Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 2 No. 1 1985, Page 24
Etiology
When one speaks of the etiology of cult-induced or related psychopathology, the cult
conversion process cannot be ignored otherwise psychological treatment will be
ineffective (Clark, 1978, p. 29 Schwartz &Kaslow, 1979, p. 22 Singer, 1979, p. 82).
Furthermore, when the cult is extremist there will be a direct link between the cult
conversion process and the resulting psychological impairment in the individual. However,
the conversion process is even more effective when prior personality factors render the
individual recruit especially susceptible to the cult‘s manipulative techniques. In short,
extremist cult conversion is usually an interplay of personal vulnerability factors and cult
milieu factors. Figure I depicts this visually according to three phases suggested earlier
(Ash, 1983 cf. AFF).
Personal Vulnerability Factors
A synthesis of AFF‘s personal vulnerability factors with Zerin‘s (1982) research on family
system vulnerability, along with other relevant literature, suggests the following variables
make an individual more susceptible to cult involvement:
1. High level of current distress or dissatisfaction in day-to-day life. Singer referred to a
temporary period of stress and vulnerability during the period of ―being in between things‖
(1978, p. 16), i.e., in transition between high school and college, between jobs, between
romances or between living at home and on his/her own. Furthermore, Galanter‘s ―relief
effect‖ implies a prior distress, a notion which Is quite liberally supported in the literature
(cf. Allison, 1966 Anthony, Robbins, &McCarthy, 1980 Clark, 1978, 1979b Deutsch,
1975, 1980 Galper in Aversa, 1976 Levine, 1980 Levine, 1979 Levine &Salter, 1976
Pattison, Llamas, &Hurd, 1979 Roche, 1979 Schwartz &Kaslow, 1981 Spero, 1980
Stoner &Parke, 1977 Yamamoto, 1977).
Personality Factors Milieu Factors
Attraction Personal vulnerability factors Recruitment/enticement
Tactics
Conversion Gradual process with Thought reform
/isolated choices along the way brainwashing tactics
snapping
Acculturation Dissociation/information disease Retention tactics
Figure 1. An overview of individual personality factors and cult milieu factors involved in
the process of cult conversion, as adapted from Clark, Langone, Schecter, and Daly (1981)
and Conway and Siegelman (1978).
2. Cultural disillusionment in a frustrated seeker--cf. the literature which refers to the
idealism in many of those attracted to cults, those who are searching for meaning in
life (Blackwell, 1980 Buckley &Galanter, 1979 Burtner, 1980 Carr, 1981 Enroth,
1977, 1979 Gordon, 1977 MacCollam, 1979 Rothbaum, 1980 Schwartz &Kaslow,
1979, 1981 Shapiro, 1977 Singer, 1979 Spero, 1977, 1980 Stoner &Parke, 1977
Ungerleider &Wellisch, 1979b West &Singer, 1980 Yamamoto, 1977).
3. Lack of an intrinsic (self-chosen and strongly held as a meaningful part of oneself)
religious belief/value system or a more nominal, or more extrinsic, religiosity. While the
tendency to conceptualize problems In a religious framework per se does appear to
increase one‘s vulnerability (Austin, 1977 Lofland, 1977), as apparently does a
nominal/uncommitted religious background (Cox, 1977, p. 38 Enroth, 1977, p. 153
Isser &Schwartz, 1980, p. 69 Levine &Salter 1976, p. 413 MacCollam, 1979, pp. 4,

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 2 No. 1 1985, Page 25
42 Schwartz &Kaslow, 1979, p. 24 Spero, 1980, P. 164 Yamamoto, 1977, p. 50), a
previous intrinsic religious belief system appears to make one less vulnerable to certain
groups, e.g., the Unification Church (Deutsch &Miller, 1983).
4. Moderately dysfunctional family system of origin (from Zerin‘s 1982 research),
including (in addition to those of a religious or values clarification nature) these
particular factors:
a. The ―absent father‖ syndrome: the father being physically present and still ―not
there‖ -Zerin‘s research supported Schwartz &Kaslow‘s (1979, 1981) earlier
contention that a weak father-child relationship increased one‘s vulnerability and a
strong one decreased it. This is also supported by many authors suggesting that
cultists joined their groups in search of a father to replace the one they didn‘t
have either physically or emotionally (Blackwell, 1980 Buckley &Galanter, 1979
Cox 1977 Enroth, 1977, 1978, 1979 Gordon, 1977 Hunt, 1980 Levine &
Zegans, 1974 Levine, 1980 maccollam, 1979 Spero, 1977, 1980). Likewise,
Yamamoto (1977) noted specifically that ―the Unification Church has had the most
difficulty (in recruiting) with those converts who have a close relationship with their
fathers‖ (p. 50). Deutsch and Miller‘s (1983) four female Unification subjects all
―cherished their fathers--in spite of perceived shortcomings,‖ although the authors
didn‘t say whether these relationships were close or not (p. 768).
b. Lack of parental direction, guidance, structure and limits--lack of preparation of the
young for independence, which may include a traumatic switch in family style at the
point of high school graduation (from binding to expelling), i.e., dramatic switch
from enmeshed overprotection/dependency to forced independence (cf. Schwartz &
Kaslow, 1981) or, after a deprogramming, the other way around (Goldberg &
Goldberg, 1982). Also, West and Singer (1980, P. 3250) have said that family
systems which foster a combination of indecisiveness and rebellion rear vulnerable
youth.
c. Lack of unconditional positive strokes--positive attention and affection given only
for performance and good behaviorcf. the literature referring to the search for love,
attention, security, or belonging in many of those attracted to cults and/or the
promise by the cults to provide for this need (Blackwell, 1980 Buckley &
Galanter, 1979 Burtner, 1980 Carr, 1981 Cox, 1977 Deutsch, 1975 Edwards,
1979 Enroth, 1977, 1979 Gordon, 1977 Hopkins, 1978 Levin &Zegans, 1974
Levine, 1980 Levine, 1979 Levine &Salter, 1976 MacCollam, 1979
Schwartz &Kaslow, 1979, 1981 Shubin, 1980 Silnger, 1978 Ungerleider &
Wellisch, 1979a West &Singer, 1980).
d. Poor family communications, especially the parental usage of double binds, cf.
Schwartz &Kaslow (1979) referring to ―contradictory communications from ‗good‘
parents‖ (p. 180). Also, poor communication per se in pre-cult families, cf.
Blackwell (1980, p. 4) Carr (1981, p. 180) Edwards (1979, p. 231) Enroth (1977,
p. 149 1979, p. 51) Martin (1979, p. 180).
e. Chronic parental marital conflict, usually unacknowledged, which may lead to the
family system‘s need for a scapegoat (cf. Schwartz &Kaslow (1981, pp. 15-16).
5. Dependent personality tendencies--cf. Schwartz &.Kaslow (1981, pp. 15-16) and the
testing results of Deutsch &Miller (1983), Spero (1982), and Ungerleider &Wellisch
(1979b), which suggest that dependency antedates cult involvement. The
dependent tendencies include: