NEURO-LINGUISTIC PROGRAMMING: THE EFFECT OFPROCESS INSTRUCTIONS ON THE EXPERIENCE OF

SELF IN NATURALLY OCCURRING LIFE SITUATIONS

Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic)

Authors Pazda, Susan Lynn

Publisher The University of Arizona.

Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this materialis made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona.Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such aspublic display or performance) of protected items is prohibitedexcept with permission of the author.

Download date 24/03/2021 03:57:39

Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/291238

INFORMATION TO USERS

This reproduction was made from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce this document, the quality of the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted.

The following explanation of techniques is provided to help clarify markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction.

1.The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure complete continuity.

2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark, it is an indication of either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, duplicate copy, or copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed. For blurred pages, a good image of the page can be found in the adjacent frame. If copyrighted materials were deleted, a target note will appear listing the pages in the adjacent frame.

3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photographed, a definite method of "sectioning" the material has been followed. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again-beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete.

4. For illustrations that cannot be satisfactorily reproduced by xerographic means, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and inserted into your xerographic copy. These prints are available upon request from the Dissertations Customer Services Department.

5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases the best available copy has been filmed.

University Micrcxilms

International 300 N. Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Ml 48106

1319460

PAZDA, SUSAN LYNN

NEURO-LINGUISTIC PROGRAMMING: THE EFFECT OF PROCESS INSTRUCTIONS ON THE EXPERIENCE OF SELF IN NATURALLY OCCURRING LIFE SITUATIONS

The University of Arizona M.A. 1982

University Microfilms

International 300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106

NEURO-LINGUISTIC PROGRAMMING: THE EFFECT OF

PROCESS INSTRUCTIONS ON THE EXPERIENCE OF SELF IN

NATURALLY OCCURRING LIFE SITUATIONS

by

Susan Lynn Pazda

A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the

DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

In the Graduate College

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA

1 9 8 2

1

STATEMENT BY AUTHOR

This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of re­quirements for an advanced degree at the University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library.

Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in his judg­ment the proposes use of the material is in the interests of scholar­ship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author.

SIGNE1

APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTOR

This thesis has been approved on the date shown below:

Date

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF TABLES iv

LIST OF FIGURES v

ABSTRACT vi

1. INTRODUCTION 1

Neuro-Linguistic Programming 1 Review of NLP Research Literature 4 Aim of this Study 9

2. METHOD 11

Design 11 Participants 11 Instrument 12 Procedure . . . 13

3. RESULTS 18

4. DISCUSSION 20

APPENDIX: QUESTIONNAIRE 29

REFERENCES 31

iii

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. Participant Demographic Information by Group: Mean Age, Class, and Number of Psychology Classes Taken, Inclusive 25

2. Analysis of Covariance Results Main Effect of Treatment and Simple Effect of Semantic Differential Factor (N = 62) 26

iv

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1. Main Effect of Treatment 28

2. Simple Effects of Semantic Differential Factor 29

v

ABSTRACT

The Neuro-Lingulstic Programming model states that content-free

linguistic patterns called process instructions are an effective psycho­

therapeutic intervention. This study tested this assumption. Sixty-two

participants silently identified an important life situation that was to

occur within twenty-four hours. Then approximately one-half of the

participants listened to tape recorded process instructions designed to

increase ones' experience of oneself as a positive, potent, active agent

during the future life situation. The remaining participants listened to

tape recorded relaxation instructions. The following day participants

completed a semantic differential devised to assess ones' experience of

oneself during the previously identified life situation. Overall, and

on each semantic differential factor (evaluation, potency, and activity)

the group that received process instructions rated themselves during

their life situations as significantly more positive, potent, and active

than the group which received relaxation instructions.

vi

INTRODUCTION

Neuro-Linguistic Programming

Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) was originated in the early

nineteen-seventies by Richard Bandler, a mathematician and later a

Gestalt therapist, and John Grinder, a psycholinguist, with the goal

of formalizing impactful human communication (Bandler & Grinder, 1975;

Goleman, 1979). Impactful communication was considered to be meaning­

ful communication which elicited specifically desired outcomes from

the person to whom the communication was being directed. Interested

in identifying patterns across schools of psychotherapy, they observed

hypnotists, gestaltists, transactional analysts, behavioral, family,

and psychoanalytically oriented mental health professionals (Bandler &

Grinder, 1979). Later they concentrated on the patterns of hypnotist

Milton H. Erickson and family therapist Virginia Satir because they

considered them such exquisite communicators (Bandler, Grinder, &

Satir, 1976; Grinder, DeLozier, & Bandler, 1977).

