Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 6, No. 2, 1989, Page 24
snatches, these deprogrammers began to call themselves “exit-counselors.” Eventually, the
twin catalysts of increased knowledge/skill and concern over lawsuits produced a dramatic
increase in exit-counselings and the waning of coerced deprogramming.
In practice, however, some deconversions may begin as unannounced, involuntary
deprogrammings and then rapidly develop into voluntary exit counselings when the cultist
responds with surprising cooperation (or even relief!) and seems very ready to consider the
deprogrammers' information. Conversely, some exit counselings can take place in secluded
areas (e.g., remote woodland cabins) that are very difficult to leave these deconversions
border on involuntary deprogrammings. Thus, the distinction between exit counseling and
deprogramming can be blurred. What seems clear is that the days of forceably grabbing
young adults off the streets to sequester them clandestinely in motel rooms have almost
disappeared. As of this writing, coerced deprogrammings are rare events.
Deprogramming's Essential Characteristics
The process of deconversion can subsume a wide range and variety of activities. In the
published deprogramming accounts I reviewed, however, there were consistent themes that
appeared to define the essential characteristics of this process (cf., Conway &Siegelman,
1978 Edwards, 1979 Enroth, 1977 Freed, 1980 Hassan, 1988 Heller, 1982 Patrick,
1976 Streiker, 1984 Underwood &Underwood, 1979 Zeidin, 1980). These included: some
form of physical removal from the cultic milieu establishing a personal relationship that
involves self-disclosure and encourages reestablishing links with pre-cult personal history
disputing cult information and imparting new information interference with cult-supported
attentional patterns (i.e., cultic “self-hypnosis”) and anticipating an overt or covert sign
that the cultist has renounced his or her allegiance (“snapping”).
The Effectiveness of Deprogramming
Among deprogrammers, reported effectiveness rates vary from 75% to 85%. Former
deprogrammer Galen Kelly reported an 85% success rate (Appel, 1983, p. 151n). Garvey
(1988) estimated that in his experience as an exit-counselor, he has achieved an
effectiveness rate of approximately 75-80%.
Studies of the effectiveness of deprogramming have suffered from small and possibly biased
sample sizes. Nevertheless, the few studies that do exist have reported very similar
effectiveness rates. In a preliminary study, Langone (1982) reported that, of 29 forced
deprogrammings, parents of cultists from a variety of groups reported 16 successes (for an
overall success rate of 59%). A later expansion of this study (Langone, 1984) revealed that,
of 62 deprogrammings, 39 were immediately successful (63% effectiveness). Of the 23
“failures,” 6 later left their cults, so a very liberal interpretation of deprogramming
effectiveness might yield a rating of 73%. My colleagues and I obtained similar results
(Dubrow-Eichel, Dubrow-Eichel &Eisenberg, 1984): 10 of 15 (67%) exit-counselings and/or
deprogrammings were successful. These results compare favorably with rates of
psychotherapy efficacy (Garfield, 198 1). Both studies suggested that the effectiveness
rates estimated by deprogrammers themselves may be somewhat overly optimistic,
although none of the above studies attempted to control for deprogrammer factors, such as
experience level as a deprogrammer or formal training in mental health counseling.
In 1981, Conway and Siegelman (1982) surveyed over 400 former cult members from 48
different groups. Their respondents ranged in age from mid-teens to mid-fifties, with 21
being the mean. Length of time as a cultist ranged from 3 days to 12 years, with 34 months
being the mean. Fifty-one percent were male. Forty-six percent were Protestant 26%
Catholic, 21% Jewish and 7% atheist or “other.” Seventy-one percent of their subjects
underwent deprogramming. Of these, 40% had been forcefully abducted (kidnapped).

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 6, No. 2, 1989, Page 25
Conway and Siegelman found the vast majority of their sample had been celibate, and that
sexual exploitation by leaders was minimal. Physical punishment (e.g., beatings, bondage,
food deprivation, cold showers) was reported by about 20% of the respondents. This sample
reported spending three to seven hours each day practicing some form of autohypnotic
ritual. An additional 20 to 30 hours per week were reportedly spent in other cult- related
rituals and/or lectures thus, a total of 40 to 70 hours per week (55 hours was the mean)
were spent in some form of devotional activity that could be labeled “thought stopping.” In
addition, 52% of Conway and Siegehnan's sample reported post-cult symptoms of “floating”
(spontaneous trance-like states), 40% reported recurring nightmares about their groups,
35% reported “being unable to break [cultic mental rhythms of chanting, meditation or
speaking in tongues” (Conway &Siegelman, 1982, p. 90), and 21% experienced some
memory loss. Conway and Siegelman found a direct correlation between the amount of time
spent per week in cult ritual and indoctrination and the number of long-term adverse
effects:
Our findings appear to confirm that the psychological trauma cults inflict upon
their members is directly related to the amount of time spent in indoctrination
and mind control rituals. Perhaps most startling of all was a second finding ...
[that] most of the damage appears to be done in the first few months [of cult
membership]. (Conway &Siegelman, 1982, p. 90)
In my experience as therapist for former cultists, I have seen a distinct difference between
my deprogrammed and nondeprogrammed clients. Although both demonstrated
ambivalence toward their cult experiences, the nondeprogrammed clients seemed more
confused about their ambivalence, and were generally in much greater internal conflict.
They generally had greater difficulty resolving family conflicts. As opposed to their
deprogrammed counterparts, they generally demonstrated greater vulnerability to other
forms of unethical social influence: they tended to be more easily attracted to other
manipulative groups, became more readily involved in physically and/or psychologically
abusive romantic relationships, and were more likely to lm vulnerable to sales and
marketing frauds. They also reported more “floating- like” symptoms than did
deprogrammed clients, but had more difficult) recognizing and labeling these states. In the
Conway and Siegelman study, deprogrammed former cultists also appeared to make a more
rapid transition to improved psychological functioning than did their nondeprogrammed
counterparts:
In almost every case, those who were deprogrammed recovered more quickly
and experienced fewer long-time effects than those who were not.
Deprogrammees needed an average 10 months‟ less rehabilitation time than
non-deprogrammees (14 months instead of 24 months) and reported, on the
average, less than half the long-term effects. (Conway &Siegelman, 1982, p.
92)
In a review of her clinical cases involving former cultists, Singer (1979, p 75) found that
“many members of our groups tell us they were grateful for the intervention and had been
hoping for [a deprogramming]” (a view that at one point was also expressed by Ken, the
cultist in my study):
These people say that they had felt themselves powerless to carry out their desire to leave
because of psychological and social pressures from companions and officials inside. They
often speak of a combination of guilt over defecting and fear of the cults retaliation -
excommunication -if the) tried (Singer, 1979, p. 75).
Singer admitted that the majority of her therapy clients had beer deprogrammed from their
cults, or immediately following a voluntary exit She did not address the possible bias implied
by Us skewed clinical sample.