|Abstract or Summary
- The research developed a methodology to code and quantify eye movement patterns as a function of a neuro-linguistic programming strategy elicitation process. Secondarily the research established methodology that identified the degree of consistency among certain certified Neuro-Linguistic Programming Practitioners while they rated eye movements. The study reviewed literature in the field, identified problems relevant to research in NLP, defined and described selected rater strategies, and utilized the findings of this study to identify areas which are in need of further research. Fifteen Certified Neuro-Linguistic Programming Practitioners viewed a videotape of 10 Oregon State University students who had been videotaped from the eyes upward while spelling 10 words. Practitioners observed eye movements of the videotaped students and these were recorded on Individual Rater Charts, with up to seven possible eye movement notations recorded for each spelling task. Subsequent analysis of these notations provided overall agreement figures among the raters by Eye Movement,¹ a grand mean which reflected agreement among raters over all eye movements and spelling tasks, and Z scores associated with each of the overall ratings by Eye Movement. Greatest agreement among raters was found for the first observed Eye Movement, where overall agreement exceeded the grand mean. Overall agreement for the second observed Eye Movement fell below the grand mean. Overall agreement for subsequent Eye Movements generally increased through Eye Movement 6 and then showed a slight decrease for Eye Movement 7. This increase in agreement for later Eye Movements was largely attributed to what is termed the "NA-effect," which can result in high agreement scores in cases where only one or a few raters note an eye movement while all other raters note no eye movement, and can result in inflated overall agreement scores when the proportion of such cases related to a particular Eye Movement is high in relation to total number of recorded observations associated with the Eye Movement. Anticipated Findings 1, 2 and 3 were not supported by this study, with overall rater agreement lower than predicted for Eye Movements 1 and 2 and higher than predicted for remaining Eye Movements. Anticipated Finding 4 was confirmed by the study, with total number of eye movements observed by all raters for a particular subject found to be inversely correlated with overall agreement among raters in rating that subject. Anticipated Finding 5 was neither supported nor unsupported by the study, since, due to restraints, an appropriate methodology for testing this prediction was not available. Footnote: ¹ An important terminological distinction should be made. Whereas the term 'eye movements' (in all lower case letters) refers to the particular eye movements displayed by individuals performing particular spelling tasks, the term 'Eye Movements' (with first letters capitalized) refers to the ordered set (from 1 through 7) of schema wherein observed eye movements are recorded and ordered. Thus, 'Eye Movement 7,' for example, refers to a schema wherein are recorded particular eye movements observed by raters as being the seventh occurring within a particular spelling task; moreover, since the schema exists even if there is nothing to fill it out, it makes sense to speak about Eye Movement 7 even in cases where no seventh eye movements have been observed.