Abstract: Neurolinguistic Programming (NLP) claims for quick and permanent relief from the unpleasant affect associated with a disturbing memory were tested by examining several subject-rated, and one counselor-rated, measure of improvement following a submodality treatment procedure. The NLP submodality treatment group scores were compared to the scores of an attentional control group (ACG) of subjects who received light trance. Two experienced licensed psychologists who are experts in NLP procedures and trance induction administered both treatments. Sixteen male and twenty-eight female adults from a large protestant church volunteered to participate in the experiment which included a Target Complaint Discomfort Box Scale administered pre-and post- treatment and at 2 weeks post-treatment. Other dependent measures were the Client Post-Therapy Questionnaire, which was administered immediately post-treatment and 2 weeks follow-up; the counselor- rated Global Improvement Rating Scale; and the Counselor Rating Form (Short Form), which were each administered only immediately post-treatment. There were significant differences (p<.05) in the participants' ratings of "change as a result of treatment" in favor of the NLP submodality procedure. The NLP group also scored significantly higher (p<.05) on a measure of "satisfaction with treatment" than did the ACG. Differences on the counselor-rated Global Improvement Rating Scale made the strongest contribution to the significance of the multi-variate main effect. No other significant differences were found on any of the remaining dependent measures. As well, no significant differences were found between the two therapists, using the Counselor Rating Form (Short Form) immediately post-treatment and for the 2 week follow-up analysis. The results of this study provide partial support for the predictions made, in that the NLP submodality participants did report that they experienced change and that they were more satisfied with their treatment significantly more than the ACG. NLP claims for permanent cure were not supported. Incidental findings from a procedural check bring into question an a priori assumption of this study that people do, in fact, want to "feel better" about a disturbing memory. These findings further bring into question the accuracy of the participants' self-reporting of "improvement" with paper and pencil measuring tools. Several suggestions for future research are included.