Skip to main content Skip to journal navigation menu Skip to site footer
contact@ukscip.com
Review

Examining Neuro-Linguistic Programming Practice in English Language Teaching: A Systematic Review and Qualitative Meta-Synthesis

Nallamuthu Perumal ORCID ,  Gandhimathi Shanmuham Natarajan Shanmuhavelu ORCID

    Received: 12 December 2025; Revised: 26 January 2026; Accepted: 6 February 2026; Published: 28 February 2026

    Abstract

    Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) is an instructive approach that enhances teacher effectiveness, learner-centric environments, and language skills. Despite its widespread use in English Language Teaching (ELT), no thorough, systematic review and meta-synthesis evaluating its effectiveness has been conducted to date. The present research adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines and conducted a systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis to evaluate the application of NLP in ELT. Research articles for the present review were obtained from academic research databases, including Scopus, Web of Science, Science Direct, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Psyndex, and ERIC. A total of 3470 articles were identified across the five electronic databases listed above; of these, 20 pertained to NLP in ELT. This research also shows that the use of NLP has a significant effect on improving students’ emotional intelligence and cognitive development. Evidence also indicates that NLP interventions have reduced learning anxiety, improved classroom communication, and enhanced language-learning outcomes among language learners. In addition, NLP (i) enforces pedagogical methods and (ii) learner-centered educational milieu, and professional identity. The results underscore the transformative potential of NLP in contemporary teaching and learning and recommend its systematic implementation in ELT through changes in teaching methodology and learner competence.

    Keywords

    References

    1. 1. Revell, J.; Norman, S. In Your Hands: NLP in ELT; Saffire Press: London, UK, 1997.
    2. 2. Knight, S. NLP at Work: The Difference That Makes a Difference in Business, 2nd ed.; Nicholas Brealey Publishing: London, UK, 2002.
    3. 3. Kulinska, A.; Socha, J. The implementation of aspects of NLP in teaching English. Forum Filol. Ateneum 2022, 1, 201–213. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36575/2353-2912/1(10)2022.201
    4. 4. Bandler, R.; Grinder, J. Frogs into Princes: Neuro-Linguistic Programming; Real People Press: Moab, UT, USA, 1979.
    5. 5. Thornbury, S. An A–Z of ELT: A Dictionary of Terms and Concepts Used in English Language Teaching; Macmillan Education: London, UK, 2006.
    6. 6. Craft, A. Neuro-linguistic programming and learning theory. Curric. J. 2001, 12, 125–136. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09585170122455
    7. 7. Pishghadam, R. Introducing applied ELT as a new approach in second/foreign language studies. Iran EFL J. 2011, 7, 8–14.
    8. 8. Khasanov, J.B. The history and transformation of neuro-linguistic programming. Foreign Lang. Uzbekistan 2023, 10, 55–62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36078/1696489965
    9. 9. Tosey, P.; Mathison, J. Neuro-linguistic programming as an innovation in education and teaching. Innov. Educ. Teach. Int. 2010, 47, 317–326. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2010.498183
    10. 10. Sunitha, S.; Jayanthy, A.C.; Kalaiyarasan, G.; et al. The concept of neuro-linguistic programming in improving the receptive skills in English. Rupkatha J. Interdiscip. Stud. Humanit. 2021, 13, 1–11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21659/rupkatha.v13n1.49
    11. 11. Sunitha, S.; Jayanthy, A.C. Psychoanalytic perspectives on learning English as a second language through neuro-linguistic programming. Think India J. 2019, 22, 225–232.
    12. 12. Purnama, Y.; Sobirov, B.; Ino, L.; et al. Neuro-linguistic programming as an instructional strategy to enhance foreign language teaching. Stud. Media Commun. 2023, 11, 50–59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11114/smc.v11i5.6035
    13. 13. Thakre, N.K.; Ansari, M.; Fatma, D.G.; et al. Neuro-linguistic programming: An effective tool for teaching English as a second language. Int. J. Sci. Res. Sci. Technol. 2023, 10, 529–536. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32628/IJSRST2310172
    14. 14. Nahi, K.A.; Al-Thamery, A.A. The role of neuro-linguistic programming in improving EFL reading comprehension students with special reference to the University of Basra. Hawlyat Al-Montada 2018, 1, 3–18. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338293407
    15. 15. Farhadi, A.; Mozayeni, N. LLMs for personalized medicine and treatment planning. In Applications of Large Language Models (LLM) in Healthcare Systems; Chapman & Hall/CRC: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003665083-4
    16. 16. Doğan, A.; Dal, N.A.; Beydag, K.D. Effect of neuro-linguistic programming on comfort after cesarean: A randomized controlled trial neuro-linguistic programming comfort level cesarean. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2025, 25, 902. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-025-08043-8
    17. 17. Farhadi, A.; Zamanifar, A.; Bahrpeyma, F. Explainable AI (XAI): Making LLM decisions transparent and trustworthy. In Applications of Large Language Models (LLM) in Healthcare Systems; Chapman & Hall/CRC: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003665083-7
    18. 18. Lashkarian, A.; Sayadian, S. The effect of neuro-linguistic programming (NLP) techniques on young Iranian EFL learners’ motivation, learning improvement, and teachers’ success. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2015, 199, 510–516. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.540
    19. 19. Keezhatta, M.S. The impact of neuro-linguistic programming on English language teaching: Perceptions of NLP-trained English teachers. Int. J. Engl. Linguist. 2019, 9, 454. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v9n6p454
    20. 20. Hedayat, N.; Raissi, R.; Asl, S.A. Neuro-linguistic programming and its implications for English language learners and teachers. Theory Pract. Lang. Stud. 2020, 10, 1141–1147. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1009.19
    21. 21. Ginting, S.A.; Hartati, R. Neuro-linguistic programming in the English classroom: Perceptions and applications among teachers. Voices Engl. Lang. Educ. Soc. 2023, 7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29408/veles.v7i2.22549
    22. 22. Rayati, M. Neuro-linguistic programming and its applicability in EFL classrooms: Perceptions of NLP-trained English teachers. Lang. Teach. Res. Q. 2021, 24, 44–64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32038/ltrq.2021.24.03
    23. 23. Arora, A.; Mehta, N.K.; Yadav, S. An exploratory study on teachers’ perspective on applicability of neuro-linguistic programming in developing language learning at the high school level. Educ. Role Lang. J. 2024, 2024, 11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36534/erlj.2024.01.05
    24. 24. Merkviladze, M. Teachers’ perspective on the applicability of neuro-linguistic programming to address EFL learners’ speaking anxiety: Case of the universities in Georgia. J. Educ. Black Sea Reg. 2023, 9, 106–124.
    25. 25. Zeb, F.; Hameed, A. Neuro-linguistic programming and English language teaching: An exploration of linguistic variants in NLP for its connection to ELT. Sir Syed J. Educ. Soc. Res. 2020, 3, 96–105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36902/sjesr-vol3-iss4-2020(96-105)
    26. 26. Pishghadam, R.; Shayesteh, S. Neuro-linguistic programming (NLP) for language teachers: Revalidation of an NLP scale. Theory Pract. Lang. Stud. 2014, 4, 2096–2104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.4.10.2096-2104
    27. 27. Farahani, F. The effect of neuro-linguistic programming (NLP) on reading comprehension in English for specific purposes courses. Int. J. Educ. Lit. Stud. 2018, 6, 79–85. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.6n.1p.79
    28. 28. Arjulayana, Z.R.; Ansoriyah, S. Neuro-linguistics programming concept for teaching productive skill. ELS J. Interdiscip. Stud. Humanit. 2019, 2, 232–239.
    29. 29. Kushwaha, S.S.; Suresh, K.P. Neuro-linguistic programming in English teaching classroom. Shiksha Shodh Manthan 2021, 7, 141–145. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/351904414_Neuro-Linguistic_Programming_in_English_Teaching_Classroom
    30. 30. Alroudhan, H.E. The effect of neuro-linguistic programming coaching on learning English. Int. J. Appl. Linguist. Engl. Lit. 2018, 7, 184. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.7n.4p.184
    31. 31. Amirnudin, M.T.M.; Saleh, S. Effectiveness of Disney’s NLP-based strategy to improve students’ higher order thinking skills. Int. J. Instr. 2020, 13, 293–306. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13320a
    32. 32. Subbu Nisha, M.; Rajasekaran, V. NLP strategies: An innovative tool to enhance employability skills. Int. J. Recent Technol. Eng. 2019, 8, 1205–1209.
    33. 33. Keezhatta, M.S. Exploring nascent trends and developments emanating in the domain of learning and assessment of English as a foreign language at undergraduate English majors of Saudi Arabia. Asian EFL J. 2020, 27, 41–62.
    34. 34. Sarac, H.S.; Daglioglu Yazici, O. Comparing NLP and communicative approach: A study on spoken performance in ELT. Glob. J. Foreign Lang. Teach. 2018, 8, 63–67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18844/gjflt.v8i2.573
    35. 35. Mehdi, M.; Abbasi, A.; Ali, A. A critical analysis of the effects of neuro-linguistic programming on human behaviour. Pak. J. Soc. Res. 2022, 4, 108–188. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52567/pjsr.v4i1.350
    36. 36. Tosey, P.; Mathison, J. Neuro-Linguistic Programming: A Critical Appreciation for Managers and Developers; Palgrave Macmillan: London, UK, 2009.
    37. 37. Siniahovska, I.; Bohun, O. Formation of language competence of future economists in English language studying using neuro-linguistic programming. Intell. Pers. Civ. 2019, 19, 11–17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33274/2079-4835-2019-19-2-11-17 (in Ukrainian)
    38. 38. Sturt, J.; Ali, S.; Robertson, W.; et al. Neurolinguistic programming: A systematic review of the effects on health outcomes. Br. J. Gen. Pract. 2012, 62, e757–e764. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp12X658287
    39. 39. Rustan, E. Language learning with neurolinguistic programming: An integrative review. J. Lang. Teach. Res. 2022, 13, 1251–1258.
    40. 40. Denyer, D.; Tranfield, D. Producing a systematic review. In Doing a Systematic Review, 1st ed.; Dickson, R., Cherry, M., Boland, A., Eds.; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2009; pp. 1–15.
    41. 41. Tranfield, D.; Denyer, D.; Smart, P. Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. Br. J. Manag. 2003, 14, 207–222. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00375
    42. 42. Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Ann. Intern. Med. 2009, 151, 264–269. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135
    43. 43. Klassen, T.P.; Jadad, A.R.; Moher, D. Guides for reading and interpreting systematic reviews: I. Getting started. Arch. Pediatr. Adolesc. Med. 1998, 152, 700–704. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/archpedi.152.7.700
    44. 44. Dickson, R.; Cherry, M.G.; Boland, A. Doing a Systematic Review: A Student’s Guide, 1st ed.; Sage Publications: London, UK, 2013; p. 240.
    45. 45. Sackett, D.L. Evidence-based medicine. Semin. Perinatol. 1997, 21, 3–5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0146-0005(97)80013-4
    46. 46. Aromataris, E.; Lockwood, C.; Porritt, K.; et al., Eds. JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis; JBI: London, UK, 2024.
    47. 47. Kraus, S.; Breier, M.; Dasí-Rodríguez, S. The art of crafting a systematic literature review in entrepreneurship research. Int. Entrep. Manag. J. 2020, 16, 1023–1042. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-020-00635-4
    48. 48. Thomas, J.; Harden, A. Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 2008, 8, 45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-45
    49. 49. Frampton, G.; Schofield, K.; Kohl, C.; et al. Principles and framework for assessing the risk of bias for studies included in comparative quantitative environmental systematic reviews. Environ. Evid. 2022, 11, 12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-022-00264-0
    50. 50. Seo, H.J.; Kim, S.Y.; Park, J.E.; et al. RoBANS 2: A revised risk of bias assessment tool for nonrandomized studies of interventions. Korean J. Fam. Med. 2023, 44, 249–260.
    51. 51. Higgins, J.P.T.; Altman, D.G.; Gøtzsche, P.C.; et al. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials. BMJ 2011, 343, d5928. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d5928
    52. 52. CASP Qualitative Checklist. Available online: https://casp-uk.net/casp-tools-checklists/ (accessed on 15 July 2025).
    53. 53. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Nonrandomized Studies in Meta-Analyses. Available online: https://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp (accessed on 12 July 2025).
    54. 54. Hong, Q.N.; Gonzalez-Reyes, A.; Pluye, P. Improving the usefulness of a tool for appraising the methodological quality of qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies. J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 2018, 24, 459–467. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.12884
    55. 55. Kudliskis, V. Teaching assistants, neuro-linguistic programming (NLP) and special educational needs: “Reframing” the learning experience for students with mild SEN. Pastoral Care Educ. 2014, 32, 251–263. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02643944.2014.960533
    56. 56. Hosseinzadeh, E.; Baradaran, A. Investigating the relationship between Iranian EFL teachers’ autonomy and their neuro-linguistic programming. Eng. Lang. Teach. 2015, 8, 68. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v8n7p68
    57. 57. Hamid, M.; Marzieh, A. The impact of neurolinguistic programming on EFL teachers’ reflective teaching. i-manager’s J. Engl. Lang. Teach. 2017, 7, 22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26634/jelt.7.3.13589
    58. 58. Caballero, D.R.; Rosado, N. Neurolinguistic programming and regular verbs past tense pronunciation teaching. Eng. Lang. Teach. 2018, 11, 1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v11n11p1
    59. 59. Zeb, F.; Hameed, A. An implication of Milton model of NLP for ESL learners. Asian EFL J. 2021, 28, 153–169.
    60. 60. Almosa, A. Using neuro-linguistic programming and transactional analysis tools to measure the English proficiency of foreign language learners. Res. J. Adv. Humanit. 2023, 4, 238–254. DOI: https://doi.org/10.58256/5ryw2v96
    61. 61. Zhang, X.; Davarpanah, N.; Izadpanah, S. The effect of neurolinguistic programming on academic achievement, emotional intelligence, and critical thinking of EFL learners. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 888797. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.888797
    62. 62. Rosa, D.C.B.; Lopes, L.W.; Lopes-Herrera, S.A. Voice and communication training programs improve university students' performance in oral presentations. CoDAS 2023, 35, e20220146. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/2317-1782/20232022146pt (in Portuguese)
    63. 63. Rayati, M. On the relationship between neuro-linguistic programming and professional identity: A case study of EFL teachers. Lang. Teach. Res. Q. 2024, 42, 88–108. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32038/ltrq.2024.42.06
    64. 64. Zarfsaz, E.; Salamat, M. The effect of using NLP techniques on the writing ability of EFL learners. Acuity J. Engl. Lang. Pedagogy Lit. Cult. 2024, 9, 17–33. Available online: https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity/article/view/2952
    65. 65. Rahman, S.; Jinu, R. Empowering deaf and hard-of-hearing undergraduates: Innovative ESL teaching strategies. Edelweiss Appl. Sci. Technol. 2024, 8, 5693–5706. DOI: https://doi.org/10.55214/25768484.v8i6.3241
    66. 66. John, A.; Selvaraj, V.; Thennavan, S.; et al. The impact of neuro-linguistic programming on speaking skills: An intervention study. Forum Linguist. Stud. 2025, 7, 862–875. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i4.9274
    67. 67. Lakoff, G.; Johnson, M. Metaphors We Live By, 1st ed.; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 1980; pp. 1–13, 44–48.
    68. 68. Langacker, R.W. Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction; 1st ed.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2008; pp. 3–14, 230–231.
    69. 69. Gee, J.P. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method, 4th ed.; Routledge: London, UK, 2014; pp. 11–39, 80–98.
    70. 70. Fairclough, N. Critical discourse analysis. In The Routledge Handbook of Discourse Analysis; Handford, M., Gee, J.P., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 2013; pp. 9–21.
    71. 71. Goleman, D. Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ ,1st ed.; Bantam Books: New York, NY, USA, 1995; pp. 46–78, 203–230.
    ×