Binds, Double Binds and Unconscious Double Binds – Part One

By Alan Jones,

Principal of Empowerment Trainings

Trainer with Talisman Training Ltd & Communicating Excellence

Over a number of articles I intend to examine binds, double binds and unconscious double binds in relation to therapy and hypnosis.

In this article I intend to introduce the various types of binds and offer some of my initial thoughts. Later articles will explore how a client’s unconscious structure, and use of ‘various binds,’ creates and sustains their “problems”.

These articles are based on my observations and understanding of various types of binds as used in Hypnotherapy and NLP as at the time of writing. They are by no means exhaustive or proven and are offered here for your consideration. I do however, believe that they play an important part in client problems and solutions.

Firstly, I would like to point out that NLP and NLP’s version of Ericksonian hypnotherapy have their own terminology, some of which has been borrowed from the linguistics of Transformational Grammar; the surface structure and deep structure of language postulated by Noam Chomsky.

The more common everyday English term “A double bind” comes from Chess or Card games, where a player only has two moves available, or two cards left to play and whichever move or card they play they will loose the game, there is no way out. The concept is also stated in colloquial phrases such as, “Dammed if you do, dammed if you don’t” or “Caught between a rock and a hard place.” I’m sure you can think of some more.

The simple Ericksonian style linguistic double bind of, “Would you like to go into trance in this chair or that chair?” Could be answered by, “Who said I want to go into trance.”, or, “Neither, I don’t want to go into trance.” So the linguistic binds that NLP and Hypnotherapy refer to might best be called pseudo, optional or self imposing binds, as they do not meet the criteria of the binds of Chess or Card games, (which offer no real choice!) Provided the client accepts the binds offered to them, then they are binding themselves; if they don’t accept the binds then they have the third option of rejecting them altogether. Anyone who has children and tried the bind, “Will you do your homework before or after dinner?” knows that the stock answer is likely to be, “Who said I’m going to do my homework?” An obvious rejection or non-acceptance of the bind offered.

To paraphrase Dr Milton H. Erickson, “I give my client’s all the freedom they need to follow my suggestions.” I believe that a part of his strategy was his use of binds directed to the unconscious mind, working in conjunction with his many other unique skills.

I intend to examine the structure of NLP/Ericksonian binds, double binds and unconscious double binds in two ways; as tools to assist someone to make changes, and as circular arguments that people use on themselves to block or inhibit change.

Binds

Binds can be used to assist someone into an altered state, they can be used by the client to keep themselves in a stuck state and they can be used to effect change. They can also be the basis of belief structures. In NLP the L stands for Linguistic, though this can be misinterpreted to mean simply words, my understanding is that it is anything a person does or does not do that is perceived as a communication either by a another or by themselves.

A bind can be explicitly or implicitly, stated. Implicit binds maybe recognised as incongruent communication. As in the case of a partner stating verbally “I don’t mind you going out”, whilst their non-verbals state “I don’t want you to go”. This type of bind, incongruent communication, is sited as a possible cause for some forms of schizophrenia, where a parent gives mixed messages on a consistent basis.

Single binds.

One dictionary definition of the word “bind” is, “To impose an obligation” as in someone agreeing to be bound by the rules of an organisation they wish to join. The linguistic pattern known as cause and effect, (where one thing is said to, or is implied to cause something else to happen, which may or may not be true) is often a bind.

For example, “the more you practice binds the better you will become at using them”.

By accepting this suggestion you are agreeing (Obligation) that this is a truth and therefore binds you to the outcome that by practicing them (Cause) you expect to improve (the effect) your ability to use them, don’t you?”

The simple question, “Are you ready to go into trance now?” Met with a congruent yes reply, binds the client into going into trance, if they do not go into trance, then they were not ready. Here the implied bind is ‘ready to go into trance.’

The question, “You don’t expect to make changes without going into trance, would you?” appears to be a simple reverse yes set question, which at one level it is. However, when the client provides a congruent “No” response to this question the client is binding themselves to the subtle suggestions of expecting to make changes, and that in order to make those changes they will have to go into trance. They are imposing these obligations on them self, more often than not outside of their conscious awareness. Although there are two binds in that question they are considered to be multiple single binds as there is no implied choice, (see double binds).

