Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 5, No. 1 1988 Page 21
Family Environment as a Factor in
Vulnerability to Cult Involvement*
Neil Maron, Ph. D.
Joel Braverman High School
Brooklyn, New York
Abstract
The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether a relationship exists
between parental perceptions of the family environment of cult members and
vulnerability to cult involvement. Thirty-five families, recruited at a convention of
the Citizens Freedom Foundation, a non-profit support group for parents whose
offspring are/were in cults, were compared with 35 families recruited from
community centers and churches in the New York Metropolitan Area. Data were
collected retrospectively on self-report measures: the Moos Family Environment
Scale and a Family Questionnaire. Univariate tests and discriminant analysis found
that the families differed only in one of the ten subscales (Independence) of the
Family Environment Scale, with the cult group having higher mean scale scores
than the comparison group. In general, the results were consistent with Singer's
(1979), Swope's (1980), Clark's (1981), and Carr's (198 1) findings that the
familial factor is not important in cult involvement and that members are typically
recruited within twelve months of experiencing one of eight stressful events.
Introduction
The study reported here investigates the role of the family as a predisposing factor in cult
involvement. Data based on parental perceptions were collected in retrospective self-report
questionnaires from a sample of families in which one offspring was/is a cult member and a
comparison sample of families without such offspring.
Various theorists and researchers have focused on three categories of supposed vulnerability
factors: personal factors, recruitment psychodynamic factors, and familial factors. (See Ash, 1985
for a detailed review of this subject.) Family factors have had negligible attention in the literature,
and this study attempts to partly fill that void.
It is hypothesized that not all youngsters are equally vulnerable to cull involvement and that
familial factors play an important role in vulnerability -specifically, enmeshment, family
psychopathology, moral-religious emphasis, achievement orientation, and intellectual-cultural
orientation.
There are many different theories regarding the background of cultists prior to membership.
Schwartz and Kaslow (1979) and Zerin (1982) emphasize the role of the family as a predisposing
factor to involvement. In their studies, Schwam and Kaslow (1979) and Vickers (1977) reported
patterns of overly enmeshed families, families in which taking responsibility for each other is the
hallmark Young people in such families are uncomfortable entering an adult world that values
autonomy. Hence, according to Schwartz and Kaslow, for the cult member the group often
represents a solution to the conflicts aroused b) society's demands for autonomy.
However, Clark (1979), Clark, Langone, Schecter, and Daly (1981), Singer (1982), and Swope
(1980), basing their studies on extensive interviews with cult families, find that most cult
members come from normal family environment and have merely been manipulated by a
Family Environment as a Factor in
Vulnerability to Cult Involvement*
Neil Maron, Ph. D.
Joel Braverman High School
Brooklyn, New York
Abstract
The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether a relationship exists
between parental perceptions of the family environment of cult members and
vulnerability to cult involvement. Thirty-five families, recruited at a convention of
the Citizens Freedom Foundation, a non-profit support group for parents whose
offspring are/were in cults, were compared with 35 families recruited from
community centers and churches in the New York Metropolitan Area. Data were
collected retrospectively on self-report measures: the Moos Family Environment
Scale and a Family Questionnaire. Univariate tests and discriminant analysis found
that the families differed only in one of the ten subscales (Independence) of the
Family Environment Scale, with the cult group having higher mean scale scores
than the comparison group. In general, the results were consistent with Singer's
(1979), Swope's (1980), Clark's (1981), and Carr's (198 1) findings that the
familial factor is not important in cult involvement and that members are typically
recruited within twelve months of experiencing one of eight stressful events.
Introduction
The study reported here investigates the role of the family as a predisposing factor in cult
involvement. Data based on parental perceptions were collected in retrospective self-report
questionnaires from a sample of families in which one offspring was/is a cult member and a
comparison sample of families without such offspring.
Various theorists and researchers have focused on three categories of supposed vulnerability
factors: personal factors, recruitment psychodynamic factors, and familial factors. (See Ash, 1985
for a detailed review of this subject.) Family factors have had negligible attention in the literature,
and this study attempts to partly fill that void.
It is hypothesized that not all youngsters are equally vulnerable to cull involvement and that
familial factors play an important role in vulnerability -specifically, enmeshment, family
psychopathology, moral-religious emphasis, achievement orientation, and intellectual-cultural
orientation.
There are many different theories regarding the background of cultists prior to membership.
Schwartz and Kaslow (1979) and Zerin (1982) emphasize the role of the family as a predisposing
factor to involvement. In their studies, Schwam and Kaslow (1979) and Vickers (1977) reported
patterns of overly enmeshed families, families in which taking responsibility for each other is the
hallmark Young people in such families are uncomfortable entering an adult world that values
autonomy. Hence, according to Schwartz and Kaslow, for the cult member the group often
represents a solution to the conflicts aroused b) society's demands for autonomy.
However, Clark (1979), Clark, Langone, Schecter, and Daly (1981), Singer (1982), and Swope
(1980), basing their studies on extensive interviews with cult families, find that most cult
members come from normal family environment and have merely been manipulated by a
