Meta model (NLP)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is under development, and also missing citations for certain statements

One of a series of articles on Neuro-linguistic programming (NLP)
Main articles NLP · Principles · Topics · History NLP and science · Therapy · Bibliography
Concepts and methods Modeling · Meta model · Milton model Perceptual positions · Rapport · Reframing Representation systems · Submodalities Positive intention · Meta program · Neurological levels Anchoring · Well-formed outcome
People Richard Bandler · John Grinder Robert Dilts · Stephen Gilligan Judith DeLozier · David Gordon Connirae Andreas · Steve Andreas Frank Pucelik · Paul McKenna Ross Jeffries · Tony Robbins Genie Laborde · Charles Faulkner
Principal influences Fritz Perls · Gestalt therapy Milton Erickson · Hypnotherapy Virginia Satir · Family therapy Transformational linguistics Gregory Bateson · Paul Watzlawick Epistemology · Double Bind Alfred Korzybski · Map-territory Frank Farrelly · Provocative therapy This box: view • talk • edit

The Meta-model of Neuro-linguistic programming or Meta-model of Therapy is heuristic set of questions designed to specify information, challenge and expand the limits to a person's model of the world. It responds to the distortions, generalizations, and deletions in the speaker's language.^[2] The meta model forms the basis of Neuro-linguistic programming as developed by then assistant professor of linguistics, John Grinder and Richard Bandler ^[1].

The meta model draws on transformational grammar and general semantics, the idea that language is a translation of mental states into words, and that in this translation, there is an unconscious process of deletion (not everything thought is said), distortion (assumptions and structural inaccuracies) and generalization (a shift towards absolute statements). Likewise in hearing, not everything said is acknowledged as heard.

These language patterns were based on the work of family therapist Virginia Satir, gestalt therapist Fritz Perls and linguistic patterns from Transformational syntax ^[2]. It is claimed that the Meta-model "yields a fuller representation of the client's model of the world - the linguistic Deep Structure from which the client's initial verbal expressions or Surface Structure, were derived" ^[1] by offering challenges to its limits, the distortions, generalizations or deletions in the speaker's language ^[1]. The reverse set of the meta-model is the Milton-model; a collection of artfully vague language patterns elicited from the work of Milton Erickson ^[3].

The following examples were derived from therapeutic contexts. The developers state that these patterns can be identified in all human communication.

Contents 1 Discussion 2 Examples 2.1 Distortion: Semantic Well-formedness 2.1.1 Presupposition 2.1.2 Cause-effect 2.1.3 Mind-reading violation 2.1.4 Lost Performative 2.2 Generalization 2.2.1 Nominalization 2.2.2 Universal quantifiers 2.2.3 Modal operators 2.2.4 Complex equivalence 2.3 Deletion 2.3.1 Unspecified Comparative 2.3.2 Unspecified referential index 3 Influences 4 See also 5 References

[edit] Discussion

Definition of the meta-model:

"People respond to events based on their internal pictures, sounds and feelings. They also collect these experiences into groups or categories that are labeled with words. The meta-model is a method for helping someone go from the information-poor word maps back to the specific sensory-based experiences they are based on. It is here in the information-rich specific experiences that useful changes can be made that will result in changes in behavior." ^[4]

Uses of meta model in psychotherapy:

"The question the PTSD victim often asks is, why did this happen to me? The astute clinician needs to probe for the deep meaning (Bandler & Grinder, 1975) of the term "this." What specific aspect(s) of the event have toxic meanings to the individual? In addition, the clinician needs to assess the specific attributions that patients give to their responses. For instance, if they believe that because they have intrusive memories of the experience, they are crazy, this will lead to increased suffering." ^[5]

[edit] Examples

[edit] Distortion: Semantic Well-formedness

[edit] Presupposition

Presupposition, refers to an assumption whereby the truth is taken for granted.

Crucially, negation of an expression does not change its presuppositions: I want to do it again and I don't want to do it again both mean that the subject has done it already one or more times; My wife is pregnant and My wife is not pregnant both mean that the subject has a wife. In this respect, presupposition is distinguished from entailment and implication. For example, The president was assassinated entails that The president is dead, but if the expression is negated, the entailment is not necessarily true.

Examples:

• "My wife is pregnant."
• Presupposition: You have a wife.

• "Do you want to do it again?"
• Presupposition: I have done it already, at least once.
• Challenge: "Have I done it before?"

• "My husband is as lazy as my son."
• Presuppositions: You have a husband; you have a son; your son is lazy.
• Challenge: "Am I to assume that your son is lazy?"

[edit] Cause-effect

Cause-effect, the inappropriate use of causal thinking (x means y, x makes me y, or x makes y happen)

Causality always implies at least some relationship of dependency between the cause and the effect. For example, deeming something a cause may imply that, all other things being equal, if the cause occurs the effect does as well, or at least that the probability of the effect occurring increases.