You may have also recognised this bind as a tag question with an embedded command and of course you are right. The “expect to make changes” is the embedded command. Deconstruct any sentence within the frame of Ericksonian Language Patterns and you will be surprised at what subtle language patterns you can find and finding them means you can use them even more effectively now, can’t you?

Double Binds

The next bind we will examine is the Double Bind or the illusion of choice.

The question, “Would you like to go into trance quickly or slowly?” appears to offer the choice of speed, whilst the assumption that the client will go into a trance is presupposed. By answering the question either “slowly” or “quickly” they are imposing the obligation on them self to go into trance.

An Unconscious Double Bind is a question framed in the present, where the answer is not known at the time of the question, and can only be known at a point in time in the future as in, “I wonder will it be your left hand or your right hand that relaxes faster as you go into trance?” Until the trance occurs the client will not know which hand will relax more, by accepting or expecting that one hand will relax more than the other, or just being curious that this is a possibility, they bind them self to the outcome.

This type of bind is also used in conversation such as, “Will it be your love of language or your desire to ethically influence people that will make you practice binds more than other language patterns?” The chances are that this question had not been considered in this way before, therefore the answer could not have been known to you. In order for you to answer the question you had to go inside and check, any answer yes or no to either or both still means that the suggestion, you will practice binds has been accepted at some level by your unconscious.

A bind can be a cliché or a paradoxical argument which is often ironic, or a belief that we have accepted, they can be family injunctions, mottos or beliefs. None of these become binds unless we accept that they hold a truth for us at some level, and therefore buy into the bind, either consciously or unconsciously.

Here are a few examples:

“Don’t take life too seriously you will never get out of it alive.” (Bind ironic truth – you will die)

Or as found on a door at the Computing Centre, University of Hawaii..

"Good judgement comes from experience, (Belief and Single Bind)
experience comes from poor judgement" (Belief and Single Bind)

As recorded in “Is There Life Before Death” by Steve Andreas

“No one in our family will ever be famous.” (Belief Single Bind)

“No one in our family makes it to old age.” (Belief Single Bind)

“No pain no gain.” (Cliché Single Bind)

“When the going gets tough, the tough get going.” (Cliché Single Bind)

“A tidy desk means a tidy mind.” (Cliché Single Bind)

I’m sure you can think of lots more.

If we accept that we create our own reality the only question is, whether a particular bind is useful either generally or in the specific circumstances to which it is applied?

For example, “When the going gets tough the tough get going,” has been a useful bind and anchor (The song) for me and there are lots of times when it may not be appropriate.

You may be surprised, and delighted at how many binds and double binds you notice from now on. When you become aware of yourself, or others using them; you do not have to ask yourself, what effect they have, it is an option though.

In a future article I will examine deeper the construction and use of binds, double binds and unconscious double binds.

If you enjoyed thinking about the effects of binds then you might like to come back and read the next instalment, you might also like to let you friends know about the articles.

Traditional Hypnosis Verse Ericksonian Hypnosis

by
Alan Jones
Clinical Hypnotherapy and NLP Trainer

What follows is not the truth; it is only an opinion which is all anyone of us has. You may disagree or agree with some or all of the ideas or my premise in this discourse. If it angers you you might like to delve deep inside to find out what it is about someone else's opinion that has that kind of power to change your state. If you dismiss it without thought or consideration are you too rigid? Just a thought.

Depending on the hypnosis school you trained with you will fall into one of three groups.
Group A will believe that traditional somnambulistic trance is the only real way to do hypnotherapy.
Group B will believe that Ericksonian hypnosis is the only way to do hypnotherapy.
And of course
Group C will claim that both work and they mix and match. Who is right, if there is a Right Way?

Before we look at this question I would like you to do a simple experiment. Read the instructions and then close your eyes and ask your self the questions, better still get someone else to ask you the questions.

Instructions: Without using memories or associations with your eyes closed answer the following questions:

Without using memories or associations who are you? Male, female, both none of these.

Without using memories or associations what are you? Animal, vegetable, mineral or none of these.

Without using memories or associations where are you? Here, there or no where?

