It can be used in the 'field' to know how your clients represent their inner world of realities. If you can understand 'how' a person represents fun, pain, love etc. you can work with that inner world more gracefully and skilfully.

Auditory Digital is self-talk or thinking to yourself. It's often the place you'll do internal calculations also, (which is one reason most people wear a watch on the left hand)

Good to hear that, as this exercise was probably the least successful I've ever done! I left it up because of it's imperfections and to show that you need your (client/person) in a good state plus not all questions are good enough to get the eyes moving perfectly where the demo was supposed to go. The idea as a practitioner is to have enough sensory awareness to get information from as many places as possible...and eye patterns are a good starting place :)

Excellent tutorial. keep it up

If they are looking down to their left they are accessing auditory digital (self talk). That just means they are thinking about it or thinking about an an answer.....or it could mean that they have what's called a 'lead' system of auditory digital, which is more complex to explain, but means they always go to that system for internal information

Ive been looking into this, it kind works.

It's okay, no apology needed, but I appreciate that there is so much self-criticism of this clip. This is my first consideration of this and the model does have good, clear eye movements. As I move from country to country and culture to culture, I have to learn and re-learn, and un-learn a lot. Thanks.

If there are any traumas in areas or parts that don't like to communicate it could indicate that you may have 'stuff' to clean up. Visual Recall (VR) are where all your memories are stored. And that's not a bad thing, we all have past issues to clean up!

Left handedness can be a factor, yet I'm left handed and 'normally' organised! A better 'spot' is which hand do they wear their watch on. If it's the right hand, look our for reversed.

great stuff. Thanks

@reghin79 your comment ius very interesting and it makes me to try to undersand better not only the eye movementes froma different prospective but also the real and effective use of them in thereapy, work, real life, etc. Have any article or website for more information on this specific subject? Txs a lot.

@terryelston it's very interesting what you say. Never knew why we a watch on ou rleft hand. Txs for that.

It's self talk. Sometimes called the labeling system. It's the part of you that can quantify or describe without emotion being involved.

@ERIN478 there is some information online about autism and eye patterns, yet I have had no personal experience as yet.

Amazing

(English is not my first language) ...I think I understand what this 6 identifiers mean except Auditory Digital....I find this very interesting :).. and I´m going to check this out more...Thanks

Thank you MR angry for your comments. All of NLP is an experiential and experimental practice. Therefore it's advised YOU try these things out and see what YOU find. NLP is not a religion! Collectively we are all contributing something to life's questions, who are we and HOW do we make life work? Discerning whether you make a comment from your own frustration in life or as a contribution to all of us, is also your own experiment in life. 'Seeing' is not only from the eyes!

i'm reading frogs into princes and this really helped.

I don't see why this isn't a great example. It's real. It also shows us that it isn't always the case that a persons eyes will go to these places. Some people may visualise wet socks before they go to the 'feeling' of. People are different and sometimes reversed. We need to keep this in mind. Eye directions can give us clues about how a person is using their brain, we mustn't forget this and berate them for not accessing the areas we 'expect' them to.

She mostly looks to the areas that we light up, but remember, this is much easier in real time and without the 'cameras' being on you. It's simply to show how the brain has different areas that are being accessed, and the eyes are simply a clue of what kind of information is being used I.E. Visual remembered, self talk etc.

So what I don't get is whose left and right!

with the times table part at about 3:00 she visualizes the numbers in her mind she may not know the 13 times table she looks at the numbers she knows in her mind thats why she looks up correct me if i'm wrong

how can this be used in the field?

Have you visited the better version? You can get that from the description just below the video From our experience the patterns are all the same. This is from having thousands of clients and trainings. You just have to ask the right question - there's no question that visuals are held in one place and feelings in another. Same for sounds and thoughts.

If u ask someone " are u dating someone now?" , and the person look down and to the left and says " no" what does it mean? Does it the person is lying becos the person seems to recalling visual and auditory info ie recalling the person he/ she is dating?

@rometube I thought that's because most of us are right handed, where a watch might be an obstruction ...

what exactly is Auditory Digital....is that when you are thinking of numbers?

if the question was " have you been dating anyone recently?" then surely looking down and left ie accessing internal info is a sign of lying? after if the person had not been dating then there would be nothing to access?

The above was supposed to be a response to cooperm. Occasionally people are wired "backwards". Don't tell the person you are mapping them when you casually ask a question re their past, recent or otherwise. A pre-planned lie will still appear in their constructed/future zone, or they may look down to check how they feel about what they are saying. there will be a difference.

To the comment "we don't create images out of nothing", kind of limits our imagination. Put it this way, we may have an idea of a 'something', yet the construct portion is where you'd go to edit it to make it yours. I've been working with eye patterns for about 14 years now, it's best to try these things out for yourselves and see what results you get.....

Yes, you can immediately look in his eyes and say, "here, have the lot"...knowing you have enough confidence to make more money at any time.

What if the person looks in your eyes directly for every question and for every answer?

@theonlyyamaman Exactly. Im not gonna say to much more cause you kinda already said it.How bias is it to say to someone THATs RIGHT.I wonder what that does?I read the comment respond to your post and all Im/were're saying is there shouldnt be any reenforcement favorable to the observer

I just do the exact oposite when I lie, I give the eye cues of someone who would be recalling something true. When I tell the truth I dart my eyes down and to the right to confuse people.

Here is a good test, maybe. Check out videos where someone is looking directly into a camera talking about diet, exercise, losing weight... whatever. Mute the volume before watching and write down the eye movement pattern name, i.e., VR (visual recall) with the time, pausing helps. Then go back and watch it with the volume un-muted to see if what they talk about correlates to the eye pattern. This NLP technique doesn't appear very consistent.

