Download File

Mirror Neurons: The Neuropsychology of NLP Modelling
by Richard Thompson and Chris Collingwood
NLP is a modelling technology, the purpose of which is to attend to, describe and transfer
models of excellence. The process of NLP modelling has been described as the “core activity of
NLP by Bostic St. Clair and Grinder and as such is the most important activity in the
development of the field of NLP”. The finding of mirror neurons has been hailed as the single
most important unpublicised story of the decade by world-renowned neuroscientist V.S.
Ramachandran (2000), who believes that “mirror neurons will do for psychology what DNA did
for biology.” Here we review the links between this important finding and NLP.





Mirror Neurons: Scientists claim to have recently isolated the neural substrates of
imitation and modelling in the brain, showing evidence from brain-based research that
humans are natural-born imitators.
Modelling: The process of NLP modelling, when done correctly, duplicates the process
of natural learning, and new research reveals that the brain is capable of laying down new
motor skills through observation.
Difficulties in Modelling: New Code NLP emphasises the importance of a highperformance mental state during the process of modelling, and significant research
illustrates the importance of one key element in particular (the absence of internal
dialogue) in the development of such a modelling state.
From Motor to Cognitive Modelling: In addition to learning physical skills, modelling
enables the uptake of new cognitive strategies and processes. Physiological and
psychological evidence suggests how such a process can occur.
Summary and References: Analysing academic resources reveals intriguing overlaps
between experiential discoveries within NLP and experimentally-confirmed hypotheses
within the field of neuropsychology. Investigating the neural substrates of NLP processes
allows us an additional perspective from which to examine the claims of NLP.
NLP and Mirror Neurons
The discipline of NLP has grown tremendously over the last twenty-five years with the
popularisation of its applications through books, seminars and the occasional guru (for example,
Anthony Robbins). Irrelevantly to its popularity yet significantly to the technology is its
grounding in rigorous evidence from the cognitive sciences. One of the co-creators Grinder, a
linguist, abducted knowledge from the world of linguistic across into NLP. For example in
linguistics language is considered, and there is considerable evidence supporting this, to be rule
governed. Bostic St Clair and Grinder (2001) strongly suggest that patterns of human excellence
are rule governed. So creating models which elucidate the patterns of human excellence is at the
core of the field of Neuro-Linguistic Programming.
In Neuro-Linguistic Programming we have a distinctive type of modelling called NLP modelling
whose function is the creation of models of human excellence. Grinder and Bostic St Clair
(2001, p.271) define NLP modelling as “the mapping of tacit knowledge into explicit
knowledge”.
A growing body of research is moving into investigating this area, which, in the NLP community
has been widely acknowledged, accepted and discussed for years: the capacity of humans to
learn by imitation.
Surprising new findings in this area indicate that in order for people to be such good imitative
learners, certain areas of neurons in the brain have developed which translate from the visual
perception of another’s actions into a simulation of those same actions inside the circuits in the
brain that we use for our own movement (i.e. the motor and premotor cortices; see figure below).
The most important implication of this finding is that we now have empirical evidence showing
that people, at the most basic neural levels, are modelling others, learning from their behaviour
by directly simulating them in their minds. As Ramachandran (2000) has said, “It’s as if anytime
you want to make a judgment about someone else’s movements you have to run a VR (virtual
reality) simulation of the corresponding movements in your own brain and without mirror
neurons you cannot do this.”
The primary motor and premotor cortices exist to execute physical, bodily actions. Recent
evidence suggests that they are also used to directly simulate another person’s (or animal’s)
observed actions. Image from “The Brain from Top to Bottom” online brain encyclopedia.
The specific sets of neurons responsible for this in the brain are known as ‘mirror neurons’, and
were first discovered in monkeys (Gallese, Fadiga, Fogassi, & Rizzolatti, 1996). Mirror neurons
are now known to exist in humans, in much more complex configurations and with more highly
sophisticated capacities (Fadiga, Fogassi, Pavesi, & Rizzolatti, 1995, Rizzolatti & Craighero,
2004).
