Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 2, No. 3, 2003, Page 7
In order to generate the items of the scale, the investigators considered: (a) a Delphi study
conducted by Dole and Dubrow-Eichel (1985) that examined the perceptions different
experts had on cults (b) Langone's (1992) theoretical analysis of psychological abuse and
(c) a review of the clinical literature on cults and thought reform programs. Afterwards, a
factor analysis of the mail responses given by 308 former members of 101 different groups
to 112 descriptive items was performed. Subjects were contacted through lists provided by
associations that provided educational programs on cults, ex-member organizations, and
professionals.
This paper presents preliminary data on the adaptation of the GPA to the Spanish
population. Besides contributing to the need for a reliable instrument that could evaluate
psychological abuse in group contexts, this study, by looking at group psychological abuse
across different cultural groups, lays the groundwork for comparative studies that may
provide a multicultural knowledge base, which would be more valuable than knowledge
based on a single culture.
Method
Subjects
The Spanish version of the GPA scale was administered to 61 subjects from different
provinces within Spain. These subjects were contacted through data provided by
associations working on information, education, and advice on group psychological
manipulation (42.6%), mental health professionals, who were not necessarily in touch with
the subject matter (21.3%), and some former members, who were taking part in this study
and facilitated contact with other former members (36.1%). The inclusion criterion was that
subjects identified themselves as former members of groups using manipulative methods to
attract, indoctrinate, and keep members inside the group. This criterion implies a feeling of
belonging or of having been a member of the group and excludes those who had just a brief
contact.
Out of the 61 selected subjects, 68.9% (42 subjects) participated in the interviewer‘s
presence, whereas 31.1% (19 subjects) completed the Scale through ordinary mail. A total
of 34 subjects (55.7%) were male, and 27 female (44.3%). Participant‘s mean age was
44.33 years (SD =11.0). They had belonged to one of a total of 21 different groups. They
got in touch with the groups at a mean age of 29.04 years (SD =12.10) and joined them at
a mean age of 29.58 years (SD =11.13), ranging, in both cases, from a minimum age of 3
years to a maximum of 56 years. The average length of membership was 8.75 years (SD =
7.96), with a range of 0.33 to 31.25 years of membership since they first met their groups.
The average length of time between exiting the group and participating in the study was
6.50 years (SD =7.11), with a median of 3.58 years and a range of 0.25 to 33.33 years.
Instruments
Spanish version of the Group Psychological Abuse Scale (GPA). Developed by
Chambers, Langone, Dole &Grice (1994), the GPA Scale is a standardized measure used to
evaluate psychological abuse in group environments. It is a self-administered instrument,
easily understood and quickly completed by subjects. It consists of 28 items, 7 for each of
the four subscales: Compliance, Exploitation, Mind Control, and Anxious Dependency. Each
item is rated on a 1-5 Likert scale ranging from 1= not at all characteristic to 5 =very
characteristic, with a possible range for each subscale from 7 to 35, and for the global
measure a range from 28 to 140. Scores above the midpoint—21 for each subscale and 84
for the global scale—are considered positive, indicating that the subject perceived the group
as abusive. The reliability coefficients identified in the original work were, according to the
authors, satisfactory, varying from 0.70 for Mind Control to 0.81 for Compliance.

Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 2, No. 3, 2003, Page 8
Adaptation process
For the Spanish adaptation of the GPA scale, we followed the international methodological
standards recommended by the International Test Commission (ITC) in order to adequately
adapt instruments from one culture to a new one (Hambleton, 1994 Hambleton, 1996
Muñiz &Hambleton, 2000). Specifically, we followed these steps:
1. Ensure that the constructs used in different languages and cultural groups of interest
were equivalent. For this purpose, we were assisted by a team of six researchers of
renowned experience in the subject matter, who were interviewed in order to
evaluate whether the constructs measured by the instrument in the original language
and group, could be found in a similar form and frequency in the target group to
which the adapted instrument was aimed.
2. We decided to adapt an existing instrument instead of developing a new one, due to
the interest shown in previous occasions to carry out transcultural studies, which
means using common instruments adapted to different languages.
3. We selected two qualified translators, one of them Spanish and the other North
American, both with experience in translations from American English into Spanish,
and vice versa, and a wide knowledge of both involved cultures. Both had lived for
long periods of time in the country different from the one they originally came from.
Before reviewing the scale, both translators went through individual training sessions
on the constructs being evaluated and on test construction (i.e., multiple response
choices, etc.)
4. The GPA scale was translated by the Spanish translator (see Figure 1: Translator A)
from the original source language into Spanish. After being reviewed by one of the
constructors of the Spanish version, and with the agreement of the team of
researchers, the instrument was back-translated by the North American translator
into American English (Translator B).
5. The adapted version of the instrument was then reviewed and went through the
necessary corrections. First, the team of experts evaluated the equivalence of the
instrument by comparing both English versions: original and back-translated
versions. According to that, the Spanish version was reviewed, and slight
modifications were introduced in the Spanish version. A pilot study was then carried
out with the adapted instrument being administered to a sample of 20 former
members of diverse manipulative groups, who were also interviewed in order to get
their opinion on the different aspects related to the understanding of instructions,
item‘s writing, etc. As a consequence, and together with the psychometric results
obtained, some modifications were again introduced in the final Spanish version of
the instrument.
6. Finally, this last version was administered to 61 subjects, who identified themselves
as former members of diverse manipulative groups. We then analyzed the
psychometric results obtained and, following a new revision carried out by the team
of researchers, we got the final Spanish version of the instrument. (See Appendix)
Procedure
The evaluations were carried out in 13 different provinces inside Spain, corresponding to the
different places of residence of the subjects who took part in the study. Certain
characteristics of some members of the sample, i.e., difficult to get in touch with, a
reluctance to attend an interview in person, geographical distance, made us consider two
different ways to take part in this study: one was physical attendance, and the second was
by ordinary mail. In both cases, a qualified interviewer informed the subjects about the