44 International Journal of Cultic Studies ■ Vol. 9, 2018
problems—for example, when such problems
are thought to be attacks from evil forces.
Consequently, there is no consensus among
researchers about what effects cultic affiliation
may have on individuals’ well-being. The
research field is controversial (Buxant &
Saroglou, 2008 Latkin, 1995), and the results of
studies vary. As noted in the following content,
it also is important to distinguish studies of
current members from studies of former
members (Buxant &Saroglou, 2008 Winocur-
Craig, 1995).
Graham and Haidt (2010) argued that there is no
difference between the social interaction in
religious groups and other groups, and that the
social interaction is the same regardless of the
doctrine. Other researchers, however, have
argued that processes of social influence may be
stronger in religious groups than in others (e.g.,
Paloutzian, Richardson, &Rambo, 1999
Ysseldyk, Matheson, &Anisman, 2010) and
religious groups have been the focus in the
majority of the literature on cults (Aronoff et al.,
2000). The current study also focuses on
religious groups, although a few of the
participants were members of nonreligious
groups.
Psychological Well-Being Among Current
Cult Members
Results from studies carried out with current
members seldom have shown any signs of
psychopathology among the participants
(Aronoff et al., 2000). These studies sometimes
even have shown an improvement in the current
members’ psychological well-being, especially
during the earliest periods of their participation
in the group (e.g., Buxant, Saroglou, Casalfiore,
&Christians, 2007). Winocur-Craig (1995)
suggested that current members may feel
conformity pressures to report a good
psychological well-being. Some studies also
have suggested that current members tend to
report a better psychological well-being than
they actually experience (Ungerleider &
Wellisch, 1979, as noted in Winocur-Craig,
1995). Furthermore, in some studies with current
members, the recruitment of study participants
was handled by leaders of the groups (e.g.,
Buxant et al., 2007 Day &Peters, 1999). Even
if the leaders promised not to be selective in
recruitment, as in the study by Buxant et al.
(2007), the features of cultic and manipulative
environments give one reason not to fully trust
such a promise. Therefore, it is important to
reflect upon bias when one is analyzing
questionnaires from current members of
manipulative groups (Aronoff et al., 2000
Gasde &Block, 1998 Winocur-Craig, 1995).
Psychological Well-Being Among Former
Cult Members
In contrast, results from studies of former cult
members often show an impaired psychological
well-being in these former members. Such
findings also may be hard to interpret.
For instance, Buxant and Saroglou (2008)
suggested that former cult members might
overlook their positive experiences from the cult
and report more psychological problems in an
attempt to avoid cognitive dissonance about
their decision to leave the group. In this study,
the former cult members reported high levels of
psychological distress. The authors suggested
that the psychological distress was caused by the
defection, arguing that the defection was the
only factor that separated former members from
current members. The psychological distress
among their participants peaked right after the
defection. The researchers’ conclusion was also
based on the fact that, for 14 of their 20
participants, the defection led to a separation
from families and friends, which is, of course, a
factor of great importance for former members’
psychological well-being. At the same time,
previous research stressed that only after the
defection could former members realize what
they had been subjected to and fully react to the
stress they experienced in the cult (e.g.,
Swartling &Swartling, 1992). Consequently,
there might be several different explanations for
the psychological distress found among former
cult members.
Swartling and Swartling (1992) found that
psychological problems were common among
former members who had attended the Bible
School of Livets Ord (Word of Life) in Sweden.
These former members did not have those
problems before they entered the group. The
most prominent problems were anxiety,
problems—for example, when such problems
are thought to be attacks from evil forces.
Consequently, there is no consensus among
researchers about what effects cultic affiliation
may have on individuals’ well-being. The
research field is controversial (Buxant &
Saroglou, 2008 Latkin, 1995), and the results of
studies vary. As noted in the following content,
it also is important to distinguish studies of
current members from studies of former
members (Buxant &Saroglou, 2008 Winocur-
Craig, 1995).
Graham and Haidt (2010) argued that there is no
difference between the social interaction in
religious groups and other groups, and that the
social interaction is the same regardless of the
doctrine. Other researchers, however, have
argued that processes of social influence may be
stronger in religious groups than in others (e.g.,
Paloutzian, Richardson, &Rambo, 1999
Ysseldyk, Matheson, &Anisman, 2010) and
religious groups have been the focus in the
majority of the literature on cults (Aronoff et al.,
2000). The current study also focuses on
religious groups, although a few of the
participants were members of nonreligious
groups.
Psychological Well-Being Among Current
Cult Members
Results from studies carried out with current
members seldom have shown any signs of
psychopathology among the participants
(Aronoff et al., 2000). These studies sometimes
even have shown an improvement in the current
members’ psychological well-being, especially
during the earliest periods of their participation
in the group (e.g., Buxant, Saroglou, Casalfiore,
&Christians, 2007). Winocur-Craig (1995)
suggested that current members may feel
conformity pressures to report a good
psychological well-being. Some studies also
have suggested that current members tend to
report a better psychological well-being than
they actually experience (Ungerleider &
Wellisch, 1979, as noted in Winocur-Craig,
1995). Furthermore, in some studies with current
members, the recruitment of study participants
was handled by leaders of the groups (e.g.,
Buxant et al., 2007 Day &Peters, 1999). Even
if the leaders promised not to be selective in
recruitment, as in the study by Buxant et al.
(2007), the features of cultic and manipulative
environments give one reason not to fully trust
such a promise. Therefore, it is important to
reflect upon bias when one is analyzing
questionnaires from current members of
manipulative groups (Aronoff et al., 2000
Gasde &Block, 1998 Winocur-Craig, 1995).
Psychological Well-Being Among Former
Cult Members
In contrast, results from studies of former cult
members often show an impaired psychological
well-being in these former members. Such
findings also may be hard to interpret.
For instance, Buxant and Saroglou (2008)
suggested that former cult members might
overlook their positive experiences from the cult
and report more psychological problems in an
attempt to avoid cognitive dissonance about
their decision to leave the group. In this study,
the former cult members reported high levels of
psychological distress. The authors suggested
that the psychological distress was caused by the
defection, arguing that the defection was the
only factor that separated former members from
current members. The psychological distress
among their participants peaked right after the
defection. The researchers’ conclusion was also
based on the fact that, for 14 of their 20
participants, the defection led to a separation
from families and friends, which is, of course, a
factor of great importance for former members’
psychological well-being. At the same time,
previous research stressed that only after the
defection could former members realize what
they had been subjected to and fully react to the
stress they experienced in the cult (e.g.,
Swartling &Swartling, 1992). Consequently,
there might be several different explanations for
the psychological distress found among former
cult members.
Swartling and Swartling (1992) found that
psychological problems were common among
former members who had attended the Bible
School of Livets Ord (Word of Life) in Sweden.
These former members did not have those
problems before they entered the group. The
most prominent problems were anxiety,
