Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Neuro-linguistic programming and the police: Worthwhile or not?

  • Published:
Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the seventies Bandler and Grinder (1975, 1979; Grinder & Bandler, 1976) developed their model of Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP). The aim of this model is to facilitate communication between persons (Particularly between counselors and clients). There is a growing body of literature on NLP; it is nowadays even used in a police context (Gray, 1991; Mayers, 1993; Rhoads & Solomon, 1987). What does NLP mean? To what extent does empirical research support the NLP-model? And, to what extent is NLP useful for the police? This article addresses these three questions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Argyle, M., & Cook, M. (1976).Gaze and mutual gaze. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyle, M., & Dean, J. (1965). Eye contact, distance, and affiliation.Sociometry, 28, 289–304.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley, M. (1989). Neurolinguistic programming: The academic verdict so far.The, Australian Journal of Clinical Hypnotherapy and Hypnosis, 10, 73–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley, M., & Predebon, J. (1991). Do the eyes have it? A test of neurolinguistic programming’s eye-movement hypothesis.The Australian Journal of Clinical Hypnotherapy and Hypnosis, 12, 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandler, R., & Grinder, J. (1975).Structure of magic. Palo Alto, CA: Science and Behavior Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandler, R., & Grinder, J. (1979).Frogs into princes. Moab, Utah: Real People Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, E. A. (1990). The contribution and influence of neurolinguistic programming on analytical hypnotherapy.The Australian Journal of Clinical Hypnotherapy and Hypnosis.11, 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, C. E., & Beck, E. A. (1984). Test of the eye-movement hypothesis of neurolinguistic programming: A rebuttal of conclusions.Perceptual and Motor skills, 58, 175–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckner, M., Meara, N. M., Reese, E. J., & Reese, M. (1987). Eye movement as an indicator of sensory components in thought.Journal of Counseling Psychology 3, 283–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheney, S., Miller, L., & Rees, R. (1982). Imagery and eye movements.Journal of Mental Imagery, 6, 113–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coe W. C., & Scharcoff, J. A. (1985). An empirical evaluation of the neurolinguistic programming model.The International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 33, 310–318.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dorn, F. J., Atwater, M., Jereb, R., & Russell, R. (1983). Determining the reliability of the NLP eyemovement procedure.American Mental Health Counsellors Association Journal, 5, 105–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowd, T., & Hingst, A. (1983). Matching therapists predicates: An in vivo test of effectiveness.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 57, 207–210.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dowd, T., & pety, J. (1982). Effect of counselor predicate matching on perceived social influence and client satisfaction.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 29, 206–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Einspruch, E. L., & Forman, B. D. (1985). Observations concerning research literature in neurolinguistic programming.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 32, 589–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elich, M., Thompson, R. W., & Miller, L. (1985). Mental imagery as revealed by eye movements and spoken predicates: A test of neurolinguistic programming.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 32, 622–625.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellickson, J. (1981). The effect of interviewers responding differentially to subjects representational systems as indicated by eye movements.Dissertation Abstracts International, 41, 2754B.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falzett, W. C. (1981). Matched versus unmatched primary representational systems and their relationship to perceived trustworthiness in a counseling analogue.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28, 305–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Famer, A., Rooney, R., & Cunningham, J. R. (1985). Hypothesized eye movements of neurolinguistic programming: A statistical artificat.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 61, 717–718.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fromme, D., & Daniell, J. (1984). Neurolinguistic programming examined: Imageny, sensory mode, and communication.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31, 387–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graunke, B., & Roberts, T. (1985). Neurolinguistic programming: The impact of imagery tasks on sensory predicate usage.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 32, 525–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R. (1991). Tools for the trade: Neuro-linguistic programming and the art of communication.Federal, Probation, 55, 11–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grinder, J., & Bandler, R. (1976).Structure of magic II. Palo Alto, CA: Science and Behavior Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gumm, W., Walker, M., & Day, H. (1982). Neurolinguistic programming: Method or myth?Journal of Counseling Psychology, 29, 327–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammer, A. (1983). Matching perceptual predicates: Effect on perceived empathy in a counseling analogue.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 30, 172–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helm, D. J. (1991). Neuro-linguistic programming: Establishing rapport between the school counselor and the student.Journal of Instructional Psychology, 18, 255–257.

    Google Scholar 

  • House, S. (1994). Blending NLP representational systems with the RT counseling environment.Journal of Reality Therapy, 14, 61–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayers, K. S. (1993). Enhancement of psychological testimony with the use of neurolinguistic programming techniques.American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 11, 53–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mercier, M., & Johnson, M. (1984). Representational system predicate use and convergence in counseling Gloria revised.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31, 161–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pesut, D. J. (1991). The art, science, and techniques of reframing in psychiatric mental health nursing.Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 12, 9–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Poffel, S., & Cross, H. J. (1985). Neurolinguistic programming: A test of the eye-movements hypothesis.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 61, 1262.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rhoads, S. A., & Solomon, R. (1987). Subconseious rapport building: Another approach to interviewing.The Police Chief,4, 39–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharpley, C. F. (1984). Predicate matching in NLP: A review of research on the preferred representational system.Journal of Counseling Psychology 31, 238–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharpley, C. F. (1987). Research findings on neurolinguistic programming. Nonsupportive data or an untestable theory?Journal of Counseling Psychology, 34, 103–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomason, T. C., Arbuckle, T., & Cady, D. (1980). Test of the eye-movement hypothesis of neurolinguistic programming.Perceptual and motor Skills, 51, 230.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A. (1991).Misverstanden tussen politie en allochtonen: Social psychologische aspecten van verdacht zijn. Amsterdam: VU Uitgeverij.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vrjj, A. (1996). Misverstanden tussen politie en verdachten in een gesimuleerd politieverhoor.Nederlands Tijdschrift voor de Psychologie, 51, 137–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A. (1997a) Interviewing suspects. In A. Menon, A. Vrij, & R. Bull,Accuracy and perceived credibility of suspects, victims, and witnesses. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A. (1997a). Nonverbal communication and credibility. In A. Memon, A. Vrij, & R. Bull.Accuracy and perceived credibility of suspects, victims, and witnesses. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A. (1997c). Physiological parameters and credibility: The polygraph. In A. Memon, A. Vrij, & R. Bull,Accuracy and perceived credibility of suspects, victims, and witnesses. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wertheim, E. H., Habib, C., & Cumming, G. (1986). Test of the neurolinguistic programming hypothesis that eye-movements relate to processing imagery.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 62, 523–529.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Psychology Department, University of Portsmouth, King Henry Building, King Henry 1 Street, PO1 2DY, Portsmouth, UK

    Aldert Vrij & Shara K. Lochun

Authors
  1. Aldert Vrij
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shara K. Lochun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vrij, A., Lochun, S.K. Neuro-linguistic programming and the police: Worthwhile or not?. J Police Crim Psych 12, 25–31 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02813808

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02813808

Keywords

Search

Navigation