[userpic]

ОТТДУШИНА НЕГАТИВНЫХ ПРОЕКЦИЙ ВАЛИДИЗАТОРОВ 

metanymous в посте Metapractice (оригинал в ЖЖ)

It’s also worth noting that the studies themselves were often full of research errors. The questionnaires used in an attempt to assess PRS often had confusing self-report questions like, “Do you see yourself as a feeling person,” or “Do you feel you are an auditory person?” As that kind of question clearly reveals, most experimenters were not trained in NLP, did not understand what they were researching, and did not use anyone trained in NLP as a consultant to review their experimental protocols. As a result, there was no control of the language used in the studies, nor control of nonverbal confounding variables such as gestures or voice tone.
При этом стоит отметить, что большинство "научных" исследований валидизации НЛП выполнялось весьма низкоуровневыми научными исследователями. И вот, этот второй/третий сорт научных исследователей начинает составлять какие-то горе-опросники в адрес нлп. И эти опросники выразили, скорее, проекции и отрицательное отношение СТОРОННИХ валидизаторов НЛП. И эти проекции показали - НЛП есть мракобесие.