FMTs must read: Violation of Contract

• Note: All IANLP curricula trainings require that 80% of the training time be led by an accredited FMT.

In recent weeks, the IANLP has been made aware of several cases in which training providers have not complied with this provision.

Code of Ethical Conduct of the IANLP asks each Fellow Member Trainer the following.

"Members of IANLP who offer and/or teach NLP certification training, shall ensure that these programs are competently designed to meet the certification standards of the IANLP for the level of training offered. In particular, they do not offer and/or teach in any NLP Practitioner, NLP Master or NLP Trainer certification courses whose requirements are lower than those stipulated by the IANLP. They also do not work at schools that offer such training courses. The designation 'practitioner', 'master' and 'trainer' may only be used for trainings that meet or exceed the standards of the IANLP."

Please read curricula!

Make sure your trainings do fulfill the requirements.

If you have any uncertainties, please get in touch with headquarters or with any of the Secretary Ambassadors of your language.

Scientific Research: Researchers biased against NLP

• Scientific community's gatekeeping against NLP unjustified

This recently published paper is about the "Demarcation Problem", which in philosophy is regarded as the problem of sorting out what is scientific work and what is not scientific work, and more recently what is pseudoscience. 

NLP was used as a case history in terms of its relationship with psychology in order to explore this philosophical problem. 

The IANLP encourages everyone to share the paper, as it helps the reader to understand that many of psychology's criticisms of NLP products are unfair. 

In their conclusion, the authors Katherine Dormandy & Bruce Grimley write. 

"We have examined a complex case of gatekeeping in science and discovered faults on all sides. Psychology’s gatekeeping against NLP is understandable due to the public presentation of some NLP-ers, but it is bad gatekeeping. It rather reflects flat-out bias, straw-manning and highly problematic empirical analyses. For this reason alone, psychology’s gatekeeping is bad – it violates the ideals it seeks to protect."

Read Article

Scientific Research: Official Recognition of NLP Interventions

• Here is a press release on the latest grant approval at King’s.

The new trial gives full credit to the NLP provenance, including RTM, VKD, Rewind and other variations, and is publicly out as a, revised over many years of work by many individuals, NLP intervention.

We are also looking at mechanisms, so testing a series of hypotheses of how we think this might be working.

This grant approval is based on a randomised controlled feasibility trial.

Forty-eight percent of the RTM group no longer met diagnostic criteria for PTSD compared to 16% in the TFCBT group. All veterans reported largely positive experiences of the therapy and research procedures and ways to improve them.

NHS trial has already commenced and the full scale veterans trial will proceed after ethics approval next year.