Now if you managed to come up with an answer you did not follow the instructions as you would have had to use your memories or associations to think. If your mind went blank, in that you had no thought, how could you without memories or associations, you experienced satori, the state of no mind.

So what was the point of the above? It is simply this; you are a collection of your memories and associations which form your beliefs from which you act in and on the world. Some of your beliefs you may be aware of; and do beware of the beliefs that operate outside of your awareness. And like it or not, we all have beliefs that we operate from as being true that we don’t know about. Some mystics say it takes a lifetime to become aware or enlightened. The Buddhist paradox is that the moment you think you are Enlightened you are at the furthest point away from Enlightenment. I think this is because at that point you cease being aware or put another way “Enlightenment” is the nominalisation of enlightening so it changes from something you are doing to something abstract you think you are and you stop doing.

So where is this going? There is a thought, from a mind that some in the twenty first century in the West, hold as important and it set off a whole discourse in philosophy, Descartes “Cogito ergo sum” (French: Je pense, donc je suis; English: I think, therefore I am; or better, I am thinking, therefore I.

I think, a thought of mine, that Descartes got it wrong. He only had one part or a tripartite model and even this is not true, only a model. What I think, oops another thought, is that what he should have said “I believe therefore I am.” Yes, I know that to have a belief you must first have a thought. However a thought is only one piece of the model; and remember a model is only a model and not “The Truth.” You can have lots of thoughts that don’t make you who you are. Yes they are your thoughts however unless they form and consolidate into a belief they remain just that, a thought.

What is a belief?

I wish I could say that I developed this model, however I can’t. I first came across it from the work of Robert Dilts, his structure of a belief is

A causes B which means (x) Or Cause - Effect – Means.

This model is, I believe, the building block of everyone’s model of The World. Or may be is should be “Their Model of Their World.” The idea of a model we create is another way of stating the famous psychological saying, “Perception is Projection.”

Getting back to the question which is the right hypnotherapy, they all are depending on "Your client’s Model of Their World.”

Some people will respond to direct suggestion or reframing of their issues from, in quotes, “An authority figure.” Others will reject direct suggestion or it will set up an internal conflict and the traditional hypnotherapist will label them a resistant clients or not ready or prepared to change.

My current view, and I’m happy to have my belief’s changed by new information that makes sense to me (Hey it is my model of the world after all), is that all successful therapy Reframes Beliefs. How this is done, transference and counter transference, direct suggestion, indirect suggestion, unconscious responsibility, clean language, psychotherapy etc. depends on the beliefs of the therapist, which brings us nicely back to beliefs are the building blocks of your model of your world. Or put another way, I like to keep things simple, there is no such thing as The Truth, definite article, what you believe is A Truth, indefinite article, for you. Also you cannot hold a belief about something you have not had direct of indirect experience of.

Let me give a simple example of a couple of beliefs that a traditional hypnotherapist must hold in some form.

Belief one. Using direct hypnosis on x number of clients have been successful that means traditional hypnotherapy works. Note this is a digital meaning, that is either a yes or no meaning as opposed to analogue meaning of say on a scale of one to ten how successful is your model of therapy. Digital thinking is sometimes called black or white thinking.

Belief two. Of those clients who have not been successfully treated and kept their symptoms or developed other symptoms means that they were resistant or that symptom substitution is a real problem to be aware of.

Similar beliefs will be held by all therapists who hold onto the premise that their therapy is the only right and true therapy, which they will defend to the last penny or emotional investment they have in their training and are therefore will be prejudiced against any other model of therapy. I use the term model deliberately because a model is not the truth and good models are up dated as new information is obtained.

An example of a model

Weather forecasters use complex models to predict the weather. However they are also aware that their predictions are based on their current theories and the computations their computers make based on current knowledge. Michael Fish is famous for his, “No hurricane broadcast of 1987.” His prediction was based on the information of the models from the met office. Unfortunately or fortunately for him, after all he is semi-famous now, he was the person who said it to millions of television views. If you have not seen it you can find it on U-tube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqs1YXfdtGE

All therapies have their model’s, they are not truths just models. Interestingly Carl Jung, "paraphrased" said to his student’s of psychotherapy, “Learn all the techniques and interventions of psychotherapy then forget them and be with your client.”