The historical development of NLP leads to its definition as a

meta-model, a model of, or about, therapeutic models. However, since

its inception as a meta-model, NLP has grown from a purely linguistic

and digital (verbal) model of communication to an increasingly complex

set of observations regarding the structure of internal experience and

an increasingly large set of technologies for changing behaviors, in­

cluding internal experience (Cameron-Bandler, 1978; Lankton, 1980).

1

2

Therefore, alternative definitions of NLP reflect the changed scope

and nature of the field. For example, the following description

appears in a 1980 publication (Dilts, Grinder, Bandler, Bandler, &

DeLozier) five years after the specification of NLP as a meta-model.

"Neuro"...stands for the fundamental tenet that all behavior is the result of neurological processes. "Linguistic"...in­dicates that neural processes are represented, ordered, and sequenced into models and strategies through language and communication systems. "Programming" refers to the process of organizing the components of a system (sensory representa­tions in this case) to achieve specific outcomes, (p. 2)

In short, in the space of five years NLP developed from a meta-

model concerned with a set of structural elements (words) and their

syntax (rules for well-formedness in therapy) to a body of knowledge

concerned with the basic processes used by all individuals to encode,

transfer, guide, and modify behavior. Throughout its development,

the emphasis has been on discovering effective stimuli for elicting

changes' in internal processes that result in external (observable)

behavior. These developments lead to another, more economical and

elegant, definition of NLP as the study of the structure of subjective

experience (Dilts et al., 1980).

NLP differentiates itself from other models in its: Criterion

of usefulness (not truthfulness); existence as an atheoretical tech­

nology utilizing presuppositions (working assumptions); development

for the purpose of being an adjunct to other therapies; and emphasis

on the structure and forms of language, communication, and change

(Bandler & Grinder, 1979).

3

As a result of an emphasis on the usefulness of structure and

de-emphasis on content, NLP has contributed to the development and

popularization of a particular form of therapeutic intervention called

process instructions (Bandler & Grinder, 1979; Grinder & Bandler, 1981;

Harman & O'Neill, 1981, Lankton, 1980). Process instructions are

patterns of language that sound specific but have no content. Such

instructions are used to elicit desired states in the client. Assuming

the establishment of rapport, the instructions lead the client through

a series of steps for which the client provides the specific sensory

and cognitive content. An example of this is , "as you relax (step 1),

you are becoming more comfortable (step 2) and you will recall a

pleasant memory (step 3) from which you will get a new learning

(step 4)". Harman and O'Neill (1981) ennumerate the advantages of

content-free techniques as 1) client's inward attention increases

problem-solving activity, 2) therapist interpretation and value imposi­

tion is prevented, and 3) therapists are provided with a way to work

with clients unwilling to disclose the content of their problems. In

addition, content-free statements are considered respectful in that

they do not violate internal experience (Bandler & Grinder, 1979).

Grinder, DeLozier, and Bandler (1977) initially identified and

systematically studied the structure of this technique as linguistic

pattern in Ericksonian hypnosis. However, process instructions are

representative of NLP techniques in general in that they are the

structure of techniques utilized in most psychotherapies. For example,

transactional analysis redecision therapy utilized process instructions

4

in formally sequencing a set of states in the client which lead to

redecision (Goulding & Goulding, 1979). Gestalt fantasy exercises

and two-chair work and many behavioral techniques such as systematic

desensitization also involve the sequencing of states specific to

the client through non-specific Instructions from the therapists

(Polster & Polster, 1973; Wolpe, .1969).

Much of the contribution NLP has made to the technology of

therapy has been the extraction of common structures of techniques

across schools of psychotherapy. Therefore, studies of the effec­

tiveness of NLP techniques are potentially valuable for many thera­

pists.

Review of NLP Research Literature

Research has been conducted on the following NLP related

concepts: The eye movement hypothesis; representational systems;

matching; and linguistic surface structure in family interaction.

Thomason, Arbuckle and Cady (1980) tested the eye movement

hypothesis. Briefly stated, the hypothesis is that an individual

will make eye movements indicating through which sensory system

(visual, auditory, or kinesthetic) she/he is processing (constructing

or recalling) information. This hypothesis is usually presented in

the form of an eye movement chart for a right-handed individual with

normal cerebral organization. Upward eye movements indicate visual

activity (towards the individual's right signals constructed imagery;

the left signals eidetic imagery); defocusing also indicates visual

processing. Lateral eye movements indicate auditory processing

(right is constructed, left is recalled). Downward eye movements

indicate kinesthetic processing if towards the right and auditory

tonal processing if towards the left. The study observed forty

subject's eye movements through a one-way mirror in response to a

set of stimulus questions designed to elicit either visual, kines­

thetic, auditory, or auditory tonal processing. A chi square test

(with a validity criterion of 75 percent consistency between ques­

tion and eye movement modalities) showed a significant discrepancy

between the criterion and observed eye movements (p < .01). The

authors concluded the study did not support the eye movement hypo­

thesis.