The key important functional element of these mirror neurons is that they become active both
when a person makes a particular action (for example, when grasping an object) and when he
observes another individual performing a similar action. Thus, as Giacomo Rizzolatti, Fogassi,
& Gallese (2001) explain, the brain has a neural mechanism that allows a direct matching
between the visual description of an action and its execution. The brain is hard-wired, by nature,
to translate the results of a visual analysis directly into action and to interpreting the visual world
with our own motor circuitry.
Intriguingly, while the mirror neurons in monkeys do not respond when actions are not explicitly
goal-oriented, human mirror neuron networks are stimulated in response to actions which are
apparently meaningless, indicating a tendency to spontaneously model any and all movements by
others (Giacomo Rizzolatti, Fogassi, & Gallese, 2001).
Humans as Natural Modellers
These fascinating findings of course provide support for the idea that humans are natural
modellers – we model the physiology of another person in the very parts of our motor cortex
which control our own physiology, and this is an automatic, natural process. The parallels
between these findings and the core NLP process of modelling is immediately obvious.
In fact, very recent investigations into the capacities of mirror neurons reveal the surprising
influence they have on new behavioural learning (Stefan et al., 2005). This research shows that
the brain actually lays down memories of movements and actions observed by another as though
the person themselves has performed them. The striking implications of this is that simply
observing another individual performing some activity can create new memory traces and
learning, adding to our behavioural repertoire before even taking physical action ourselves. The
new ‘memory’ traces can then support and enhance learning. Katja Stefan and colleagues
recently (2005) have collected data that raises “the intriguing possibility that observational
practice may improve motor performance by mechanisms similar to those involved in motor skill
acquisition by physical training.”
The memories that are laid down through this intriguing process are not simply constrained to an
isolated existence within the brain, either. Multiple experiments have shown that this type of
knowledge is readily accessible in a people’s physiology. Fadiga et. al. (1995) found that the
observation of certain movements enhanced measurable muscular signals generated from
artificially stimulating a person’s motor cortex (using transcranial magnetic stimulation).
Rizzolatti & Craighero (2004) also review evidence showing that people’s ability to perform an
action is significantly improved when they have watched someone performing that action. Thus,
observation directly improves muscle performance via mirror neurons.
These capacities are exploited to their fullest n the process of NLP modelling, a methodology
consisting of a series of processes for assimilating, reproducing, describing (coding) and
transferring human capability. It consists of a five stage process.
The first phase is identifying an appropriate exemplar as the model of excellence. In phase two
the modeller takes an unconscious uptake of patterns demonstrated by the model (this phase ties
in with the findings on mirror neurons) avoiding conscious understanding at this stage. Phase
three is an evaluative phase based on feedback gained from demonstrating the modelled patterns
in the appropriate context. Phase four occurs when the modeller achieves criterion that is, he or
she can reproduce the skill in the same context with the same outcomes in the same time frames
as the model of excellence. At this stage in the modelling process the modeller sorts his or her
behaviour keeping behaviours that are relevant and discarding those that are idiosyncratic and
not essential to the skill being modelled. Phase five is the explicit coding stage where the
constituent patterns of he model are coded (described) in a suitable form for transfer to others.
The final phase is actual transfer of the skill to others with testing and modification of the model
as necessary.
Difficulties in Modelling
We know that children are fantastic imitative learners, display frequent and overt imitative
behaviours and learn new motor and verbal skills very quickly (Meltzoff & Moore, 1977,
Meltzoff & Prinz, 2002). In most adults this imitative ability often seems to fade as we age. NLP
explains this phenomena as resulting from an over-emphasis on internal dialogue and what
Grinder calls linguistic filters, in contexts where those capacities become hindrances.
Recent empirical evidence supports NLP’s explanation for this difficulty in learning, and that
direct modelling is an example of a context where internal dialogue hinders learning. Phase 2 of
modelling – the disengagement of conscious (linguistic) filters and the unconscious uptake
(implicit learning) of the demonstrated patterns – are the stages that explicitly involve mirror
neuron circuitry. In phase 3 we also avoid linguistic filtering and attend to sensory experience
(without conscious understanding) as a way of ‘bedding in’ the neural patterning that have
already been laid down in the ‘unconscious uptake’ phase. This disengagement of linguistic
filtering is key to the process of modelling, and the importance of this has found support recently
in research by Stefan et al. (2005), who found that engaging the motor system in an unrelated
task impaired learning which involves mirror-neuron systems.
