6 International Journal of Cultic Studies ■ Vol. 1, No. 1, 2010
way, the person is also submerged by the
doctrine, not only through the confession and
admission of past sins that only the teachings of
the guru and group can put right, but also
through the need to commit absolutely to beliefs
and teachings of the group that are described
repeatedly as the only path for redemption and
protection.
The most painful examples illustrate this process
the best: The Heaven’s Gate cult eventually took
part in a group suicide, believing, passionately,
that when they died they would be transported to
the space ship that was arriving for them as their
leader foretold. That leaders of the group
“helped” children and other members to die also
illustrates the complex pattern of influence in
such a claustrophobic and highly charged
situation—how much dissonance really existed?
How much additional “persuasion” did members
need in order to take their own lives? How many
would have lived had they been given anything
of a choice? As with the Branch Davidians, there
is evidence, as probably there is in all cults, that
there were varying levels of ideological and
group commitment amongst members. But the
processes of thought reform can reward the
doubters, sometimes with an added sense of
urgency to commit more to what they fear may
be their only chance and path to redemption.
Many researchers and authors in this field have
described well how the break point comes for
individuals one of the clearest descriptions is
cult expert and counsellor Steve Hassan’s
account of how his own involvement in the
Unification Church or Moonies was broken by a
car accident that gave him an opportunity to
think outside of the constraints of the immediate
group milieu and influence.
Many case studies and pieces of research have
both demonstrated and operationalised the
Lifton themes. Indeed, the Group Psychological
Abuse Scale (Grice, Dole, Chambers and
Langone 1994) has been validated across a
number of settings as an objective measure of
the level of undue influence that Lifton’s themes
define.
From Lifton’s Themes to Related
Psychological Processes
This lecture turns now to how these themes of
thought reform, of the social psychological
processes in a cultic group setting, can
themselves be seen to be related to the
psychological processes in the person in that
setting. If, as was the stated intention earlier, we
are to understand what happens to and in the
person in extremist groups—including why
someone joins at all, then we need to understand
phenomenologically what happens within the
person’s psychological make up. In this way, I
tend to view the Lifton themes as an articulation
of the social forces and influences that have an
impact on the person but they are not (and
ontologically cannot simultaneously be) an
articulation of the psychological processes
within the person.
In this way, we need to appreciate the vast
distance that social psychology travelled through
the second half of the 20th century as it embraced
what has been referred to as the European
School of Social Psychology. Amongst its
leading figures were psychologists such as
Solomon Asch, Jerome Bruner, Serge
Moscovici, Michael Billig, Gustav Jahoda—and
most notably for tonight’s lecture, the work of
Henri Tajfel, who, with his colleague John
Turner, created the whole field of work around
Social Identity Theory and Self-Categorisation
Theory in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s at Bristol
University, and then far beyond. Their shared
initial commitment—and that of many others—
was to understand why it was that some people
had embraced the extremism of Naziism during
the 1930s and 1940s, and what causes ordinary
people—not psychopaths—to believe in
stereotypes about certain social groups, and to
act according to those stereotypes with
damaging prejudicial actions and judgements.
In a more modest way than these leading figures
of my discipline, these have always been my
concerns, as well. My own doctoral work was on
the subject of the psychological processes
involved in social category salience—the
psychological process at the heart of
stereotyping and prejudice. However, I am
arguing this evening, as I have done extensively
way, the person is also submerged by the
doctrine, not only through the confession and
admission of past sins that only the teachings of
the guru and group can put right, but also
through the need to commit absolutely to beliefs
and teachings of the group that are described
repeatedly as the only path for redemption and
protection.
The most painful examples illustrate this process
the best: The Heaven’s Gate cult eventually took
part in a group suicide, believing, passionately,
that when they died they would be transported to
the space ship that was arriving for them as their
leader foretold. That leaders of the group
“helped” children and other members to die also
illustrates the complex pattern of influence in
such a claustrophobic and highly charged
situation—how much dissonance really existed?
How much additional “persuasion” did members
need in order to take their own lives? How many
would have lived had they been given anything
of a choice? As with the Branch Davidians, there
is evidence, as probably there is in all cults, that
there were varying levels of ideological and
group commitment amongst members. But the
processes of thought reform can reward the
doubters, sometimes with an added sense of
urgency to commit more to what they fear may
be their only chance and path to redemption.
Many researchers and authors in this field have
described well how the break point comes for
individuals one of the clearest descriptions is
cult expert and counsellor Steve Hassan’s
account of how his own involvement in the
Unification Church or Moonies was broken by a
car accident that gave him an opportunity to
think outside of the constraints of the immediate
group milieu and influence.
Many case studies and pieces of research have
both demonstrated and operationalised the
Lifton themes. Indeed, the Group Psychological
Abuse Scale (Grice, Dole, Chambers and
Langone 1994) has been validated across a
number of settings as an objective measure of
the level of undue influence that Lifton’s themes
define.
From Lifton’s Themes to Related
Psychological Processes
This lecture turns now to how these themes of
thought reform, of the social psychological
processes in a cultic group setting, can
themselves be seen to be related to the
psychological processes in the person in that
setting. If, as was the stated intention earlier, we
are to understand what happens to and in the
person in extremist groups—including why
someone joins at all, then we need to understand
phenomenologically what happens within the
person’s psychological make up. In this way, I
tend to view the Lifton themes as an articulation
of the social forces and influences that have an
impact on the person but they are not (and
ontologically cannot simultaneously be) an
articulation of the psychological processes
within the person.
In this way, we need to appreciate the vast
distance that social psychology travelled through
the second half of the 20th century as it embraced
what has been referred to as the European
School of Social Psychology. Amongst its
leading figures were psychologists such as
Solomon Asch, Jerome Bruner, Serge
Moscovici, Michael Billig, Gustav Jahoda—and
most notably for tonight’s lecture, the work of
Henri Tajfel, who, with his colleague John
Turner, created the whole field of work around
Social Identity Theory and Self-Categorisation
Theory in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s at Bristol
University, and then far beyond. Their shared
initial commitment—and that of many others—
was to understand why it was that some people
had embraced the extremism of Naziism during
the 1930s and 1940s, and what causes ordinary
people—not psychopaths—to believe in
stereotypes about certain social groups, and to
act according to those stereotypes with
damaging prejudicial actions and judgements.
In a more modest way than these leading figures
of my discipline, these have always been my
concerns, as well. My own doctoral work was on
the subject of the psychological processes
involved in social category salience—the
psychological process at the heart of
stereotyping and prejudice. However, I am
arguing this evening, as I have done extensively