This study has been criticized by a representative of NLP's

Division of Training and Research (D.O.T.A.R.) from both an experi­

mental and NLP framework (Steinback, 1981). Perhaps the most serious

objection to this study is that NLP states the eye movement hypothesis

is not universal. However, they assert individual organization is

consistant. This study did not address the question of intra-indivi-

dual reliability.

Three studies have investigated the concept of representa­

tional systems and related hypotheses. Representational systems are

thought to be the sensory-based systems (visual, auditory, kenes-

thetic, gustatory, and olifactory) people use to represent or store

a given experience. NLP states that people give behavioral cues

(ie. eye movement, predicates) that allow an observer to determine

which system an individual is using.

6

Owens (1977) investigated the relationship between eye movement

patterns, verbalizations and individual self-report as measures of

representational systems. One-hundred-twenty-eight subjects were

presented with nine stimulus questions. Six of the stimuli required

no verbal response and eye movement measures were taken, while for the

remaining three both eye movements and verbal responses were recorded.

Measurement of the dependent variable was in terms of its frequency.

At the study's end, subjects' self-rated their primary representational

system. Analysis showed one significant (p < .05) finding: The

combination of observing eye movements and listening for the most

frequently used predicate system was significantly related to the

subject's self- reported primary representational system.

Beale (1981) tested the hypothesis that by observing eye

movements and verbal predicates, therapists can identify how (in which

representational system) a person is organizing her/his ongoing

conscious experience. The independent variable was a set of twenty-four

stimuli (ie. questions, pictures). The way in which the forty subjects

made sense of the stimuli was recorded on video and audio tape.

Hypotheses for the combined predictions of eye movement and verbal

predicates were not substantiated, confounding the results. The author

concluded conscious experience cannot be identified solely in terms of

visual, kinesthetic, and auditory representations.

Shaw (1977) examined the communication hypothesis that people

find communication more meaningful when it is presented in their

primary representational system. One-hundred-eight subjects whose

7

representational systems had previously been identified (through

verbalization, eye movement, and primary and secondary self-report)

were shown one of three forms (visual, auditory, or kinesthetic) of a

video taped story. As a measure of meaningfulness, subjects were then

asked to list as many of the experiences described in the story as

they could remember. Analysis did not show that subjects identified

by representational system responded differentially to a story presented

in various representational systems.

Two studies have examined the effects of matching. Matching is

a technique through which the therapist paces the client (mirrors or

matches some aspect of the client's experience) in order to establish

rapport. Possible client behaviors to match include: Posture, voice

tone and/or tempo, depth and/or rate of breathing, vocal intonation,

gross language patterns (subjects, predicated), and representational

systems (predicated, ie. adjectives, adverbs).

Rebstock (1980) inventigated the effects of counselor training

in matching techniques on client's ratingsof rapport with the counselor.

Two groups of twelve counseling students received training in NLP

matching techniques. One group was trained prior to initial interviews

with new clients and the other group was trained after the initial

interview. Both groups then conducted a second interview with

counselees. After each interview, clients and counselors filled out

rapport ratings and frequency counts of matched predicates were made

from tape recordings. Analysis of the data showed no significant

differences between the groups on either of the measures. The author

8

recommended further research be conducted on the effectiveness of

matching in developing rapport. It was concluded that the study

demonstrated the lack of effectiveness of the particular training,

not necessarily the ineffectiveness of matching techniques in general.

Yapko (1971) tested the effect of matching primary representa­

tional system predicates on hypnotic relaxation. Primary, secondary,

and tertiary systems were identified through frequency counts of

predicates used in answering open-ended questions and baseline

Electromyograph (EMG) recording were taken. Subjects then listened to

three recorded hypnotic inductions utilizing predicated from one of the

three major representational systems (visual, auditory, kinesthetic).

EMG recordings were taken while the tapes played and subjects rated

their level of relaxation after each tape. Results showed subjects

relaxed most deeply when listening to inductions matching their primary

representational system (p < .05). The second and third most deep

levels of relaxation were achieved with tapes corresponding to subject's

secondary and tertiary representational systems.

Linguistic surface structure in family interaction was investi­

gated Macroy (1979). NLP, as a linguistic model, is based on Chomsky's

model of transformational grammar and utilized the concepts of deep

and surface structures. Bandler and Grinder (1975) have identified

three universal linguistic (and modeling) processes that occur during

the transformation of experience from deep to surface structure. They

are generalization, deletion, and distortion. Language which contains

these processes is said to be semantically ill-formed. The assumption

is that semantically ill-formed language does not accurately express

an individual's experience. Macroy hypothesized that families who

express dissatisfaction with current intra-familial relationships

would use the above linguistic structures to a greater extent in

their interactions with familial members than would satisfied families.

Six satisfied and six dissatisfied families were identified on the

basis of a self-rating questionnaire and were given a Revealed Dif­

ferences questionnaire to discuss together. Tape recording of the

discussions were scored for eleven subcategories of generalization,

deletion, distortion, and semantic ill-formedness. Results showed

dissatisfied families used significantly more deletion (p < .01)

than the satisfied families. It was also found that mothers and

children in dissatisfied families obtained a significantly greater

ratio (p < .05) of ill-formed sentences to well-formed sentences

than did their counterparts in satisfied families.

Aim of this Study

The aim of this study is to examine the effects of process

instructions. The assumption is that the use of verbal language in

the manner suggested makes for- more powerful, influential communica­

tion capable of affecting individual internal processing, ultimately

leading to changes in experience and behavior. Research has not yet

been conducted to determine if this linguistic pattern represents one

of the fundamental elements of effective communication. The particu­

lar set of process instructions chosen for investigation is designed

for, and assumed to, ultimately affect an individual's experience

of self in natually occurring life situations. Testing of this

assumption is the basis for this study.

The way in which this particular set of process instructions

is intended to affect an individual's experience is to enhance one's

experience of oneself as a positive, potent, active agent during a

future life situation of importance to oneself. The following hypo­

thesis will be tested: This set of process instructions will affect

subjective experience along the following dimensions: Evaluation,

potency, and activity. The group receiving process instructions will

rate their experience of themselves during their life situations as

more positive, potent, and active than the group not receiving pro­

cess instructions.

METHOD

Design

A design analogous to the therapeutic situation was chosen to

test the effect of process instructions because of the advantages of

experimental control. Wherever possible, Ka*zdin's (1978) sugges­

tions for appropriate variation of analogue dimensions were followed

to enable greater generalization of findings to the therapeutic

situation.

The independent variable was the type of treatment: Process

instructions (experimental group) and relaxation instructions (con­

trol group). The dependent variable was the experience of self in

the life situation identified during (experimental group) or prior

(control group) to treatment as measured by the evaluation, potency,

and activity scales of the semantic differential.

This was a mixed model design, with one between subjects

factor (treatment) and one within subjects-factor (the evaluation,

potency, and activity factors of the semantic differential).

Participants

Participants were volunteers enrolled in a sophomore level

psychology class at the University of Arizona during the spring

semester of 1982. All volunteers participated with informed con­

sent and anonymity was preserved throughout the study. A total of

62 participants were recruited, with 30 in the control group and

11

12

32 in the experimental group. For both groups, the mean age was

20 years, the average class was sophomore, second semester, and

the mean number of psychology classes taken (inclusive) was four.

Table 1 shows participant demographic information by group.

Instrument

Since this study focused on process regardless of specific

content, an instrument that measured the result of the process with­

out reference to content was needed. The semantic differential was

chosen as such an instrument.

The semantic differential is a combination of scaling and

association procedures used to measure the psychological or conno-

tative meaning of concepts as points in three dimensional semantic

space (Osgood, 1952). Through factor analysis, three general

factors, evaluation, potency, and activity, have been identified.

In general, the test-retest reliability correlation coefficient of

the scales is .85. The three factors account for approximately

60 percent of the total variance, with about 70 percent of the

common variance due to the evaluative factor (Endler, 1961; Osgood

& Suci, 1955).

The particular form of the semantic differential used in

this study consisted of one concept ("my experience of myself in

situation X") rated on twelve bipolar scales. Each scale consisted

of a seven point continuum, with point four being a neutral position.

To counteract response bias tendencies, six of the twelve scales

were reversed so than an equal number of positive terms appeared

on each side of the scales.

