Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 2 No. 1 1985, Page 68
Table 2
Percentage of all respondents who report engaging in each type and extent of religious
practice and spiritual-mystical experience (among those who gave valid answers, N=907)
Regularly Not Regularly Never
Pray 66 33 1
Religious services attended weekly 48 50 2
Read parts of the Bible 45 54 1
Attend religious youth groups 41 58 1
Revelations received personally from God 35 62 3
Felt soaring ―peak experiences‖
(bliss, cosmic consciousness,
transcendence, a sense of
universal oneness) 36 60 4
Meditate 33 65 2
Experienced psychic phenomena, ESP,
telepathy, etc. 37 60 4
Read parts of Koran 4 88 8
Read parts of Bhagavad Gita 7 86 7
It is the rare student who reports never having practiced nor experienced these activities.
The majority of students either engage in them regularly or have done so in the recent past.
While it may not be surprising to note that most pray regularly and many attend religious
services and religious youth groups regularly, it was not expected that so many of these
high school students would report divine revelations, psychic phenomena, peak experiences
and meditation. Comparative data from other geographical regions of the country are
needed to determine if the extent of this religious/spiritual emphasis is a local or widely
shared phenomenon among today‘s youth.
Attitudes Toward Authority and Structure
Many cults are organized as hierarchical power structures headed by a designated authority
figure with a formalized chain of command between the leader and followers. To assess the
extent to which students feel attracted to structured settings and authority, survey
questions asked about their preferences for type of school class, need for knowledgeable
leaders and reliance on the judgments of others.
More than twice as many students preferred structured classes (38%) to unstructured ones
(15%), the rest of the students (47%) preferred some mix of these extremes. An even
greater difference was found between the many who preferred a lecture-type class (48%)
and the few who liked the less organized discussion format (10%) with the remainder
(42%) preferring a combination of the two. The overwhelming majority of these high school
students believed that, ―to know what is going on, it is really necessary to have a leader
who knows.‖ Only 14% disagreed with that point of view, while 41% endorsed the
proposition strongly and another 45% generally agreed with it. A similar finding emerged
when most students supported the idea that, ―it is better to postpone judgment until you
hear from people whose opinion you trust.‖ While 21% disagreed, 24% agreed strongly and
an additional 55% agreed somewhat. Thus, it appears that among this sample of
adolescents there is a marked preference for structured learning settings, a reliance on
knowledgeable leaders over personal discovery of information, and a willingness to
postpone making judgments until trusted others present their opinions.
Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 2 No. 1 1985, Page 69
Empathetic Associations
The students were asked to project the emotional reactions they might have to each of a set
of hypothetical scenarios concerning cults. If they were asked to lie for the group, they
would be angry (56%), disgusted (32%), afraid (10%), surprised (6%), or embarrassed
(4%), while 3% would feel sad about being asked to do so, but 1% would be happy to.
Collecting funds for the group also elicited a range of primarily negative emotions: angry
(35%), embarrassed (26%), disgusted (25%), afraid (3%), sad (4%), surprised (3%),
while 2% would be happy to collect funds. Negative empathetic associations to cults were
also shown on items asking students to imagine: giving their names to the group‘s mailing
list, having parents sign them up for an introductory session, and being asked to defend the
group physically. However, the dominant reaction to imagining a sibling dating a group
member was ―nothing felt‖ (30%), and surprised (24%). They can‘t imagine their parents
attending a group‘s meeting (31%, surprised), but 2% would be angry and 19% would be
disgusted. Mixed reactions were uncovered when students were invited to Imagine how they
would react if their parents or guardians objected to their joining such a group. More
responded ―happy‖ (36%) than with any other mood label. But many (29%) said they‘d
have no reaction to such an intervention. A significant 17% fell into the category of those
who would respond negatively--with anger--against this interference with their freedom of
choice. Another 6% would be disgusted, 3% sad, and 1% embarrassed. The issue of
parental intervention then seems to divide the students into opposite factions: those who
would welcome such ―concern‖ versus those who would reject such ―controlling‖ influence
by parents.
Another way to interpret these data suggests that students were more readily aroused
emotionally by responding to scenarios in which they personally experienced the
consequences compared to those scenarios that took the perspective of others. They react
most intensely to a loss of their personal freedom, whether the source is cults or parents.
Who Makes Contact With Cults?
If the process were random by which a cult recruiter selected an individual for contact-
conversion or by which an individual made him or herself available for such an approach, we
would not expect to find variables that operated in a systematic fashion to differentiate
those contacted from those never contacted. On the contrary, we have found a number of
variables that do contribute to a statistically significant degree to this dynamic process of
being selected for contact and/or being available for a contact agent‘s advances.
From an initial set of thirty-four possibly relevant variables (from our student survey
responses), a discriminate function analysis identified a subset of eleven predictor variables.
Taken together, these variables separate all students into two groups: those approached
and those not approached by a cult member. This composite of variables is accurate in
predicting 61% of the cases where contact either occurred or did not occur. The index of the
discriminating power of this multivariate analysis, Wilkes‘ Lambda of .786, is highly
significant beyond the .0006 level (see Table 3A).
The description of each of these eleven contact predictor variables is outlined in Table 3B.
An analysis of the contribution of each of the predictor variables to group separation along
this discriminant function revealed that the first five variables are the strongest predictors of
contact, while the remaining six, thought important, were relatively less powerful. These
scaled vectors for the five best predictors were: positive group purposes (.423), father‘s
occupational status (-.486), media exposure, TV (.424), accuracy in identifying cults (.331),
and media exposure, newspapers (-.376).
The portrait of a high school student in our sample who was most likely to be available
for/targeted for contact by a cult member can now be drawn – in contrast to the youngster
Previous Page Next Page