「神経言語プログラミング」の版間の差分

[[ジョン・グリンダー]]（言語学者）と[[リチャード・バンドラー]]によって提唱された、コミュニケーション、[[能力開発]]、[[心理療法]]の技法である。NLPは、効果を実証するには不十分な[[実証研究|経験的証拠]]しかないため、学術的な信頼性には問題があり<!--出典Peter Hartley(1999)より--><ref name="Hartley 1999" />、一般の社会科学からは広く無視されている<!--出典Peter Hartley(1999)より--><ref name="Hartley 1999">Peter Hartley (1999) "Chapter 10: How useful are 'popular' models of interpersonal communication?" in ''Interpersonal Communication'' 2nd edition; Routledge, United Kingdom. p162-180. ISBN 978-0-415-18107-5 [''This issue of professional credibility leads me to my final point - the way these systems have been largely ignored by conventional social science.''(p.180)]</ref><ref name="Heap 1988">Heap. M., (1988) [http://www.mheap.com/nlp1.pdf Neurolinguistic programming: An interim verdict]. In M. Heap (Ed.) Hypnosis: Current Clinical, Experimental and Forensic Practices. London: Croom Helm, pp.268-280.</ref>。[[心理学者]]、[[神経科学|神経科学者]]<ref name="Corballis 1999">Corballis, MC., "Are we in our right minds?" In Sala, S., (ed.) (1999), ''Mind Myths: Exploring Popular Assumptions About the Mind and Brain'' Publisher: Wiley, John & Sons. ISBN 0-471-98303-9 pp. 25-41 (see p. 41)</ref>、[[言語学|言語学者]]<ref name="Stollznow">{{cite journal | title=Not-so Linguistic Programming|url= | author=Stollznow.K | journal=Skeptic | year=2010 | volume=15 | issue=4 | page=7}}</ref><ref name="Lum 2001">{{cite book | title=Scientific Thinking in Speech and Language Therapy | publisher=Psychology Press | author=Lum.C | year=2001 | page=16 | isbn=0-8058-4029-X}}</ref>からなる批判者たちからは、NLPという名前、コンセプト、使用する用語が問題にされ、無批判に受け入れられる極端な心理療法または[[通俗心理疑似科学]]的な特徴を持っと考えられている<ref name="Thyer">{{Cite book |title=Science and Pseudoscience in Social Work Practice |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=nE9FCQAAQBAJ&lpg=PA166&vq=nlp&pg=PA166#v=onepage&q&f=false |publisher=Springer Publishing Company (社会福祉実習の科学とされる疑似科学) |date=2015-05-15 |isbn=978-0-8261-7769-8 |first1=Bruce A. |last1=Thyer |first2=Monica G. |last2=Pignotti |pages=56–57, 165–167 |quote=As NLP became more popular, some research was conducted and reviews of such research have concluded that there is no scientific basis for its theories about representational systems and eye movements." "In the more than 20 years that has elapsed since the aforementioned article(1987), to date there is no convincing empirical evidence on the efficacy of NLP.}}</ref><ref name="Hartley 1999" /><ref name="Heap 1988" /><ref name="Devilly 2005">{{cite journal | author = Devilly GJ | year = 2005 | title = Power therapies and possible threats to the science of psychology and psychiatry | url = http://www.devilly.org/Publications/Power_Therapies_-_Published.pdf | journal = Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry | volume = 39 | pages = 437-45 | doi = 10.1111/j.1440-1614.2005.01601.x | pmid = 15943644 | issue = 6 }}</ref><ref name="Sharpley 1987">{{cite journal |last=Sharpley |first=Christopher F. |title=Research findings on neurolinguistic programming: Nonsupportive data or an untestable theory? |journal=Journal of Counseling Psychology |date=1 January 1987 |volume=34 |issue=1 |pages=103–107 |doi=10.1037/0022-0167.34.1.103}}</ref><ref name="witkowski">{{cite journal |last=Witkowski |first=Tomasz |title=Thirty-Five Years of Research on Neuro-Linguistic Programming. NLP Research Data Base. State of the Art or Pseudoscientific Decoration? |journal=Polish Psychological Bulletin |date=1 January 2010 |volume=41 |issue=2 |doi=10.2478/v10059-010-0008-0}}</ref>。当初の批判から20年以上たっているが、NLPの効能に関する説得力のある実証研究は表れなかった<ref name="Thyer" />