The Eyes Don’t Have It: Lie Detection and Neuro-Linguistic Programming

Richard Wiseman; Caroline Watt; Leanne ten Brinke; Stephen Porter; Sara-Louise Couper; Calum Rankin

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0040259

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

The Eyes Don’t Have It: Lie Detection and Neuro-Linguistic Programming

Richard Wiseman,

Affiliation School of Psychology, University of Hertfordshire, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom
⨯
Caroline Watt ,

* E-mail: caroline.watt@ed.ac.uk

Affiliation Psychology Department, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
⨯
Leanne ten Brinke,

Affiliation Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, Canada
⨯
Stephen Porter,

Affiliation Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, Canada
⨯
Sara-Louise Couper,

Affiliation Psychology Department, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
⨯
Calum Rankin

Affiliation Psychology Department, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
⨯

The Eyes Don’t Have It: Lie Detection and Neuro-Linguistic Programming

Richard Wiseman,
Caroline Watt,
Leanne ten Brinke,
Stephen Porter,
Sara-Louise Couper,
Calum Rankin

Published: July 11, 2012
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0040259

Reader Comments

Post a new comment on this article

Please note the confusion

Posted by Andy_B on 13 Jul 2012 at 09:18 GMT

Proponents of Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) claim that certain eye-movements are reliable indicators of lying.
http://plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0040259#article1.front1.article-meta1.abstract1.p1

NLP is not a "thing". This article acknowledges that it is concerned with rumours rather than actual claims made by the co-creators of the FoNLP (field of NLP), but then the criticisms it arrives at are directed at an hypothetical entity referred to as NLP as though "it" (and by implication the co-creators of the FoNLP - the field of NLP) were making the claims made by the unidentified "proponents".

Competing interests declared: I have been involved with the FoNLP for over 20 years and meet with co-founder John Grinder at least once a year. I therefore know what the co-creators ACTUALLY did, and do, say on subjects such as the "eye accessing cues" technique..

Subject Areas
?

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.
We want your feedback. Do these Subject Areas make sense for this article? Click the target next to the incorrect Subject Area and let us know. Thanks for your help!

Eye movements
Is the Subject Area "Eye movements" applicable to this article?

Thanks for your feedback.
Deception
Is the Subject Area "Deception" applicable to this article?

Thanks for your feedback.
Neurolinguistics
Is the Subject Area "Neurolinguistics" applicable to this article?

Thanks for your feedback.
Experimental psychology
Is the Subject Area "Experimental psychology" applicable to this article?

Thanks for your feedback.
Behavior
Is the Subject Area "Behavior" applicable to this article?

Thanks for your feedback.
Video recording
Is the Subject Area "Video recording" applicable to this article?

Thanks for your feedback.
Psychology
Is the Subject Area "Psychology" applicable to this article?

Thanks for your feedback.
Vision
Is the Subject Area "Vision" applicable to this article?

Thanks for your feedback.

The Eyes Don’t Have It: Lie Detection and Neuro-Linguistic Programming

The Eyes Don’t Have It: Lie Detection and Neuro-Linguistic Programming

Reader Comments

Post Your Discussion Comment

Why should this posting be reviewed?

Thank You!

Please note the confusion

Posted by Andy_B on 13 Jul 2012 at 09:18 GMT