The three factors of evaluation, potency, and activity were

equally represented by four adjective pairs each. Scales were

chosen to have a maximal loading on the factor they represent and

a minimal loading on the other two factors. The factors and their

respective scales were: Evaluative represented by good-bad, beau-

tiful-ugly, valuable-worthless, and pleasant-unpleasant; potency

represented by large-small, strong-weak, heavy-light, and thick-

thin; activity represented by fast-slow, active-passive, hot-cold,

and sharp-dull (see Appendix).

Procedure

Participants were divided into two groups on the basis of

sex and males and females were then randomly assigned to one of the

two groups (experimental and control). Participants met with their

respective groups twice: Once to receive the appropriate treat­

ment, and again to complete the semantic differential.

At the first meeting, both groups listened to a three minute

tape-recorded introductory statement designed to establish rapport.

The experimental group then listened to a ten minute tape-

recording of process instructions designed to enhance their experi­

ence of themselves as positive, potent, active agents during their

future life situations. This exercise, taken from the transcript

of an NLP workshop, was modified only slightly for the purposes of

this study (modifications bracketed) (Bandler & Grinder, 1979).

14

Sometime within the last five years, each of you has had a very CpositiveU experience in which you experienced your­self as a [potent, active, positive] human being. You may or may not have a conscious appreciation of exactly which episode in your life history this is. I would like you to allow that experience to come into your consciousness. Sit there for a moment, with feelings of comfort and strength, let yourself see and hear again what it was that happened to you back there. There are additional [ways to apply that experience to your life in the future.D I would like you to allow yourself the treat of seeing and hearing yourself go through that again so as to [re-experience those potent, positive, active feelings] which are embedded in that experi­ence in your past history...

And when you've seen and heard something that you believe to be of value for yourself, I would like you to pick a spe­cific situation of [importance to you] that you know will occur within the next Ctwenty-four hours.] Notice—again by watching and listening with feelings of strength and com­fort - how you can apply [those positive, potent, active feelings] to this new situation that is going to arise in the next Ctwenty-four hours.] In so doing you are making elegant use of your own personal history, and you are trans­ferring [positive, potent, active feelings} from one part of your personal history, so as to increase your choices as a creative human being in the present. Take all the time you need...

Some of you may have a clear, solid, resonant understand­ing of what you've succeeded in doing; some of you may simply have a sense of well-being, a feeling of having done some­thing without actually understanding in detail explicitly what it was that you were able to do by making use of a par­ticularly CpositiveD experience from your past in a new way....

Now I'd like you to begin to drift back slowly, under­standing that if you've completed the process to the best of conscious understanding, fine....If you haven't yet finished, you've set into motion a process which can be completed comfortably outside of your awareness as you return your attention slowly here to this room. (p. 126)

In place of process instructions, the control group was asked

to "identify a specific situation of importance to you that you know

will occur within the next twenty-four hours" (the experimental group

15

did this in context of their exercise) and listened to a ten minute

tape-recording of relaxation instructions. The relaxation exercise

was designed to range from a neutral to a somewhat positive experi­

ence. This treatment was structured so that the same amount of time

and similar treatment (tape-recorded instructions) and participant

behavior (sitting with eyes closed in a relaxed state) occured in

both groups. The relaxation exercise was as follows (Bry & Bair, 1979).

Close your eyes. Get yourself comfortable, and concen­trate on your breathing.

Pay careful attention to your breathing. Recognize how slow and deep breathing will help to induce relaxation. Exhale. Then take a deep breath in through your nose and blow it out through your mouth. Breathe from your abdomen, deeply and slowly.

As you concentrate on your breathing, focus your atten­tion on an imaginary spot in the center of your forehead. Look at the spot as if you were trying to see it from inside your head.

You will begin to realize that your eyelids have become tense. Get a sense of how tense the eyelids can become as you stare at the spot so that you can compart this feeling with relaxation.

When your eyelids become strained and uncomfortable, let them drop. Notice the feeling of relaxation that radiates all through and around your eyes. Allow that feeling of warmth and relaxation to move out to the temples and across the forehead.

Let the relaxation then radiate to your scalp, to the back of your head, to your ears, temples, cheeks, nose. To your mouth and chin.

As you feel all the tension leave your face, relax your jaw muscles. Let your jaw open slightly, so that all the ten­sion can smmothly flow away.

16

Relax the muscles in your neck. As you do, let your head tip forward gently so your chin just about touches your chest.

Let this feeling of relaxation flow down into your shoulders and from there into the muscles of your arms and hands, then down your back, over to the front of the chest, on down to the abdomen, and then allow it to reach all the way down to the base of the spine.

Let the buttocks go completely loose and limp. Allow the warmth and relaxation to spread to the thighs, on down the legs, down to the ankles, and down through the feet to the tips of the toes.

Now you feel completely relaxed. Take a moment, starting from the top of your head and working down, to check to see if any part of you is not fully relaxed.

If you find any part of your body not fully relaxed, simply inhale a deep breath and send it into the area, bringing sooth­ing, healing, relaxing, nourishing oxygen to comfort that area. As you exhale, imagine blowing out right through your skin any tension, tightness, or discomfort. By inhaling a breath into that area and exhaling right through the skin, you are able to replace tension in any part of your body with gentle relaxa­tion.

When you find yourself quiet and fully relaxed, take a few moments to enjoy it. (p. 34-36)

Both groups were dismissed with standardized statements thank­

ing them for their participation in this portion of the study and

given information regarding the date, time, and place of their next

meeting (approximately twenty-five hours later).

At the second meeting, both groups filled out a questionnaire

containing the semantic differential items. Instructions on the ques­

tionnaire asked participants to recall the life situation that occurred

within the past twenty-four hours that they identified during the first

meeting. The instructions asked them to rate their experience of them­

selves during their particular life situation. Participants were

i

17

given as much time as they needed to complete the scales. Group leader

and participant interaction were minimized at this meeting, with stan­

dardized opening and closing statements.

RESULTS

An analysis of covariance by group using Biomedical Computer

Programs (BMDP) program BMDP2V was run on the data. The possible

confounding variable of sex was controlled for by treating sex as a

covariate. The analysis allowed for the testing of: 1) Main effects

due to treatment (do the experimental and control group means differ?),

and 2) simple effects of the main effect of semantic differential

factor (do experimental and control group means differ for the seman­

tic differential factors — evaluation, potency, and activity?).

Results are presented in Table 2. Throughout this analysis,

low semantic differential scores indicate high levels of the factors

measured by the scale. Overall, means for the control and experimen­

tal groups were 3.40 and 2.31, respectively (see Figure 1). The

analysis performed on these data indicated that there was a signifi­

cant main effect of treatment (F = 10.86; p = .0017). The pro­

portion of variance accounted for in groups' scores by treatment in

this sample, computed using n (eta), was 69%.

Means for the control and experimental groups, respectively, on

each of the semantic differential factors were: 3.00 and 2.06 for

evaluation; 3.74 and 2.66 for potency; and 3.46 and 2.22 for activity

(see Figure 2). The analysis between these group means revealed a

significant simple effect of the main effect of semantic differential

18

19

factor (F 2 0) " 9.47; p = .0002). The strength of association

measure for this analysis indicated the proportion of variance in

scores accounted for by the three factors was 32% in this sample.

No significant interaction was found between semantic differential '

factors and treatment group (F 0) * P " *6176). Sex of the

participant was not found to significantly affect responses (F -

1.84; p = .1799).

Thirty-seven percent of the participants chose to comment on the

study or about the effect of the exercise on their experience of their

life situation. Of those comments, 8% were unfavorable, 22% were

neutral, and 70% were favorable.

DISCUSSION

To review, this study found significant differences between

groups' mean ratings on the semantic differential both overall and

on each of the scale's factors. Strength of association measures

indicated that a sizable proportion of the variance in groups' scores

in this sample was accounted for by treatment. Of the participants

who commented on the study or the effect of the exercise on their

experience of their life situation, the majority commented favorably.

Specifically, the experimental group members who received

process instructions rated their experience of themselves during an

important, naturally occuring life situation as significantly more

positive, potent, and active than control group members who received

relaxation instructions. The differences between groups and the

direction of these differences support the main prediction of this study:

That the group which received process instructions would rate themselves

as more positive, potent, and active than the group which did not

receive process instructions. Likewise, as ratings were obtained for

individuals' subjective experience of self, results support the under­

lying assumption that this set of process instructions would affect

subjective experience along the dimensions it was designed to impact:

Evaluation, potency, and activity.

The generalizability of this investigation's findings are limited

by the particular form of treatment utilized, the population sampled

from, and the problems inherent in analogue research. Expressly, the

20

21

effect of one particular set of process instructions were assessed for

a homogeneous sample of sophomore university students. Using Kazdin's

(1978) classification for evaluating the external validity of analogue

research, the most important dimensions on which this study deviated

from the clinical situation were determined to be the target population

and the target problem. Although the target problem intrinsically

remains unspecified in the process instruction technique, this study,

by design, did not address the issue of with which type of problems

the technique may be effective. Nor did this investigation speak to

the effectiveness of process instructions with an identified patient

population.

