignore the analysis.
Myself, I struggled with and sought counseling for an addiction that persisted for decades that was eliminated in a 20 minute conversation with a therapist who told me he was using an NLP technique. If he were to further tell me that it really works because he had a psychic intervention with my inner chipmunk, it wouldn’t mean that the therapy was any less effective.
Pretty much what I want to say as well. I know how helpless one can feel when nothing seems to help with a problem and to the find something which actually helps; well I am no one to tell you that what happened was not real. I would still make the same decisions as I talk about towards the end but it doesn't mean you have to as well.
As a psychology student who is in therapy. I would have chosen slow paced therapy such as CBT. But I think a lot of corporates have NLP for maximum productivity which I do not know is sane or not ? I have seen a divide in MHPs because of NLP, two extremes, ones which favor NLP and ones which do not.
For the corporates it is always about a quick fix, even if it doesnt work. For MHPs, a lot of us dont really care for empirical evidence :P We just see whatever the latest fad is and then follow it to death, even if it doesn't make any sense. I remember graphology being such a trend in early 2010s
Although it was a good article I have two things to say:
1. It does really answer the question, is NLP a valid therapy technique? If not then why are so many students and psychologists pursuing it?
2. You have mentioned that enough empirical evidence is not available and therefore there is some question to it's validity. But alot of MHPs have over the decades questioned the effectiveness of Psychodynamic approach. Or some recent scientifically researched new therapies, for example, Polyvagal theory have also been questioned on the validity.
Thank you sharing this. I will try and frame this as well as I can
1. The reason behind students pursuing NLP is more to do with the psychological reality of FOMO rather than an implicit agreement that NLP works. There are loads of invalid pseudoscience out there that people pursue purely because others are doing it as well. Just last night I had received an email from one such student who had joined an NLP course excited about learning something new but was disappointed at what was being offered.
2. That is a good question. I am not the greatest fan of the psychodynamic approach but I do understand it offers a few ideas and frameworks which can come in handy in the clinic. I don't think empiricism is the ultimate form of science. There are limitations to it as well but as I said, if I were asked to choose between an empirical evidence-backed technique such as CBT and something that works phenomenologically for many such as NLP, I would go for CBT because I believe it is the responsible choice with the well-being of my client in mind.
Others may make a different choice but that is up to them, not me.
I was very motivated to take an NLP course as well just due to the heavy advertising and popularity :v This made me think about my decision again. Amazing article.
haha glad I could play some role in your thoughts. What did you end up doing?
If the evidence of the efficacy of the therapy that we are weighing is a statistical analysis of whether the person is satisfied that the problem they went in with is no longer a problem, then I would choose the therapy with the higher score on that analysis.
If the evidence of efficacy that we are weighing is based upon the claims that the therapist is making upon the mechanisms at play in the therapy, then I would ignore the analysis.
Myself, I struggled with and sought counseling for an addiction that persisted for decades that was eliminated in a 20 minute conversation with a therapist who told me he was using an NLP technique. If he were to further tell me that it really works because he had a psychic intervention with my inner chipmunk, it wouldn’t mean that the therapy was any less effective.
Pretty much what I want to say as well. I know how helpless one can feel when nothing seems to help with a problem and to the find something which actually helps; well I am no one to tell you that what happened was not real. I would still make the same decisions as I talk about towards the end but it doesn't mean you have to as well.
As a psychology student who is in therapy. I would have chosen slow paced therapy such as CBT. But I think a lot of corporates have NLP for maximum productivity which I do not know is sane or not ? I have seen a divide in MHPs because of NLP, two extremes, ones which favor NLP and ones which do not.
For the corporates it is always about a quick fix, even if it doesnt work. For MHPs, a lot of us dont really care for empirical evidence :P We just see whatever the latest fad is and then follow it to death, even if it doesn't make any sense. I remember graphology being such a trend in early 2010s
Graphology (silent laughs) is also such pseudo science, and thank you for replying :)
Although it was a good article I have two things to say:
1. It does really answer the question, is NLP a valid therapy technique? If not then why are so many students and psychologists pursuing it?
2. You have mentioned that enough empirical evidence is not available and therefore there is some question to it's validity. But alot of MHPs have over the decades questioned the effectiveness of Psychodynamic approach. Or some recent scientifically researched new therapies, for example, Polyvagal theory have also been questioned on the validity.
Would love to know your opinion.
Thank you sharing this. I will try and frame this as well as I can
1. The reason behind students pursuing NLP is more to do with the psychological reality of FOMO rather than an implicit agreement that NLP works. There are loads of invalid pseudoscience out there that people pursue purely because others are doing it as well. Just last night I had received an email from one such student who had joined an NLP course excited about learning something new but was disappointed at what was being offered.
2. That is a good question. I am not the greatest fan of the psychodynamic approach but I do understand it offers a few ideas and frameworks which can come in handy in the clinic. I don't think empiricism is the ultimate form of science. There are limitations to it as well but as I said, if I were asked to choose between an empirical evidence-backed technique such as CBT and something that works phenomenologically for many such as NLP, I would go for CBT because I believe it is the responsible choice with the well-being of my client in mind.
Others may make a different choice but that is up to them, not me.