I believe that to do good therapy, it is not the model I’m working out of that is important but, the model my client is working out of.

Therapists who rigidly hold onto their model of therapy are in danger of therapeutic prejudice or flat Earth thinking. Definition of Prejudice: prejudice n. An adverse judgment or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge or examination of the facts.

Please note a fact is an empirical observation or experience which may or may not be repeated and can be subject to up date. At one time in the past humanity believed that the Sun went around the Earth. To our eyes the Sun appeared in the East, traversed the sky and disappeared in the West. Based on empirical observation the only logical conclusion was that the Sun went around the Earth which was the observer’s truth. Please not that this was the only logical conclusion based on observation and level of knowledge at the time.

I don’t think, oops another thought, therapists of any persuasion should prejudge their client’s needs or cling to their model of therapy; people do not conform to models of therapy, unless they invest a great deal of time, learn and then conform to the model of therapy their therapist is operating from. Like the weather, clients are unpredictable, which is what makes being human and a therapist so interesting.

My answer to the question which is the right hypnotherapy; whatever method of suggestion works best for an individual client is the right type of hypnosis for them. To map across Carl Jung’s advice to his students, “Learn all the methods of hypnosis, (To learn something is to have it available, such as riding a bike or swimming) then forget them (Don’t become slavishly attached to them) and be and respond to your client’s model of their World.” Note I know Jung did not use the term “Model of the World” however that would be one interpretation I would put on the term, “Be with your client.” Another interpretation might be accept their reality.

To clear up any misunderstandings, I believe there is a lot of skill that goes into being a good therapist and the skills should not be confused with models of therapy. I have seen trained coaches and so called therapists do demonstrations at practice meetings with very little skill, they had the model but no skill.

A note regarding my opinion of Dr Milton H Erickson’s model of hypnotherapy, or as he calls it “Psychiatry,” Dr Erickson was trained in Traditional Hypnotherapy and Psychiatry; I don’t think that he developed Ericksonian Hypnosis. I think he learnt all he could about hypnosis and human nature and responded to the models his individual client’s operated out of. Therefore I do not think of Ericksonian Hypnosis as a model rather as a set of skills I will continue to develop to the day I die. Initially Erickson was pleased with the linguistic distinctions that Grinder and Bandler observed him using and wrote the forward to “Patterns 1, Patterns of the Hypnotic Techiques of Miton H. Erickson, M.D.”

Extract, “Although this book by Richard Bandler and John Grindr, to which I am contributing the Preface, is far from being a compete description of my methodologies, as they so clearly state it is a much better explanation of how I work than I, myself, can give. I know what I do, but to explain how I do it is much too difficult for me.” My interpretation of this part of the preface is that Erickson thought they described his linguistic syntax in a way that was easier to understand than he had yet found; a different perspective, actually two different perspectives, a linguists and a musician computer programmers. However, Gregory Bateson said that they had missed the point and later Dr Erickson was known to call them the heels on a loaf of bread. The heels are the crust ends on a loaf that lots of Americans would discard.

The Ericksonian hypnotherapy of NLP has, to my mind, become seen as something that therapist ‘do’ to their clients. Just look at one of the titles of Paul McKenna’s books, “I Can Make You X.” Well sorry to disappoint you Mr McKenna, you can’t make anyone anything, if you follow the model of whatever it is he is telling you he can make you, you may make yourself become X. Remember it is not Paul McKenna that will be doing the making, it will be you.

I believe Dr Erickson knew all along that it was not what he did that changed people but what he did enabled them to change themselves, a fundamental difference. He removed obstacles and limiting beliefs to open up possibility, he showed his client’s their way to effect change in themselves, he was truly with his clients in the way that Jung had suggested to his students. Each client’s treatment was unique so Dr Erickson’s methods cannot be copied or distilled, one can only hope to emulate his skills and principles. Paraphrased advice Dr Erickson gave his students, “Don’t copy what I do, learn all I can teach you and find your own hypnosis.” I would like to propose that Milton H. Erickson never had a model for therapy. He had skills of observation and sensory acuity that enabled him to respond to a client’s needs, in the moment, with infinite flexibility and patience. A therapy model of no model or infinite models.

