PSI Seminars and Large Group Awareness Training

[Makalakumu]

My wife just came home from a personal grown seminar called "PSI Seminar Basic" and was pretty fired about some of the content. I thought a lot of it sounded great, because it forces you to reflect on your life and you always come up with some pretty astounding things when you do that.

However, some of the other things that she was describing gave me pause. A lot of what was taking place at PSI was taken exactly out of the Large Group Awareness Training playbook and I'm wondering if we've fallen under the sway of hucksters.

Finkelstein's 1982 article provides a detailed description of the structure and techniques of an Erhard Seminars Training event, noting an authoritarian demeanor of the trainer, physical strains of a long schedule on the participants and the similarity of many techniques to those used in some group therapy and encounter groups.[14] The academic textbook, Handbook of Group Psychotherapy regards Large Group Awareness Training organizations as "less open to leader differences", because they follow a "detailed written plan" that does not vary from one training to the next.[7]

Specific techniques used in Large Group Awareness Trainings may include:

• meditation[17]
• biofeedback[17]
• self-hypnosis[17]
• relaxation techniques[17]
• visualization[17]
• neuro-linguistic programming[18]
• mind-control[17]
• yoga[17]

LGATs utilize such techniques during long sessions, sometimes called a marathon session when lasting for eight hours or more.[19]
In his book Life 102, LGAT participant and former trainer Peter McWilliams describes the basic technique of marathon trainings as pressure/release and asserts that advertising uses pressure/release "all the time", as do "good cop/bad cop" police-interrogations and revival meetings. By spending approximately half the time making a person feel bad and then suddenly reversing the feeling through effusive praise, the programs cause participants to experience a stress-reaction and an "endorphin high." McWilliams gives examples of various LGAT activities called processes with names such as "love bomb," "lifeboat", "cocktail party" and "cradling" which take place over many hours and days, physically exhausting the participants to make them more susceptible to the trainer's message, whether in the participants' best interests or not.[20]

Although extremely critical of some LGATs, McWilliams found positive value in others, asserting that they varied not in technique but in the application of technique.[20]

Some of this applies from what she described.

Finkelstein noted the many difficulties in evaluating LGATs, from proponents' explicit rejection of certain study models to difficulty in establishing a rigorous control group.[14] In some cases, organizations under study have partially funded research into themselves.[21]

Not all professional researchers view LGATs favorably. Researchers such as psychologist Philip Cushman,[22] for example, found that the program he studied "consists of a pre-meditated attack on the self". A 1983 study on Lifespring[23] found that "although participants often experience a heightened sense of well-being as a consequence of the training, the phenomenon is essentially pathological", meaning that, in the program they studied, "the training systematically undermines ego functioning and promotes regression to the extent that reality testing is significantly impaired". Lieberman's 1987 study,[21] funded partially by Lifespring, noted that 5 out of a sample of 289 participants experienced "stress reactions" including one "transitory psychotic episode". He commented: "Whether [these five] would have experienced such stress under other conditions cannot be answered. The clinical evidence, however, is that the reactions were directly attributable to the large group awareness training."

In Coon's psychology textbook, Introduction to Psychology, the author references many other studies, which postulate that many of the "claimed benefits" of Large Group Awareness Training actually take the form of "a kind of therapy placebo effect".[8] DuMerton writes that "... there is a lack of scientific evidence to quantify the longer-term positive outcomes and changes objectively ..."[4] Jarvis described Large Group Awareness Training as "educationally dubious" in the 2002 book The Theory & Practice of Teaching.[24]

Controversial tactics sometimes used by LGAT groups have included physical violence, isolation, entrapment, brainwashing, and sexual experiences.[25] Tapper mentions that "some [unspecified] large group-awareness training and psychotherapy groups" exemplify non-religious "cults".[26] Benjamin criticizes LGAT groups for their high prices and spiritual subtleties.[27] In an academic research-paper on "Choices", a type of LGAT, researchers credited LGAT programs with having had perhaps a million American attendees, many of whom gave positive testimonials of "healing effects" and "positive outcomes in their lives".[4]

This stuff makes me nervous. I don't like people manipulating emotions in order to break down a person's mind and I think that it is highly unethical to do this AND include a hard sell of the next seminar in a "series" of seminars.

Especially when the next seminar would cost more then $4,000 dollars. Am I wrong for feeling this skeptical?

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

If a seminar like this would cost $4,000 then you have every right to be incredibly skeptical. This is not something that I imagine you or your wife need.

 

[theletch1]

I'll second what Brian said. The fact that you are intelligent enough to realize that you COULD be under the influence of hucksters is enough to point out that you don't need anyone to teach you how to BE a huckster.

Manipulation of another person is not always a bad thing. For instance, during my divorce I manipulated my soon to be ex-wifes emotions in such a way that the transition went smoothly and her penchant for narcissistic rage was kept in check. Was it wrong of me to redirect her emotions in such a way that I got what I wanted from the divorce? Some may say so but the divorce was over quicker and cleaner than it would otherwise have been. Manipulation in that case was a good thing. Manipulating someone for a $4,000 seminar, IMO, isn't a win/win scenario and therefor a bad thing.

While I've always been interested in the more ethereal aspects of the human mind and how it interacts with the world I certainly feel that there are less expensive ways to go about it.

 

[jks9199]

I agree. If you're concerned enough to wonder -- there's a real good chance it is a scam. Especially when you look at the costs...

To me, it's kind of like some of these martial arts schools that are in love with new acronyms... and will tell you all about their ultimate secret to deadliness... once you fork over the dough. How many of them really are anything worth what they're asking?

 

[teekin]

My wife just came home from a personal grown seminar called "PSI Seminar Basic" and was pretty fired about some of the content. I thought a lot of it sounded great, because it forces you to reflect on your life and you always come up with some pretty astounding things when you do that.

However, some of the other things that she was describing gave me pause. A lot of what was taking place at PSI was taken exactly out of the Large Group Awareness Training playbook and I'm wondering if we've fallen under the sway of hucksters.



Some of this applies from what she described.



This stuff makes me nervous. I don't like people manipulating emotions in order to break down a person's mind and I think that it is highly unethical to do this AND include a hard sell of the next seminar in a "series" of seminars.

Especially when the next seminar would cost more then $4,000 dollars. Am I wrong for feeling this skeptical?

Ok, here are some key word and phras3es that should have you running for the hills; psychosis, ego breakdown, endorphin high, impaired reality functioning, brainwashing, Lifesprings, Good cop/ Bad cop, marathon, TM.
This is just a rehash of trans meditation or gestalt. Nothing new, just repackaged crap. Expensive Dangerous repackaged crap! Look up TM horror stories.:ak47:
Lori M

 

[Phoenix44]

While I've always been interested in the more ethereal aspects of the human mind and how it interacts with the world I certainly feel that there are less expensive ways to go about it.

Yeah. You can get Thom Hartmann's book, Cracking The Code for ten bucks on Amazon.

 

[theletch1]

Ok, here are some key word and phras3es that should have you running for the hills; psychosis, ego breakdown, endorphin high, impaired reality functioning, brainwashing, Lifesprings, Good cop/ Bad cop, marathon, TM.
This is just a rehash of trans meditation or gestalt. Nothing new, just repackaged crap. Expensive Dangerous repackaged crap! Look up TM horror stories.:ak47:
Lori M

I thought that all sounded familiar. Maharishi doesn't carry a very good connotation for those that were around in the 70s.

 

[Sukerkin]

Excellent warning words everyone. Any seminar that costs that kind of money set's off all sorts of alarm bells, whatever the subject. Avoid strenuously.

 

[Makalakumu]

Okay, some new information has come to the floor. This seminar series is Neuro-linguistic programming based.

In 1984, Christopher F. Sharpley (publishing in the Journal of Counseling Psychology) undertook a literature review of 15 studies on the existence and effectiveness of preferred representational systems (PRS), an underlying principle of NLP. He found "little research evidence supporting its usefulness as an effective counseling tool" and that there was no reproducible support for PRS and predicate matching.[40] Eric Einspruch and Bruce Forman (1985) broadly agreed with Sharpley, but they disputed the conclusions, identifying a failure to address methodological errors in the research reviewed. They stated that "NLP is far more complex than presumed by researchers, and thus, the data are not true evaluations of NLP"[40] adding that NLP is difficult to test under the traditional counseling psychology framework. Moreover, they argued the research lacked a necessary understanding of pattern recognition as part of advanced NLP training. There was also inadequate control of context, an unfamiliarity with NLP as an approach to therapy, inadequate definitions of rapport, and numerous logical mistakes in the research methodology.[53] In 1987, Sharpley published a response to Einspruch and Forman with a review of a further 7 studies on the same basic tenets (totalling 44 including those cited by Einspruch and Forman).[6] This second article included a review of Elich et al (1985), a study that found no support for the proposed relationship between eye movements, spoken predicates, and internal imagery. Elich et al stated that "NLP has achieved something akin to cult status when it may be nothing more than a psychological fad".[54]

And I also discovered that this thing is part of the Human Potential Movement.

The Human Potential Movement (HPM) arose out of the social and intellectual milieu of the 1960s and formed around the concept of cultivating extraordinary potential that its advocates believed to lie largely untapped in most people. The movement took as its premise the belief that through the development of "human potential", humans can experience an exceptional quality of life filled with happiness, creativity, and fulfillment. As a corollary, those who begin to unleash this assumed potential often find themselves directing their actions within society towards assisting others to release their potential. Adherents believe that the net effect of individuals cultivating their potential will bring about positive social change at large.

Criticisms

The first class of criticism of the HPM comes from researchers in psychology, medicine, and science, who often dismiss the movement as grounded in pseudoscience and overusing psychobabble.[citation needed]Such critics regard any efficacy as explicable entirely as a placebo. Richard Feynman's response to his visit to Esalen expressed this sort of criticism. (See Feynman's 1974 Caltech commencement address for his development of the term cargo cult science and the description of his visit to Esalen.)

The second criticism of the HPM comes from those who, though often considered sympathetic to the movement, nevertheless believe that the HPM has not succeeded in its goals, but has instead created an environment that actually inhibits personal development. Such critics may claim that the HPM encourages childish narcissism by reinforcing the behavior of focusing on one's problems and expressing how one feels, rather than encouraging behaviors to overcome these problems. One can view this criticism in the terms of Maslow's hierarchy of needs. This analysis characterizes the failure as an exclusive focus on helping individuals fulfill their "Deficit Needs", without moving individuals up the hierarchy to "Being Needs" (self-actualization).

An extension of this criticism claims that this problem stems from a flawed foundation of the movement altogether — the focus on the individual's own development as supreme, to the detriment of the consideration of others and society (i.e. victim-blaming, underestimating forces of oppression, or feelings of apathy towards large-scale social problems.)
Sonia Choquette, Wayne Dyer, Deepak Chopra and others have responded to this criticism by suggesting that individuals consider putting their individual development in the hands of the divine as a means to better others and society. Such an approach implies the invalidity of the criticism on the grounds that the movement, for the most part, guides itself by extrinsic consideration for the highest good of all beings on the planet.

I'm pretty much convinced that this is crap. The problem is that my wife came home and feels really powerful and good and she wants me to shell out a few hundred dollars for the "basic" so we can communicate better. I'm starting to get a little freaked out. NLP can be bad stuff. It uses suggestion and self hypnosis to trick a person into thinking something is actually working even though their is no real evidence of its efficacy. Further, this business hits you with a hard sell AFTER you have gone through an intense session of NLP. I think that is HIGHLY unethical.

This is really hard, because I sense a trap. I want to be supportive and encourage my wife's confidence, but on the other hand I sense the hand of HPM suggestion behind the intent of asking me. Not sure what to do...

 

[Empty Hands]

I want to be supportive and encourage my wife's confidence, but on the other hand I sense the hand of HPM suggestion behind the intent of asking me. Not sure what to do...

Have her read this thread! A number of people have chimed in, and you've dug up quite a bit of info. If your wife wants to feel good and learn to communicate better, there are many other effective (and cheaper) ways to do so. That couple hundred dollars is only the beginning...

 

[teekin]

Or go through the web and dig out some papers that describe the exact methodology of how TM works. The actual sessions themselves and the psychology behind the sessions. Hopefully once she sees that she is being Manipulated, that this is a Short term fix, and will leave her with more problems than she started with she will go another way.
Do Not shell out the money. This **** is Bad JuJu, dangerous crap, a bunch of drunk monkey's with razor blades stumbling around your wife's sense of self.
Lori M

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Well I think it is pretty simple that you need to say to your wife, honey we can spend our money on better things. How about like College for the children, food, vacations, etc.