Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 11, No. 1, 1994, Page 54
The Group Psychological Abuse Scale:
A Measure of the Varieties of Cultic Abuse
William V. Chambers, Ph.D.
University College, Mercer University
Michael D. Langone, Ph.D.
American Family Foundation
Arthur A. Dole, Ph.D.
University of Pennsylvania
James W. Grice, M.A.
University of New Mexico
Abstract
The Group Psychological Abuse (GPA) scale was developed from a factor analysis of
308 former cult members‟ characterizations of their groups. Four subscales were
derived: Compliance, Exploitation, Mind Control, and Anxious Dependency. Reliability
and validity findings suggest the GPA should be useful in characterizing the varieties
of abuse and in differentiating cults from innocuous groups.
The major apprehension surrounding cults is not that they represent new religious creeds,
dissenting political views, or alternative therapeutic methods. The driving concern is that
these groups tend to abuse their members, and sometimes nonmembers, unlike bona fide
new religious (and other) movements, which treat members and outsiders with relative
respect.
How much do we really know about abuse in cults? From experiential, clinical, and
philosophical perspectives, we know quite a lot. From the viewpoint of scientific theory, based
on quantitative measurements, we know less. A few steps toward quantitative measurement
of abuse have been taken, however. Dole and Dubrow-Eichel (1985) used a Delphi strategy to
study experts‟ perceptions of cults. They collected descriptions of numerous dangerous
practices found among cults. Ratings of the practices by experts showed that abuses by cults
could be quantitatively differentiated. The Dole and Dubrow-Eichel study thus provided
precedence for further quantitative studies of abuse in cults.
Some years after the Dole and Dubrow-Eichel (1985) study, Langone and Chambers (1991)
conducted a factor analysis of former cult members‟ interpretations of terms used in cultic
studies. Five dimensions of meaningfulness and terminological acceptability were found: Mind
Control, Social Manipulation, Group Intensity, Trauma, and Abuse. The former cult members
rated the Abuse and Trauma dimensions as most meaningful and acceptable to people leaving
cults. The views of the former cult members thus concurred with those of Dole and
Dubrow-Eichel in emphasizing the significance of abuse and trauma in cultic groups.
Taking the lead offered by Dole and Dubrow-Eichel (1985), as well as by the subjects in the
factor analysis study, Langone (1992) developed a theoretical model of abuse, with the idea
of respect for the person as the central concern and contrast to abuse. The respect-versus-
abuse model emphasizes four aspects of personhood: Mind, Autonomy, Identity, and Dignity
(MAID). These aspects may be construed as needs in a psychological sense or as rights in a
philosophical sense.
Disrespect for Mind concerns the violation of the person‟s right to pursue truth and goodness
through reality testing, logical thinking, and objective inquiry. These violations of respect are
often described in the literature as mind control, coercive persuasion, or thought reform
(Langone, 1993 Lifton, 1961 Schein, Schneier, &Baker, 1961).

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 11, No. 1, 1994, Page 55
The second aspect of respect for the person/Autonomy summarizes the person‟s right to
make decisions independent of the interests and dictates of others. These issues of conformity
and compliance are found throughout the literature and reflect the authoritarian features of
most cultic groups.
The Identity aspect of personhood concerns the inner integration of the person and integrity
as a member of a family, community, and culture. Violation of the rights of people to define
themselves is frequently described in the literature (see especially Yeakley, 1988), with the
person‟s identity generally being preempted to serve the group‟s goals and daily needs.
Dignity, the final aspect of personhood, concerns the person‟s right to feel worthwhile in the
eyes of others, to feel ?equal? in the sense enunciated in the Declaration of Independence
(?all men are created equal??that is, with equal inherent worth). The destruction of the
person‟s sense of inherent worth is common to most forms of psychological abuse.
The four aspects of respect, then, appeal to the legitimacy of the person as an end, rather
than as a means to be exploited. Langone‟s theoretical formulation of psychological abuse
derives from his work with former members of cultic groups, which, being exploitatively
manipulative, place the abuse-respect distinction in bold relief. Other clinical and empirical
investigations clearly place abuse at the heart of the controversy surrounding the cult
phenomenon.
Given this background and our assumption that abuse is the essence of a cult, it is reasonable
to proceed to a scientific study of the nature of the abuse in cultic groups. We need a
quantitative measure of abuse that can be applied to any group by anyone with experience of
the group. Development of such a scale is the purpose of this study.
Method
Introductory Comments
Development of a measure of psychological abuse could begin in either of two ways.
Descriptive items could be selected that discriminate between groups commonly considered
abusive (e.g., cults) and groups commonly considered nonabusive. Discriminant function
analysis is the statistical method of choice for this kind of item analysis (Ghiselli, Campbell, &
Zedeck, 1981). This method is frequently used, for example, in research on psychiatric
diagnosis. The approach assumes, however, that accepted validity criteria exist--for example,
the diagnostic decisions of expert clinicians. Unfortunately, there are no equivalent
authoritative diagnostic criteria for cults. Therefore, a measure of the psychological abuse
associated with cults must first focus on describing what is meant by cultic abuse.
Clinical studies, philosophical analyses, and surveys of personal and expert experience can
help explicate definitional issues and assumptions, as well as provide potential items for
scales. Accumulated observations must be systematically organized, however, before
sophisticated scientific theories can be developed or derivative hypotheses tested empirically.
Factor analysis is the appropriate method for this approach.
As Kerlinger (1973) states: ?Factor analysis is a method for determining the number and
nature of the underlying variables among larger numbers of measures ...Factor analysis
serves the cause of scientific parsimony ...It tells us, in effect, what tests or measures belong
together--which ones virtually measure the same thing? (p. 659). Gorsuch (1983) adds that
the aim of factor analysis is to ?summarize the interrelationships among the variables in a
concise but accurate manner as an aid in conceptualization? (p. 2).
Thus, factor analysis can enable us to distill the varieties of abuse by separating numerical
themes. Delineation of the combinations and permutations of these varieties may, in turn,
help us to empirically elaborate the dimensions, meaning, and nature of cultic abuse.