Interestingly for me Dave Elman (1900 – 1967) and Milton Erickson (1901 – 1980) were contemporaries developing hypnosis from different perspectives. Dave Elman was training doctors in rapid inductions and the use of direct hypnosis and Erickson training psychiatrists in indirect hypnosis. I often wonder what would have been the outcome if these two had met and collaborated. I do know what the outcome of my understandings of these two great exponents of hypnosis is; I take things from both schools and make my hypnotherapy my own.

My parting question to you is, “Do you want to be a pale imitation of a model of one of your trainer/s or do you want to learn all the skills they can teach you and be a shining example of your own "no model skills" based hypnotherapy?”

Hypnosis or Trance?

By Alan Jones Principal of Empowerment Trainings
C.Hyp. Dip.Hyp. NLP Trainer

Some traditionalists believe that in order to be an effective hypnotherapist clients need to be in the state of somnambulism which is easily tested for. Some modern Ericksonian style hypnotherapists and NLP therapists believe that the conscious mind can be bypassed using vague language and be as, if not more, effective than traditional Hypnosis. Personally I think they are both right, in that the effectiveness of any therapy is, in part, down to the expectations of the client; consciously and unconsciously.

One operating principle of NLP is, “If what you are doing is not working do anything else.” So if you are using a traditional method to induce trance and it is not working as well as you would like, switch to an Ericksonain style trance and vice a versa. To hold on to a particular style, as Erickson might have said is “Too ridged.”

Some people may be aware of the work of Dave Elman, who for me is in between traditional and Ericksonian hypnosis. There are many, I’m sure who will disagree and that’s fine. Opinions are like bodies, everyone has one. I think that too many therapists get caught up in defending their therapy. Carl Jung told his students to learn all the skills of therapy then forget them and be with their client, who after all is the most important person in the therapeutic relationship, aren’t they?

The comments and articles on this blog can only ever be someone’s opinion, be it based on their experience or their understanding and both will always be limited to their knowledge and their experience. In my opinion there is no such thing as “The Truth,” we all have our on truths which can only be based on our experience and our knowledge; academic knowledge is someone else’s opinion’s, it cannot not be.

This blog is open to all styles of hypnosis and therapies, personally I use both direct and indirect inductions; traditional and modern and will happily mix and match my style to suit the client.

Some hypnotherapists speed up their speech tempo, I usually slow mine down to about 25% of my normal speaking voice and pace my phrases to the out breath of my client.

Whilst anyone can buy a book or download scripts from the internet, anyone not qualified as a hypnotherapist should be aware of the following contra indications to the use of trance:

If your client or person you intend to hypnotise is being treated by any other practitioner, including their GP, for the condition they are consulting you; it is good etiquette to get your client to check with them, that they have no objections to you treating the client at the same time. You may wish to refuse to treat a client if they have not sought the other practitioner’s agreement, even though the client insists it’s OK. One reason is, that having two therapies together for the same thing, will mean that the client cannot be sure which treatment is benefiting them.

Prescribed medication.

It is illegal to suggest or recommend that someone on prescribed medication stops taking it or changes the amount being taken unless you are a qualified and practicing Medical Doctor treating the client.

Treatment of Pain

Pain is a signal from the body that something is wrong. If you are not a medical doctor, it is imperative you have your client seek medical advice before using pain control.

Psychiatric Disorders

If a client has received psychiatric treatment for a clinically diagnosed condition such as bipolar disorder (manic depression), schizophrenia or psychotic behaviour etc. you must refer them back to their psychiatrist or GP, unless you are a qualified medical psychiatrist and have access to their medical records.

A client who is likely to cause harm to themselves or others

This is a matter of personal choice. However, if I did consider such a case, I would insist that the person sign an agreement that they do not harm themselves or anyone else whilst they are being treated.

On drugs that cause an altered state

Anti-depressants etc, seek written medical confirmation that hypnosis is in order. Always check out any drug you are not sure of, prior to treatment.

This includes someone who has been drinking alcohol or is currently high on so called recreational drugs.

Any condition you feel you are not confident about treating

Refer the client.


