Key result
Specific eye movements reliably indicated visual and auditory components of thought, but not kinesthetic components.
Cross-Sectional (n=48)
The study provides empirical support for the visual and auditory components of the NLP eye movement model, but not the kinesthetic component.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May inform visual/auditory thought assessment in counseling; leaves open rigorous validation of the full NLP eye movement model.
This study investigated a claim of the Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) eye movement model, which states that specific eye movements are indicative of specific sensory components in thought. Forty-eight graduates and undergraduates were asked to concentrate on a single thought while their eye movements were videotaped. They were subsequently asked to report if their thoughts contained visual, auditory, or kinesthetic components. Two NLP-trained observers independently viewed silent videotapes of participants concentrating and recorded the presence or absence of eye movements posited by NLP theorists to indicate visual, auditory, or kinesthetic components in thought. Coefficients of agreement (Cohen's K) between participants ' self-reports and trained observers ' records indicate support for the visual (K =.81, p <.001) and auditory (K =.65, p<.001) portions of the model. The kinesthetic (K =-. 15, p<.85) portion was not supported. Interrater agreement (K =.82) supports the NLP claim that specific eye movement patterns exist and that trained observers can reliably identify them. Proponents of Neuro-Linguistic Programming endorse an eye movement model that they claim enables an observer to know when a person is accessing or experiencing thoughts
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Buckner et al. (1987) reported a cross-sectional. Specific eye movements was evaluated on Agreement between self-reported sensory components in thought and observer-recorded eye movements (Cohen's K 0.81 (visual), 0.65 (auditory), -0.15 (kinesthetic), p=<0.001 (visual and auditory), <0.85 (kinesthetic)). Specific eye movements reliably indicated visual and auditory components of thought, but not kinesthetic components.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: