|NLT Committee for
Resourceful Cultural Evolution
Expert technician comment:
As a point of interest, ..... the
"p.<.001" reference which appears in all of the
Galvanic Skin Response Test Results
Skin Response Test Results for NLT Heritage Project (second)
A repeated measures analysis of variance was performed to compare means for the pre and two post measures. A statistically significant result was found [F (1,110) = 99.05, p. <.001]. Post hoc analysis indicated significant differences in pre and post measures for all three subjects.
Subject #2 showed a significant difference [t (36) = -16.44, p. <.001]between pre and post GSR measures (Subject #2 was not present for the second post test session). Subjects #1 and #3 showed significant differences between pre and post [Subject #1 ( t= -36.76, p. < .001), Subject #3 (t = -8.33, p. <.001)] and also between pre and second post measures [Subject #1 (t = -26.46, p. <.001) , Subject #3 (t = -15.39, p. < 001)]. In addition, Subject #3 showed a significant difference between the first and second post tests (t= -19.28, p. <.001).
Galvanic Skin Response is a measure of physiological arousal which has been reliably linked to various emotional responses. Accurate interpretation of results would necessitate incorporating observational data in order to determine the nature of the emotion. Results showed a higher mean for post and second post tests which suggests that subjects showed more physiological arousal in post tests than in the pre test. Observations by the GSR technician, the interviewer and the subjects themselves would indicate that the higher GSR means in post tests were a result of a more exuberant, cheerful disposition in post testing. In fact, in the initial testing session, all subjects indicated that they had resigned themselves to the inevitability of some unpleasant situations. All subjects were very even-tempered, amiable people who expressed frustration rather than anger. In the testing sessions which took place after the seminar, subjects were much more animated and expressed positive attitudes and a willingness to actively deal with problem situations in a positive way. Their exuberance in post tests resulted in higher GSR measures for these tests.
Overall, GSR results provide empirical evidence of the effectiveness of the NLT project in that they show statistically significant changes in 100% of subjects tested for pre and post measures. In addition, the second post measure (which was obtained one month after the seminar) suggests that these changes are enduring.
It is unfortunate that a larger sample was not available for this project, as it would have lent more credence to these results. In future studies, it would be advantageous to obtain a larger sample. A longitudinal study, with testing every few months, would also be of interest to provide further evidence of the permanence of the change effected through this procedure.
Pre-testing October 18-19, 1999
First Post-testing October 25-26
Second Post-testing December 13, 1999
Canadian Heritage NLT project, GSR results: (First)
It seems that Subjects 2, 4, and 5 showed a lot of anger, fear or sexual arousal in their pre test, but during the final post test showed joy or happiness in their Skin Response. I am primarily using the James Lange Theory of Emotion and The Cannon Baird Theory of Emotion. I must warn that these results can be argued against by some who adopt other psychological theories.
Through statistical methods, Subjects 2, 4 and 5 (the "Dummie Variable") showed a statistical significant difference: [F (1,5) = 2.065, p < 0.05]. Post hoc analysis indicated a significant difference between the pre test and the second post test. In assessing these calculations through use of z scores as well, the same results were obtained.
Subjects 1 and 3, however, showed to have no statistical difference within their Galvanic Skin Response (GSR). [Subject 1 consciously chose not to address the issues she had presented initially during the GSR pre-test reading, therefore her pre- and post test readings would not show a statistical difference. She did enthusiastically endorse the use of Neuro-Linguistic Techniques, having experienced and observed their successful use in eliminating racist and other responses. She is eager to proceed with the full NLT training in the next project. Subject 3 took the opportunity during the demo workshop to change a painful response to an ongoing traumatic relationship. This issue however was unrelated to any of the issues she had identified and discussed during the pre-test. She reported that the results of applying NLT to her traumatic response were truly successful: "I feel good about my freedom to choose to express my anger toward this person [when necessary] and with presence of mind / self control. NLT has helped me to no longer take responsibility for their thoughts and feelings toward me, and I feel good about it." She has also expressed genuine interest in proceeding with the full NLT training.]
Through use of analysis of variance and a series of one ways, it was found that there were no statistically significant differences in any of the subjects’ heart rates when the pre tests and post-tests were compared. Dr. Persinger and I anticipated that this would happen based on previous GSR results from previous projects we are familiar with. One such project had exposed 30 different subjects (males and females of various age categories and backgrounds) to violent video clips. There was found no statistical difference in any of their heart rates between their pre and post-test readings.
From the perspective of the Galvanic Skin Response testing results, the NLT project demonstrated credibility in that 100% of those who dealt with the same presenting issues in the workshop as had been identified in their pre-test, showed significant statistical differences between their pre and post GS Responses. And more than 50% of all subjects tested showed significant statistical differences in their Galvanic Skin Responses from pre-test to post test, as a result of applying Neuro-Linguistic Techniques.
As a suggestion for future projects using GSR testing, I would recommend that the first post test be carried out the day after the workshop, rather than the same day immediately following the workshop. The rationale is that the subjects are tired and would probably prefer to rest or go do something else for awhile. Waiting until the next day would provide a better opportunity for a more accurate GSR reading of their true responses to the presenting issues.
Submitted by Robin Dashnay, GSR technician, Bachelor of Science Psychology, Laurentian University
To contact us or to arrange a Phone Consultation please Email: Doug@Maxap.com.
©2004, Maximum Achievement Programs, Inc., All rights reserved
Created by WebSiteServices.ca