NLP certainly has its critics, especially in the psychology field. That said, however, I have not seen much “scientific evidence” that NLP has been discredited.
The few things I have seen have focus on an extremely narrow part of NLP, such as VAK identification, or even eye accessing cues. Additionally, on taking a simple NLP “technique” or intervention, and applying it to a lot of people. IMO this just isn’t how it works.
Coaching is a dynamic process that involves many different factors that are clearly difficult to measure, such as rapport, influence, etc.
The goal with neurolinguistic programming is to increase effectiveness of communication, accuracy of information we gather from others and ourselves, and use it as a sort of operating system or way to become more effective.
So has NLP been discredited? Not exactly. It’s not a perfect system, but it can be a very effective way of thinking that is very useful in helping others and ourselves move into the direction of achieving optimal outcomes.
Evidence-based Neuro Linguistic Psychotherapy: a meta-analysis
Neurolinguistic Programming: A systemic review of the effects on health outcomes