For those new to or interested in hypnosis what follows is a traditional basic progressive induction script, using presuppositions and embedded commands for added effectiveness, to relax and unwind; also known technically as a Fractional Induction. This is a no content induction and therapist wishing to effect change would use their own style of intervention.

Script

You may feel more comfortable if you just allow your eyes to close and turn your attention inwards now… and focus on your breathing…become aware of the air as it flows into your body and as you breath out notice how you can relax more now…and the next breath….as it were finds itself…without any effort on your part…in your imagination I’d like you to see a light…this may be a large or small light…your light may be colour…just know that the colour of your light is the right colour for you…and if by any chance you have not noticed the light yet that’s alright too…Sometimes we know things before we notice them and other times we notice them before we are aware of them haven’t you…and as you become more aware of the light…or know that it’s there before you see it…mores closer to you and down towards your toes…feel the sensation of the light entering your toes…I wonder if that is a tingling feeling, a warm feeling or another sensation…whatever feeling you may notice is right for you…no two times…you allow yourself to relax…are the same…each time you begin to enter this state of relaxation will be unique and sensations may change or be similar…that’s right…as the light continues to enter your toes feel it filling your feet up to the ankles now…releasing, releasing and letting go now…as the light moves up through your calves up to your knees and on to your hips, filling you thighs and buttocks as you continue to relax, release and just let go now…as the light moves on up through your stomach…I wonder whether the sensations are changing as you relax deeper now…or if they are becoming more familiar to your conscious mind…while your unconscious mind…enjoys these feelings of relaxation…as the light continues to spread up through your back…relaxing your back muscles now…you may go back, right back to a time when you felt really relaxed haven’t you…as the light and those feelings spread through your neck up over the back of your head and down across your forehead, over your eyes, nose and down your chin…and I wonder if you’ve even bothered to noticed that your breathing has changed to a more relaxing and gentle rhythm…let the light relax the small muscles above your eyes…behind your eyes…relax the space at the back of your eyes…relax…give yourself the permission to enjoy the luxury…of letting go…completely…allow the light to continue to relax the space behind your eyes as those relaxing feelings gently float down through the roof of your mouth into your tongue…and as your tongue relaxes even more… just allow your jaw… to relax so your tongue can just float in your mouth, go deeper….go deeper…let it happen…let it happen…now simply follow the trance…your unconscious….mind is leading you on…follow your trance…into deep peaceful relaxation…

If you would like information about training to be a Clinical Hypnotherapist with Empowerment Trainings please click here or email alan@empowerment-trainings.org.uk

Can you really tell if someone is lying using NLP?

Recently I have seen some daytime television where shows are using Lie detector machines or so called experts who claim they know when someone is lying with 96% accuracy. Jeremy Kyle, Tricia and Judge Judy are some.

Judge Judy claims to know when someone is lying by their “Eye Accessing Cues,” a little more about them in a moment, Jeremy Kyle uses a lie detector machine and Tricia uses an expert. Some of the results and the shows hosts assertions change people’s lives; for the good or the worst only the individual’s concerned will know in time.

On a recent repeated show of Jeremy Kyle’s, five people took lie detector tests, four came back that they were telling the truth, the fifth’s result came back as inconclusive. Apparently the person being tested had a slight reaction, not enough for the expert to say they were lying. Jeremy Kyle then added, “One day you may tell her the truth.” This is a very damaging and dangerous remark because of the asserted implication that the person was lying and the seed of doubt is sowed in the other four minds. The preverbal, “Maggot eating away inside the apple,” as they now cannot help but question everything the other person says or does and go over events to look for clues that they may have lied.

At Talisman Training and Empowerment Training we know there is a difference between “The Truth” and someone lying. If someone believes what they are saying is the truth, then they are telling “Their Truth,” and cannot be said to be lying. This may not be the objective truth of say a video of a particular event, and even a video will only see and record sound from where it is placed, one perspective. For example four people can witness an accident; there will be four different versions of what happened. They can all be telling their truth and yet all four may not be telling “The Truth,” that’s why the Police have special accident investigators and scene of crime investigators. This is not done to prove someone is lying but to piece together their recollections and corroborate their experience of the event. Our truth’s are subjective and are limited by our sensory equipment, sight, hearing, feeling, taste, smell and our filters. Quantum Physics now accepts that the way an experiment is set-up and what the experimenter expects to prove has an effect on the results of their experiment. For more information have a look at Rupert Sheldrake Online

