Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 6, No. 2, 1989, Page 6
“Deprogramming” is a term applied broadly to activities and processes aimed at the
deconversion of a member of one of the controversial new religions, pseudoreligions, or
mass therapy “cults” (Clark, Langone, Schecter &Daly, 1981 Conway &Siegelman, 1978).
Deprogramming is a controversial and often secretive activity the first step (physical
separation from the cult) is sometimes conducted without the cult member‟s initial
voluntary agreement. Coercive persuasion (“brainwashing” or “mind control”) is the
justification for deconverson most often cited by deprogrammers, exit-counselors, and the
families that hire them (Barker, 1984 Beckford, 1985 Bromley, Shupe, &Ventimiglia,
1983 Shupe &Bromley, 1980 Sullivan, 1984) “mind control techniques” appear most
prominently in experts‟ definitions of destructive cult characteristics (Cole &Dubrow-Eichel,
1985 Sullivan, 1984). According to many practitioners, ex-members and several
researchers (Conway &Siegelman, 1978 Hassan, 1988 Patrick, 1976 Underwood &
Underwood, 1979 Zeitlin, 1985), cultic brainwashing may involve the induction and
maintenance of hypnotic or trance-like states of consciousness. Discussions with many
deprogrammers and ex-members indicate that they view deprogramming as a
predominantly cognitive-interpersonal process.
I began the process of systematically studying deprogramming by: (a) describing in detail
the general social contexts and interactions I observed throughout one 5-day
deprogramming (not the object of this study) (b) developing a Deprogramming Statements
Checklist, a coding strategy and manual specifically designed to study deprogramming and
(c) analyzing in detail changes in verbal content (using the Deprogramming Statements
Checklist) and cognitive processes (i.e., focus of attention, and quality of subjective
experience) during the three most significant deprogramming events.
The results of my study are presented in two issues of the Cultic Studies Journal, (this
special issue and a follow-up in a later issue).
In this issue, I first review the literature on cultic conversion, information processing,
attention, consciousness, deprogramming, and interaction analysis. I attempt to integrate
these seven research strands and relate them to the questions posed in my study. Next, I
detail my observations and review the audiotapes of Ken‟s deprogramming as a member of
the Hare Krishnas. These observations provide a qualitative context for the presentation of
quantitative data on verbal interaction, attention, and consciousness to be presented in the
subsequent Cultic Studies Journal article.
Ken‟s deconversion began as an “involuntary” deprogramming: His initial “snatch” involved
a clear message that he was not free to leave the deprogrammers‟ car. Soon thereafter,
however, he agreed to participate in the deprogramming and stated that he would not try to
leave it can be argued that the deprogramming had then become voluntary. My study
allowed for an initially involuntary process, but ultimately required the voluntary consent of
the deprogrammee before I could collect and utilize data. I began my observations of Ken‟s
deprogramming after he had agreed to stay and listen to the deprogrammers‟ information.
In addition, I obtained Ken‟s initial verbal consent to observe but later received a written
release. This method was reviewed and approved by the Committee on Studies Involving
Human Beings of the University of Pennsylvania.
Personal Experiences with Destructive Cults, “Mind Control,” and Deprogramming
Personal passions have often fueled and occasionally clouded both “sides” of the cult
controversy. It is therefore imperative to explicate clearly how personal experiences have
influenced the interpretation of information yielded from formal studies. Choosing to study a
topic related to the psychology of destructive cultism was not a difficult decision for me. As
a researcher, counselor, consultant, and psychologist I have been actively involved in this
field since April, 1975.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 6, No. 2, 1989, Page 7
My experiences as a Unification Church trainee. My involvement began as an undergraduate
at Columbia University, when I became fascinated with the young members of Sun Myung
Moon‟s Unification Church (U.C.) who were on campus passionately recruiting for the U.C.‟s
college arm, the Collegiate Association for Research of Principle (CARP). Just prior to the
beginning of the 1975 spring semester, I received approval to conduct independent
research on the U.C. I voluntarily subjected myself to two months of “brown bag lectures”
on Divine Principle (the Unification Church‟s doctrine) followed by one week of intensive
indoctrination (under the guise of a CARP “young leaders conference”) at the U.C.‟s eastern
seminary at Barrytown, NY.
Prior to going to Barrytown, I had familiarized myself somewhat with U.C. doctrine, which I
opposed, and I was very aware of the Church‟s extremist, right-wing, political views, which
I loathed.
My experiences in Barrytown stunned me. After only two days, I found myself wavering and
seriously doubting the integrity of beliefs, feelings, and self-perceptions that had been an
integral part of my personality since I was thirteen. I had also become aware of an intense
physiological agitation that I interpreted as extreme anxiety.
I felt I was on the verge of either capitulating to the radically alien set of beliefs and
behaviors beings presented to me, or of having an anxiety attack (a “nervous breakdown”)
nevertheless, I did neither. I credit my eventual departure from Barrytown to luck, and
cigarettes (which were forbidden). Sneaking out of the large group sleeping quarters for
men (the “brothers” dorm”) to smoke cigarettes, I encountered several other young men
who were also breaking this rule. We began to talk, and to share our doubts. This form of
communication was also forbidden (we were supposed to communicate only to our assigned
“buddies,” all of whom were long-term Moonists). I became a part of a small group of five
“renegades” who met secretly late at night (actually, early in the morning) to smoke
cigarettes and debrief each other (although we did not label it as such back then). After two
more days, our rebellion became overt and evident to our leaders when we refused to
cooperate with the “buddy system,” and insisted on our right to limited periods of “free”
conversation.
Nevertheless, I had initial difficulty leaving Barrytown. When I insisted on leaving at the end
of my seven-day workshop, my “brothers” told me they would call a taxi to pick me up –
but in fact they never called. I then insisted on making the call myself (there were no public
phones), but when my taxi arrived my backpack was suddenly “lost.” I then became angry,
and threatened to sue my workshop leader if I was detained any longer. My backpack
suddenly “reappeared,” and immediately thereafter I left.
When I arrived back at Columbia, I was still agitated. I remained intermittently agitated and
“spaced-out” for approximately one month. In retrospect I now believe I was experiencing,
in mild form, many of the symptoms associated with post-traumatic stress disorder and/or
dissociative disorders and what many former cultists call post-cult “floating.”
Prior to and during my stay at Barrytown, I interviewed (with the local CARP‟s approval)
several U.C. members, employing a questionnaire and a structured interview drawn from
my study of transactional analysis, especially the theory of “life scripts” (Berne, 1961
Steiner, 1971). I expected to find differences in “scripts” between Moonists and a small
matched sample, with the Moonists having “scripts” similar to those of alcoholics. My
findings gave limited support to this hypothesis, but my section on my experiences as a
Barrytown trainee was considerably more provocative. In this section, I compared the
processes I observed in Barrytown to the process of thought reform as described by Lifton
(1961) and Schein (1961). I concluded that while in Barrytown I had been deceptively
subjected to strong pressures to regress psychologically within a structured program of
thought reform. The fact that the Moonists had failed to “brainwash” me was, in my