The literature on Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) frequently describes an alleged relationship between eye movements and lying. We recently tested this claim and found no evidence to support it. When these results were published, several NLP practitioners argued that the claim was not prevalent in the NLP literature.

In fact, there exists considerable evidence to suggest that the alleged relationship does indeed form a key part of NLP. Mann et al. (2012) recently described the origin and prevalence of this alleged relationship. They note that the origin of the claim seems to come from work presented by Bandler and Grinder (1979) in their seminal NLP text 'Frogs into Princes'. Bandler and Grinder describe how they believe that looking up to the left indicates 'remembering', whilst looking up to the right indicates 'construction'. Mann et al. note that although Bandler and Grinder do not extend this notion to lying, several NLP practitioners have interpreted their comments in this context (see, for example, Gordon et al. (2002), Hess (1997), and Rhoads & Solomon (1987)).

In addition, Mann et al. note:
"The second author regularly gives workshops on lie detection (worldwide) and almost without exception, someone in the audience will raise the question about NLP eye movements and deception."

Coupled with the evidence cited in our original paper, it seems strange that some NLP practitioners now claim that the alleged relationship between lying and eye movements does not form a key aspect of NLP.

Will our data change the views of some NLP practitioners? We suspect not. Mann et al. (2012) describe the rather curious approach that the founding fathers of NLP have towards disconfirming data:

"Bandler and Grinder do not present any empirical evidence for their NLP claims, and express no interest in doing so. On page 7 of their book 'Frogs into Princes' they explain that they are not psychologists, theologians or theoreticians; that they have no idea about the real nature of things; and are not particularly interested in what’s true. Their aim is to describe something that is useful. They further report on page 7 that “If we happen to mention something that you know from a scientific study, or from statistics, is inaccurate, realise that a different level of experience is being offered you here. We’re not offering you something that’s true, just things that are useful.”"

References
Mann, S., Vrij, A., Nasholm, E., Warmelink, L., Leal, S. & Forrester, D. (2012). The direction of deception: Neuro-linguistic programming as a lie detection tool. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology
Hess, J.E. (1997) Interviewing and interrogation for law enforcement. Anderson Publishing Co., Cincinnati, OH
Gordon, N.J., Felisher, W.L., Weinberg, C.D. (2002) Effective interviewing and interrogation techniques. Academic Press, San Diego, CA
Bandler. R. & Grinder. J. (1979) Frogs into princes. Real People Press, Moab, Utah
Rhoads, S.A. & Solomon, R. (1987) Subconscious rapport building: another approach to interviewing. Police Chief 4:39–41

Richard Wiseman & Caroline Watt