Electrical Lie Detectors

The lie detector or PolyGram only detects changes in emotions; it alone cannot tell if someone is lying. I will repeat that last bit, “It alone cannot tell if someone is lying,” only that the individual showed emotional reactions outside of a base mark about the question asked. This is the same for the so called experts. The only real way of telling if someone is lying is for them to tell you they lied. Anyone wanting more information about the PolyGram can visit Skeptics

Recent research suggests that in the future there may be a more accurate way of telling if someone is lying using brain scans, though as one of the researchers Feroze Mohamed, PhD, says, "There's a lot more reseach required." See utube clip here

Firstly let’s look at the advice of the world’s foremost expert in lie detection and FBI interview trainer Paul Eckman PhD. “There is NO ONE THING that a person may or may not do that indicates they are lying.” Paraphrased, “There are indications of inconsistency which need to be gone over again and again and areas where corroborating evidence needs to be sort.”

In NLP we use the information from "Eye Accessing Cues" for increased rapport and the benefit of our client’s so this is very useful model. At Talisman Training and Empowerment Trainings we teach a combination of Analytical Interviewing, NLP and Clean Elicitation for interviewing, this is amazingly effective and is one of the most respectful ways of interviewing young and other vulnerable witness, and interviewing generally for jobs and critical incident interviewing.

Eye Accessing Cues Explained.

Eye accessing cues are the movements our eye’s make when we are seeking information. With calibrating, that is continually checking it out; Eye Accessing Cues can tell us how someone is processing information, not if they are lying.

The Eye’s can be split into three zone, Upper, Middle and Lower. When the eyes move into the upper zone either left or right the person is processing visually, in pictures or movies, when the eyes move left or right in the middle zone, that is horizontally, the person is processing sounds, which we call auditory. When the eyes move into the lower zone the person is either processing through feelings, emotions or tactile feelings and playing internal tape loops, called inner dialogue. Generally a right-handed person will look up and to the left to remember pictures or movies and right to construct pictures or movies, look left in the middle zone to remember sounds and middle right to construct sounds, look down and to the left for internal dialogue and down right for emotions and tactile feelings. See diagram. The big misconception is that is a person is constructing either pictures or sounds they are lying. The only thing it means, if they are right-handed and conform to the model, is that they are processing information by constructing or reconstructing it, rather than it being a remembered picture or sequence of sounds.

Let me give you an example. If I asked you what you had for dinner on a Wednesday four weeks ago can you remember? Some people can, some will work backwards and reconstruct, piece together, what they had and others like me would not have a clue.

The Eye Accessing Cues is a model, not everyone conforms to it, not all left-handed people are the reverse of the right-handed model. The only way to find out how a person is processing information is to check it out on an individual basis. Remember that this is only a model of someone’s processing and not a lie detecting model. Also remember that a constructed picture or sound, once constructed can become a memory and change to a remembered picture or sound.

Conclusions on lying.

If someone is willing to deliberately tell lies so the observer or a Polygraph can be calibrated to the act of lying then are asked simple questions of no value, for example they turn over a deck of cards one at a time and they can either tell the observer the truth of a lie about the cards then you may get good at telling if they are lying about this trivial matter. Ask them a question about something that is important to them, something they don’t want you to know or is sensitive, then you might get a reaction and still you won’t know for sure if they are telling the truth or lying, especially if they believe what they are telling is “Their Truth.”

It is unsafe to presume you know someone is lying without independent corroborating evidence and even then they could still be telling you what they believe, which to them is not a lie.

I would suggest that we should all be very careful what we consider to be a lie as everyone’s truth is only as good as their senses, their filters and what they paid attention too at the time.

Using the Clean Elicitation Interviewing model developed by Talisman Training and Empowerment Training you can effectively recover more information from the interviewee than they consciously remember in a safe and respectful way.

Alan Jones

Point of interest:

Paul Eckman PhD has spent years studying micro muscle movements of the face there is an interesting clip of a micro part of his work on U-tube. To view the clip click here His interviewing technique is called "Analytical Interviewing."