Abstract: There is a growing body of empirical literature on Neurolinguistic Programming (NLP). A review of this literature by Sharpley (1984) failed to consider a number of methodological errors. In the present article the authors identify six categories of design and methodological errors contained in the 39 empirical studies of NLP documents through April 1984. These categories include (a) lack of understanding of the concepts of pattern recognition and inadequate control of context; (b) unfamiliarity with NLP as an approach to therapy; (c) lack of familiarity with the NLP "Meta-Model" of linguistic communication; (d) failure to consider the role of stimulus-response associations; (e) inadequate interviewer training and definitions of rapport; and, (f) logical mistakes. Representative reports reflecting each category are discussed. Suggestions are offered for improving the quality of research on NLP.