Interpretation or 'mind reading' is the act of assigning meaning to another person's state or behaviour, without using sensory based evidence to support the claim. Where sensory based information is noticed, it is used as the jumping off point from which to interpret. Interpretation is not a response to behaviour; it is a commentary about it. Consider this; if every person has their own individual model of the world, and the said model of the world is based on that individual's own map, i.e. not the world itself, then it is apparent that interpreting someone else's behaviour according to one's own value judgement is likely to mismatch the other's experience. To assume without asking them that someone 'does not care' or is 'being difficult', because they turned away, for example, is mind reading. The evidence is, they turned away.

Calibration is the comparison of a person's present observable behaviour with past examples of the same person's behaviour. It requires sensory based evidence to be obtained by observing movement, skin tones, eye accessing cues, and any other visible indications of mental processing, and by listening to voice tones, speed, rhythm, word choice and any other audible indications of mental processing. These behaviours demonstrate that processing is going on. They do not identify the content the person is processing, nor the person's own description of their state. Calibration gives the observer the means to establish rapport, to offer feedback based on sensory evidence, and to gather more information.

Feedback is the sensory based description of another's behaviour, and / or its effect on third parties, or the response in sensory based terms of one person to another person's behaviour. It is devoid of interpretation, and relies on observation, calibration and questions for the information to which it responds. The language of feedback is 'When you did X (sensory based evidence) I saw, heard or felt Y', or 'I saw, heard or felt Z do Y'.

The distinction between mind reading and feedback is particularly useful in training, performance appraisal, and therapeutic situations. Some coaches tell their students or clients what they think the student is doing, feeling or being, by interpreting the sensory based evidence offered by the student according to their own beliefs and values. This is often called 'feedback', although the coach is imposing their own meaning on the student. It is interesting to note that when challenged to produce evidence, many people who mistake mind reading for feedback take the challenge itself as 'evidence' to support their interpretation. A colloquial description of such activity is 'Laying a trip on someone'.

Separating Interpretation from High Quality Information

If someone tries to interpret the meaning of your behaviour, you can ask them to substantiate their claim with sensory based evidence and teach them how to give high quality feedback, simultaneously. This can be a great opportunity to practice rapport skills. Use your own variants on the following questions. (For more information on mind reading, see the NLP 'Meta Model' developed by John Grinder and Richard Bandler).

Examples of Specifying Questions for replacing Interpretation with High Quality Information.

It is a good idea to use non-verbal rapport, and to soften the questions if you wish to preserve or enhance the relationship. These questions are in their basic form.

• How do you know that?

• What evidence do you have to support that statement?

• Somebody else's opinion is hear say. What is your evidence?

• I want sensory based evidence only. What did you see, hear, feel?

• How do you know that means X?

• What is your sensory based evidence?

• What specifically do you mean by (arrogant, vague, not paying attention)

• Give me specifics. Was it the whole time or when I did A, B or C?

• What was your response?

• When I did X, what did you see, hear or feel in response?

Reference:

The NLP Field Guide; Part 1. A reference manual of practitioner level patterns

Separating Interpretation from High Quality information - Exercises

The following exercises highlight the difference between sensory based description and interpretation.

In Groups of Three

1. Person A observes and listens, and coaches B.

2. Person C is the subject.

3. Person B describes C in mind reading terms.

4. Person B describes C in sensory based terms.

5. Change roles.

In Groups of Three

1. Person A picks an emotional state and accesses it.

2. Person B names it in mind reading terms, then describes person A in sensory based terms.

3. Person C observes.

4. Person A names their state, or says what they were doing.

5. B and C calibrate.

6. Change roles.

The following exercise turns interpretation back into feedback:

In Groups of Three

1. Person A picks an emotional state or behavioural response and accesses it.

2. Person B interprets A's state or action...'You are doing, being etc'

3. Person A asks how B knows that, using questions similar to examples

4. Person C observes, feeds back and coaches A and B.

5. Change roles.