While caution is warranted in generalizing findings from this

study to the clinical situation, both the form of treatment as well as

the sample population on which it was tested were analagous to NLP's

formulation of process instructions and one suggested type of target

population. The particular set of instructions utilized were a

slightly modified version of instructions used with an adult group

similar to this study's sample in that they did not assemble for the

purpose of therapeutic treatment (Bandler & Grinder, 1979). A

content-free treatment modality is advocated by NLP as useful for non-

patients in that the procedure teaches individuals a way to achieve

satisfactory outcomes perhaps more effective than the present process

used for this purpose (Bandler & Grinder, 1979). In fact, the nature

22

of many participants' comments suggest that the technique was perceived

as useful for this purpose (ie. "...you can apply it to other events

that are happening right now in my life").

To sum, further research is needed before substantive statements

regarding the effectiveness of process instructions in the clinical

situation can be made. In particular, further investigation of this

technique's impact across time, with a range of identified problems,

and with individuals sampled from client populations is necessitated.

Additional levels of treatment (kinds of process instructions) would

enable generalization of findings to more than one form of treatment.

However, within the limitations of this study, results lend credence

to NLP's assertion that content-free therapy, in the form of process

instructions, is effective in eliciting desired changed in one's

experience (Bandler & Grinder, 1979; Grinder & Bandler, 1981; Harman &

O'Neill, 1981; Lankton, 1980).

The implications of this study's results extend beyond the realm

of NLP. Process instructions are representative of NLP techniques in

general in that they contain the structure of techniques utilized in

most psychotherapies. As previously discussed, process instructions

are implicitly the higher level communication inherent in Transactional

Analysis redecision therapy, Gestalt fantasy exercises and two-chair

work,and many behavioral techniques such as systematic desensitization.

For example, the Gestalt therapist's instructions for two chair work

might be, "Put your problem (ie. headache) in the chair and talk to it"

23

(Polster & Polster, 1973). On a process instruction level, the client

is asked to disassociate from his problem and gain insight through

talking to her/his projection without being told what to say (Bandler &

Grinder, 1979). The results of this study suggest the success of

techniques such as this may partially lie in the process instructions

themselves. Therefore, further research on process instructions is

potentially valuable for therapists of varying theoretical persuasion.

24

TABLE 1

Participant Demographic Information by Group:

Mean Age, Class, and Number of Psychology Classes Taken, Inclusive

Group N Age

X SD

Control 30 20.40 1.61

Experimental 32 20.16 1.63

Number of Psychology Classes Taken,

Class Inclusive

X SD X SD

1.63 0.81 4.10 2.47

1.53 0.67 3.91 1.89

*Unit of measurement is a semester, equaling 0.50. Therefore, for both groups the average class was sophomore, second semester, with a standard deviation of two semesters.

25

TABLE 2

Analysis of Covarlance Results

Main Effect of Treatment and Simple Effect of Semantic Differential Factor (N = 62)

Source SS df MS F P

Group 54.77134 1 54.77134 10.86 .0017

Covariate (Sex) . 9.28959 1 9.28959 1.84 .1799

Error 297.58371 59 5.04379

SD Factor 13.83562 2 6.91781 9.47 .0002

SD Factor and Group Interaction .70659 2 .35329 .48 .6176

Error 87.61667 120 .73014

Adjusted Group Means (N = 62)

Overall

Group N X SD

Control 30 3.40 1.76

Experimental 32 2.31 1.15

26

Table 2—Continued

By Semantic Differential Factor

Group N X SD

Control 30

Evaluation 3.00 1.87 Potency 3.74 1.60 Activity 3.46 1.82

Experimental 32

Evaluation 2.06 1.05 Potency 2.66 1.23 Activity 2.22 1.15

7--

Mean Score on Semantic • 6--Differential

5--

1 --

Control Experimental

Group

Figure 1

Main Effect of Treatment

27

7-

Mean Score on Semantic Differential

5-

Control

1-

Evaluation Potency Activity

Figure 2

Simple Effects of Semantic Differential Factor

28

29

APPENDIX

QUESTIONNAIRE

Group number: Sex (circle one): (0) female, (1) male

Age: Class (circle one): (0) freshman, (1) sophomore, (2) junior, (3) senior Number of psychology classes taken, including this one:

* * * * * *

DIRECTIONS: Recall the specific life situation of importance to you that you identified during yesterday's exercise. This is the life situation that was to have occurred sometime between yesterday's exercise and now.'

A) If this situation did occur, rate your experience of yourself during this situation on each of the twelve scales below. Do this by placing a check mark (/) on the appropriate place on the continuum between each of the adjective pairs.

