Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 5, No. 1 1988 Page 9
The latter hypothesis, which has been explored in the present research, explains cult vulnerability
in the context of late adolescent or young adult development Gitelson and Reed (1981) have
found support for a similar hypothesis, although with a relatively small number of subjects (N =
7). Levine (1984) reports that cultists ―are not brainwashed or weird, but neither are they quite
whole‖ (P. 26), while Singer (1979) states, ―many participants joined these religious cults during
periods of depression and confusion, when they had a sense that life was meaningless‖ (p. 72).
Presuming that an interaction of intrapsychic dynamics and stressful life events, rather than the
life events themselves, leaves one susceptible to cult recruitment, the third hypothesis of this
study was that parental reports would demonstrate significantly more stressful life events among
cult-involved individuals in contrast to individuals not involved in cults.
Method
Participants
The cult-involved group consisted of 42 families who had at one time consulted the Cult Hot-line
and Clinic of the Jewish Board of Family and Children's Services about their child's cult
involvement and who agreed to participate in the research. (1) Only Jewish families were included
in the present study. One-parent and divorced or remarried families were not excluded and
constituted 29% of the sample.
For the purposes of comparison, a group, which we called ―contrast‖ families, was recruited
through organizations such as Hadassah and the Organization for Rehabilitation and Training
(ORT), through synagogues, and through newspaper advertisements. Contrast families were
recruited on the basis of the following characteristics: a) Jewish families with two to four children
one of whom was between the ages of 19-27, b) the children have had some college, and c) both
parents were at least high school graduates. Forty-five families who met these qualifications
agreed to participate in this study. Again, no effort was made to control for one-parent, divorced
or remarried families, who constituted 18% of the contrast sample.
A target child was chosen as a point of focus for interviews with the contrast families to create a
closer parallel to the cult-involved families. This child was required to be between 19-27 and to be
in or have completed college. If more than one child in the family met these conditions, one of
the eligible children was chosen randomly using a random numbers table. This target child was
the point of reference for parents in the contrast group when discussing developmental history
and stressful life events.
Procedure
The cult-involved and contrast (noncult-involved) parents first completed a set of questionnaires
sent to their homes. Next, a personal interview was scheduled with the parents (or parent) and
one of the trained research staff team. The research instruments included:
Family Environment Scale (FES). The FES (Moos &Moos, 1981) is a measure of the perceived
family environment. It assesses the interpersonal relationships among family members
(Relationship Dimension), the directions of personal growth stressed by the family (Personal
Dimension), and the organizational structure of the family (System Maintenance Dimension). The
scale consists of 90 true-false statements divided equally among 10 subscales which constitute
these three major dimensions.
Family Questionnaire. This measure, developed by the investigators, comprised straightforward
questions concerning the child's background (childhood, school, work, social and health history),
the family's health history, religious affiliation, and demographics (marital status, education,
income). An adaptation of the questionnaire prepared for the contrast families removed all the
items pertaining specifically to cult involvement.
The latter hypothesis, which has been explored in the present research, explains cult vulnerability
in the context of late adolescent or young adult development Gitelson and Reed (1981) have
found support for a similar hypothesis, although with a relatively small number of subjects (N =
7). Levine (1984) reports that cultists ―are not brainwashed or weird, but neither are they quite
whole‖ (P. 26), while Singer (1979) states, ―many participants joined these religious cults during
periods of depression and confusion, when they had a sense that life was meaningless‖ (p. 72).
Presuming that an interaction of intrapsychic dynamics and stressful life events, rather than the
life events themselves, leaves one susceptible to cult recruitment, the third hypothesis of this
study was that parental reports would demonstrate significantly more stressful life events among
cult-involved individuals in contrast to individuals not involved in cults.
Method
Participants
The cult-involved group consisted of 42 families who had at one time consulted the Cult Hot-line
and Clinic of the Jewish Board of Family and Children's Services about their child's cult
involvement and who agreed to participate in the research. (1) Only Jewish families were included
in the present study. One-parent and divorced or remarried families were not excluded and
constituted 29% of the sample.
For the purposes of comparison, a group, which we called ―contrast‖ families, was recruited
through organizations such as Hadassah and the Organization for Rehabilitation and Training
(ORT), through synagogues, and through newspaper advertisements. Contrast families were
recruited on the basis of the following characteristics: a) Jewish families with two to four children
one of whom was between the ages of 19-27, b) the children have had some college, and c) both
parents were at least high school graduates. Forty-five families who met these qualifications
agreed to participate in this study. Again, no effort was made to control for one-parent, divorced
or remarried families, who constituted 18% of the contrast sample.
A target child was chosen as a point of focus for interviews with the contrast families to create a
closer parallel to the cult-involved families. This child was required to be between 19-27 and to be
in or have completed college. If more than one child in the family met these conditions, one of
the eligible children was chosen randomly using a random numbers table. This target child was
the point of reference for parents in the contrast group when discussing developmental history
and stressful life events.
Procedure
The cult-involved and contrast (noncult-involved) parents first completed a set of questionnaires
sent to their homes. Next, a personal interview was scheduled with the parents (or parent) and
one of the trained research staff team. The research instruments included:
Family Environment Scale (FES). The FES (Moos &Moos, 1981) is a measure of the perceived
family environment. It assesses the interpersonal relationships among family members
(Relationship Dimension), the directions of personal growth stressed by the family (Personal
Dimension), and the organizational structure of the family (System Maintenance Dimension). The
scale consists of 90 true-false statements divided equally among 10 subscales which constitute
these three major dimensions.
Family Questionnaire. This measure, developed by the investigators, comprised straightforward
questions concerning the child's background (childhood, school, work, social and health history),
the family's health history, religious affiliation, and demographics (marital status, education,
income). An adaptation of the questionnaire prepared for the contrast families removed all the
items pertaining specifically to cult involvement.