It is well understood within the field of NLP that in order to learn with maximal effectiveness
(i.e. to model a skill), it is imperative for the learner to engage a specifically-designed ‘modelling
state’, characterised by open peripheral vision and an absence of internal dialogue.
As an analogue to this knowledge, originally discovered experientially by Bandler and Grinder,
recent evidence from experiments into cognitive processing reveal that subvocalization strongly
involves motor processing, which, thanks to Stefan and colleagues, we know impairs mirrorneuron-based learning. Aleman & Wout (2004) found that performance on an auditory-verbal
imagery task was significantly affected by concurrent articulatory suppression, equally as much
as by concurrent finger tapping, illustrating that subvocalization – a habitual and persistent
behaviour in the majority of adults – essentially represents a distracting motor activity, severely
impairing neural learning through mirror neurons.
Thus, we find support for the known importance of a state absent of subvocalisation, a motor
behaviour which distracts and impairs learning through direct simulation and modelling
capacities of mirror neurons.
In accordance with New-Code principles and Bostic St. Clair and Grinder’s specification of the
process of modelling (2001), the mirror neuron system is able to operate primarily independently
of conscious cognition, according to Stefan et al. (2005), who also noted that while motor
distraction impaired learning, the beneficial effect of previous observation was uncompromised
when conscious attentional systems were otherwise engaged and distracted.
Thus the only requirement for modelling is the development and maintenance of a ‘knownothing state’ (Bostic St. Clair & Grinder, 2001) and exposure to a model whose skills are
deemed to be worthy of absorbing.
From Motor to Cognitive Modelling
This natural process which takes place within every person’s brain is useful in modelling
someone’s cognitive capacities as well as their physical capacities. So as well as being useful in
sports and coaching, it can also be used for understanding how someone thinks about and acts in
a given situation and for duplicating their cognitive capacities.
According to the ‘chain of excellence’ (Bostic St. Clair & Grinder, 2001), physiological state has
influence over mental state, and mental state has influence over specific behaviours. Humans’
innate ability to modify our own behaviour through modelling another’s physiology (directly in
the brain networks which control our own physiology), must result in a corresponding
modification of state and thereby, behaviour.
The chain of excellence has implicit support from the mirror-neuron research as well. Dr.
Giacomo Rizzolatti, according to a New York Times article, has said that “mirror neurons allow
us to grasp the minds of others not through conceptual reasoning but through direct simulation.”
Dr. Christian Keysers (commenting on his studies of the neural bases of empathy published in
the journal Neuron) has said that the ability to share the emotions of others appears to be
intimately linked to the functioning of mirror neurons. Iacoboni (in press) has also made similar
links between mirror neurons, imitation and the capacity to feel empathy for others. The
implications here are, of course, that through observing and implicitly and unconsciously
matching another person’s physiology through your mirror neurons, that the same mental states
will emerge.
An interesting parallel, which suggests the same conclusion, is drawn by Rizzolatti et. al. (2001)
in their observations of patients with moebius syndrome, who are congenitally incapable of
moving their facial muscles and perhaps consistently seem to have difficulties in appreciating
emotions conveyed by the faces of others.
The final link between mental state and behaviour is provided in studies of state-dependent
learning, as an example of the influence mental state has upon a particular behaviour; in this
case, learning and remembering. Overton (1964) and many others have demonstrated that
learning which takes place under specific physiological conditions, whether caused by drug
administration or emotional experiences, will have a higher probability of being recalled when
the initial physiological state that learning initially occurred under is present. That is, state has
influence over behaviour.
Conclusion and References
Through the process of modeling (provided that the correct state has been engaged), we have the
capacity to utilize natural and innate learning capacities to absorb patterns of physiology, states
and behaviours of excellence. Recent empirical evidence provides strong evidence that this is
the case, and it is hoped that further research will provide further support for this and other core
NLP concepts.
If you are looking to investigate NLP further, please contact us. If you are interested in
investigating the possibilities for your own development through the processes of modeling or
learning NLP and attaining an accredited qualification in NLP which provides depth and breadth
of knowledge and skills, you are the ideal candidate for the Graduate Certificate in NLP.
The development and maintenance of a ‘know-nothing state’ and exposure to models of
excellence is one of the primary concentrations of our Graduate Certificate, Part 2.
Your Next Step
Attending our Advanced NLP modelling program – VU20485 Perform NLP Modelling to
capture expertise. This program is a stand alone unit of our postgraduate program 22133VIC
Graduate Certificate in Neuro-Linguistic Programming. Find our more by visiting the
VU20485 Perform NLP Modelling page, send a message via the Contact Us button on the
bottom of the page or call us on +61 2 9328-2993.
References
Aleman, A., & Wout, M. (2004). Subvocalization in auditory-verbal imagery: just a form of
motor imagery? Cognitive Processing, 5(4), 228-231.
Bostic St. Clair, C., & Grinder, J. (2001). Whispering In The Wind. Scotts Valley, California
950666: J & C Enterprises.
Fadiga, L., Fogassi, L., Pavesi, G., & Rizzolatti, G. (1995). Motor facilitation during action
observation: a magnetic simulation study. Journal of Neurophysiology, 73(6), 2608-2611.
Gallese, V., Fadiga, L., Fogassi, L., & Rizzolatti, G. (1996). Action recognition in the premotor
cortex. Brain, 119, 593-609.
Iacoboni, M. (in press). Understanding others: imitation, language, empathy. In S. Hurley & N.
Chater (Eds.), Perspectives on imitation: from cognitive neuroscience to social science.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Meltzoff, A. N., & Moore, M. K. (1977). Imitation of facial and manual gestures by human
neonates. Science, 198(4312), 75-78.
Meltzoff, A. N., & Prinz, W. (2002). The Imitative mind: Development, Evolution and Brain
Bases. In A. N. Meltzoff & W. Prinz (Eds.), The Imitative Mind (pp. 19-41). Cambridge:
University press.
Overton, D. A. (1964). State-dependent or “dissociated” learning produced with pentobarbital. J
Comp Physiol Psychol, 57, 3-12.
Ramachandran, V. S. (2000). Mirror neurons and imitation learning as the driving force behind
“the great leap forward” in human evolution. Edge.
Rizzolatti, G., & Craighero, L. (2004). The mirror-neuron system. Annual Review of
Neuroscience, 27, 169-192.
Rizzolatti, G., Fogassi, L., & Gallese, V. (2001). Neurophysiological mechanisms underlying the
understanding and imitation of action. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2, 661-669.
Stefan, K., Cohen, L. G., Duque, J., Mazzocchio, R., Celnik, P., Sawaki, L., et al. (2005).
Formation of a motor memory by action observation. The Journal of Neuroscience, 25(41),
9339-9346
About the Authors
Richard Thompson, BSc. (Cognitive Science), is a Graduate of Exeter University, and is a
freelance writer and web consultant. He holds the Graduate Certificate in NLP and enjoys
receiving responses to his work.
Christopher Collingwood, BA (Psych)., MAppSci Social Ecology, a director of Inspiritive Pty
Ltd., has over 21 years experience in coaching, consulting and leading seminars in Australia,
New Zealand and the United States. He holds the Graduate Certificate in NLP, is an NLP Trainer
Assessor, and has undertaken extensive training with the major developers of NLP, including Dr.
John Grinder, co-originator of Neuro-Linguistic Programming.
Inspiritive is a registered trademark of Inspiritive Pty Ltd
Article content copyright 2006 of respective authors. Richard Thompson & Chris Collingwood.
All rights reserved.
All other material copyright 2006. Inspiritive Pty Ltd. All rights reserved
If you found this article useful hit the share button!
5 Votes
Chris Collingwood
Christopher Collingwood, BA (Psych)., MAppSci Social Ecology, a director of Inspiritive Pty
Ltd., has over 21 years experience in coaching, consulting and leading seminars in Australia,
New Zealand and the United States. He holds the Graduate Certificate in NLP, is an NLP Trainer
Assessor, and has undertaken extensive training with the major developers of NLP, including Dr.
John Grinder, co-originator of Neuro-Linguistic Programming