@svanurmg Auditory Internal Dialogue.

but she almost never used her audio part of the brain, and the glitch should indicate that she hasn't a very strong audio"capasity". but Im picking up that the guy says her audio i dominant, or am I getting it wrong? according to me she is strong with pictures. thanks

heis constantly giving her cues as to what he wants her to do, and then rewarding her. how many times does he say thats great to her? its hard to tell if there is anything relly going on.

That's usually if the question is too simple and they literally do not have 'to go' anywhere to answer the questions.

This idea doesn't really gel with what I think is a generally accepted fact that people's brains are often uniquely organized. Why would eyes be uniform if our brains aren't. But actually I think there is definitely information to be read from the eyes - but it must be read with the heart and not the mind. Intuition it is called! Also he seemed to identify things that I didn't see, and gloss over some other stuff. Thank u

@terryelston

6 жыл бұрын

Thanks for your comments Anya - and yes, the way I train NLP these days is not a "one fits all" process. NLP has at it's very roots the idea of finding things out rather than presupposing. A good NLP Practitioner will ask a lot of good questions before going onto any technique. And with eye patterns a ton of research has been assimilated and agreement on the conformity is also established. Neuro science tells us that the brain has different compartments for different senses. The eyes gives that away as people (99.9% exactly the same and .1% the same but reversed) will look in the same direction for the same senses (Pictures, sounds, feelings etc.). Not just that, I've been training since 1999 and have experienced this with literally thousands of people now. There's a better example of eye patterns here: I agree that wasn't one of the best demo's. Here's a much better one. kzread.info/dash/bejne/aq1626WwoZm7YbA.html

I noticed that she had a tendency to look at you. I think that could have interfered with the readings. She was nervous, and instinctively trying to check out YOUR body language to understand what was going on. So that's why her eyes kept shifting to the left.

NLP is about experimentation as well as being a science. Check it out for yourself. I don't ask anyone to believe me about anything. You must research before making conclusions. We could have faked this session with Claire but I've left in all the bits that didn't quite work as well as those that did.

Do people with autism or Asperger's show different movements than do those without?

FFD

Then we'll disagree as 'held in one place' doesn't translate as uniformity of eye movements. 'have to ask the right questions' likewise, becomes a self-fulfilling reinforcement. But if you find it works for you then who am I to argue. (I'll have a look at the other vid, thanks)

Yes, that's probably what happened there.....she went up to see if she could see it.

Yeah. It is easier in normal conditions. Your viewers are just concerned they are getting inaccurate information because she did have some idea as to the situation and what was going on.

Notice how he appears when he has no reason to lie ( map him ), then notice a change. For instance, someone was telling me a list of things they had done during the prior weekend. As she did she seemed comfortably making eye contact with me. Only while mentioning one activity, she looked down and away. I said I didn't know why, but that she was uncomfortable regarding the bookstore. Turned out it was she was purposely omitting the fact it was a Christian bookstore. Mapping or calibrating.

Just try this with someone. It's really difficult to 'pretend' and 'make' your eyes go to different places. She has no idea where she's supposed to look here. Not every pattern is clear and that's why you have to ask different questions and get the person to try and not be under 'test' pressure. In normal conditions it's much easier!

The letters that light up are where she is supposed to be looking. As you can see, she doesn't always go to those places immediately This video is not for research as we know the eye patterns are accurate, it's to give people an idea of eye patterns so you can work with clients more easily. Mostly useful in natural surroundings. When the eyes go to different quadrants they are seeing pictures listening to sounds, remembering data etc. Not useful to the everyday person not working with clients..

Basically this video shows that Eye Accessing Cues technique barely works and if it does its very random and not reliable.

I like how by the likes and dislikes on a video we can tell if its bullshit! WE TRUST US! ALL HAIL UNITY!

This is only ever a rough guide for SOME people. The key is to calibrate your subject with questions in your everyday chatting and watch for the reaction. I find that even knowing this, has minimal use, but watching the whole face, especially the mouth, tells me more about what a person is thinking. This is a tad staged if she already knows the drill, but ok for a demo.

To be honest, I think the only reason this information hasn't been proven yet is because they do tests like this, and the subjects consciously know what's going on... If you were to randomly ask a question, I think that the subject would in fact make some kind of eye pattern. Everyone differs... And that's why it's important on getting to know someone beforehand before they find out which representational system the subject prefers... I know this isn't possible for therapists mind you.

What i am saying is check it out for yourself. Your own research. The eye patterns of NLP have been extensively researched by Robert Dilts 25 years ago. The research took two years and in some respect is used in a technique called EMDR, which uses eye patterns to sync different parts of the brain. The kind of 'research' done in the name of science by guys sitting round at desks or in test tubes is not the type i prefer to give authority to. Please try out for yourselves, then give judgment.

doesnt really seem right

You still displaying the GLOBE? You may have missed the memo. You don't live in on floating spining ball.

@toErehWon

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you for the video, very well!

I saw her go to audio construct over and over again. I don't know what he's talking about.

That may be true in THEORY, yet I work with phobias, cancer patients, that the men in white coats have no answers for! You can't just do positive thinking on cancer or phobias, yet I can get a stranger and release a phobia in less than 30 minutes. I am more interested in early scientists (Egypt and further back), who were scientific observers and used experiential evidence in equal order. The experience of love has more learning than any 'scientific' rendering. Experience and research equally

I'm sorry, this suggests a uniformity that simply doesn't exist. Eye accessing cues are individual & probably need re-calibrated constantly if they have any worth. This is a bit like saying everyone you punch will react in exactly the same way & every time! Simplistic nonsense.

What the hell was this recorded with? A wet dish cloth?