MY EXPERIENCE OF MYSELF IN SITUATION X

1) Good : : : : : : Bad

2) Ugly : : : : : : Beautiful

3) Valuable : : : : : : Worthless

4)Unpleasant : : : : : : Pleasant

5) Large : : : : : : Small

6) Weak : : : : : : Strong

7) Heavy : : : : :. : Light

8) Thin : : : : : : Thick

9) Fast : : : : : : Slow

10) Passive : : : : : : Active

30

QUESTIONNAIRE—Continued

11) Hot : : : : : : Cold

12) Dull : : : : 5 i Sharp

B) Did you go through the experience with a greater degree of confidence than usual? (circle one): (0) no, (1) yes

C) If the specific life situation you identified yesterday did not occur, place a check here:

D) Feel free to comment on yesterday's exercise, or this project, on the back of this paper.

31

REFERENCES

Bandler, R., & Grinder, J. The Structure of Magic: A Book About Language and Therapy, Volumes I & II. CA: Science and Behavior Books, Inc., 1975.

Bandler, R., Grinder, J., & Satir, V. Changing with Families: A Book About Further Education for Being Human. CA: Science and Behavior Books, Inc., 1976.

Bandler, R., & Grinder, J. Frogs into Princes: Neuro-Linguistic Programming. Utah: Real People Press, 1979.

Beale, R.P. The testing of a model for the representation of consciousness (The Fielding Institute, 1980). Dissertation Abstracts International. 1981, 41, 9.

Cameron-Bandler, L. They Lived Happily Ever After: Methods for Achieving Happy Endings in Coupling. CA: Meta Publication, 1978.

Dilts, R., Grinder, J., Bandler, R., Bandler, L.C., & DeLozier, J. Neuro-Linguistic Programming: The Study of the Structure of Subjective Experience. Volume I. CA: Meta Publications, 1980.

Endler, N.S. Changes in meaning during psychotherapy as measured by the semantic differential. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 1961, 8, 105-111.

Goleman, D. People who read people. Psychology Today. 1979. 13. 66-78.

Grinder, J., & Bandler, R. Trance-formations: Neuro-Linguistic Programming and the Structure of Hypnosis. Utah: Real People Press, 1981.

Goulding, M.M., & Goulding, R.L. Changing Lives Through Redecision Therapy. N.Y.: Brunner/Mazel, Inc., 1979.

Grinder, J., DeLozier, J., & Bandler, R. Patterns of the Hypnotic Techniques of Milton H. Erickson. M.D.. Volume I. CA: Meta Publications, 1977.

Harman, R.L., & O'Neill, C. Neuro-Linguistic Programming for counselors. The Personnel and Guidance Journal. 1981, 59. 7, 449-453.

32

Kazdin, A.E. Evaluating the generality of findings in analogue therapy research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psycho­logy. 1978, 46, 4, 673-686.

Lankton, S. Practical Magic: A Translation of Basic Neuro-Llngulstic Programming into Clinical Psychotherapy. CA: Meta Publica­tions, 1980.

Macroy, T.D. Linguistic surface structure in family interaction (Doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, 1978) Disserta­tion Abstracts International, 1979, 40, 2.

Osgood, C.E. The nature and measurement of meaning. Psychological Bulliten, 1952, 49, 197-237.

Osgood, C.E., & Suci, G.J. Factor analysis of meaning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1955, j>0, 325-338.

Owens, L.F. An investigation of eye movements and representational systems. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ball State University, 1977.

Polster, E., & Polster, M. Gestalt Therapy Integrated: Contours of Theory and Practice. N.Y.: Brunner/Mazel Publishers, 1973.

Rebstock, M.E. The effects of training in matching techniques on the development of rapport between client and counselor during initial counseling interviews (Doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri, 1980) Dissertation Abstracts International, 1980, 41, 3.

Shaw, D. Recall as effected by the interaction of presentation: repre­sentation system and primary representation system. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ball State University, 1977.

Steinback, M. Personal Communication, October, 1981. Neuro-Linguistic, Division of Training and Research, Santa Cruz, California.

Thomason, T.C., Arbuckle, T., & Cady, D. Test of the eye-movement hypo­thesis of Neurolinguistic Programming. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1980, 51, 230.

Wolpe, J. Practice of Behavior Therapy. N.Y.: Pergamon, 1969.

Yapko, M.D. The effect of matching primary representational system predicates on hypnotic relaxation. The American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 1981, 3, 3, 169-175.