Example:

• "That news makes me angry."
• Challenge: "If it weren't for that news, you would not be angry?"

[edit] Mind-reading violation

"Mind-reading" violation occurs when someone claims to think they know what another is thinking without verification.

Example:

• "If he doesn't start paying his share of the bills, she is going to leave him."
• Challenge: "Has she told you that she intends to leave him if he doesn't?"

[edit] Lost Performative

Lost Performative, makes reference to an action but the person who performed the action is unspecified.

Example:

• "Her book was highly acclaimed."
• Challenge: "Highly acclaimed by whom?" or "How do you know that?"

[edit] Generalization

[edit] Nominalization

Nominalization occurs when a verb is transformed into a noun

In English, some verbs and adjectives can be used directly as nouns, for example, change and good. Others require a suffix:

• applicability (from applicable)
• carelessness (from careless)
• difficulty (from difficult)
• failure (from fail)
• intensity (from intense)
• investigation (from investigate)
• movement (from move)
• reaction (from react)
• refusal (from refuse)
• swimming (from swim)
• nominalization (from nominalize)

Examples:

• "The communication [from 'communicate'] in this company is poor."
• Challenge: "How could we communicate more effectively?"

• "They need my decision [from 'decide'] by Monday."
• Challenge: "Have you decided yet?"

[edit] Universal quantifiers

Universal quantifiers occurs when someone attempts to spuriously characterize an entire set (all people, every X, everyone, everything, ...). That is, an attempt to formalise the notion that something (a logical predicate) is true for everything, or every relevant thing.

Example:

• "My co-workers are all lazy."
• Challenge: "All of them?" or "Which co-workers, specifically?"

[edit] Modal operators

Modal operators are intuitively characterised by expressing a modal attitude, such as necessity (have to, must, should) or possibility (can, might, may) towards the proposition which it is applied to.

Example:

• "I can't put myself together."
• Challenge: "What would happen if you did/didn't?"

[edit] Complex equivalence

Complex equivalence draws an unrelated conclusion from an event to create a logic that "does not follow" See also: non sequitur

Example:

• "And now my secretary quit. I'll be bankrupt by the end of the year!"
• Challenge: "Are you telling me your fortune depended on your secretary's employment?"

[edit] Deletion

[edit] Unspecified Comparative

Unspecified Comparatives or null comparative is a comparative in which the starting point for comparison is not stated. These comparisons are frequently found in advertising. For example, in typical assertions such as "our burgers have more flavor", "our picture tube is sharper" or "50% more", there is no mention of what it is they are comparing to. In some cases it is easy to infer what the missing element in a null comparative is. In other cases the speaker or writer may have been deliberately vague in this regard, for example "Glasgow's miles better". The null comparative

Example:

• "That was the best plan."
• Challenge: "What were some of the other plans?"

• "Our picture tube is sharper"
• Challenge: "Sharper, compared to what?"

[edit] Unspecified referential index

Unspecified referential index, refers to the use of personal pronoun when the context is unknown, or can not easily be understood based on the preceding sentences. For example uncontextualised use of they, them, you, ...

Example:

• "They say I should go into business, but I don't know if I have the confidence."
• Challenge: "Who is it that says you should go into business?"

• "Yeah, I have tried alcohol before. It makes you say stupid things."
• Challenge: "Wait, it makes me say stupid things?"

• "I hate watching the Vikings in the playoffs. We always lose and it makes me depressed."
• Challenge: "By 'we', do you mean that you are part of the Vikings?"

^[1]

[edit] Influences

John Grinder did his doctoral thesis on Noam Chomsky's Transformational Grammar.^[2].

It can also be traced to the nominalistic tradition of William of Ockham.^{[citation needed]}

An effort unrelated by origin but going in the same direction of improving clarity of communication is the constructed language Loglan (and its close cousin, Lojban).^{[citation needed]}

[edit] See also

• Problem of universals
• Neuro-linguistic programming
• Richard Bandler - co-creator of this meta model
• John Grinder - co-creator of this meta model
• Fritz Perls
• Virginia Satir
• Transformational Grammar
• List of NLP topics
• Modeling (NLP)

[edit] References

1. ^ ^{a b c d} Bandler, Richard & John Grinder (1975a). [- The Structure of Magic I: A Book About Language and Therapy]. Palo Alto, CA: Science & Behavior Books., ch.3. -. 
2. ^ ^{a b} Grinder, John & Carmen Bostic St Clair (2001.). Whispering in the Wind. CA: J & C Enterprises, 127, 171, 222, ch.3, Appendix. -. 
3. ^ Bandler, Richard, John Grinder, Judith Delozier (1977). [- Patterns of the Hypnotic Techniques of Milton H. Erickson, M.D. Volume II]. Cupertino, CA: Meta Publications., -. -. 
4. ^ (Steve Andreas, 2003 [1])
5. ^ Schwarz, R.; Proute, M. Intergrative approaches in the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training. 28(2) pp.364-373.