Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 14, No. 2, 1997, page 76
West &Singer, 1980), with variables from across the lifespan interacting with cult
experiences to create individual patterns of adjustment in former cultists.
The extent to which these and other factors are related to current adjustment in former cult
members has yet to be explored. Also lacking is firm empirical evidence that demonstrates
a relationship between cult involvement and subsequent distress. As a result, competing
theories regarding the etiology of postcult distress continue to circulate, thus hindering
appropriate therapeutic responses to many former cult members seeking treatment.
The Individual Cult Experience (ICE) Index was developed as part of a larger study of ex-
cult members that examines the relationships among precult, cult, and postcult factors to
current functioning. The model employed in this study has been used to successfully
examine the etiology of distress in combat veterans (Foy, Sipprelle, Rueger, &Carroll,
1984), battered women (Houskamp &Foy, 1991), adult survivors of childhood sexual
assault (Rowan, Foy, Rodriguez, &Ryan, 1994), and adolescent victims of violence (Burton,
Foy, Bwanausi, Johnson, &Moore, 1994). Applying this model to former cult members
offers the advantage of utilizing standard instruments which, for the pre- and posttrauma
time frames, are easily adapted to different populations. Current distress has been
measured with the Los Angeles Symptom Checklist (LASC), a standard instrument which
has proven useful in clinical and research settings (King, King, Leskin, &Foy, 1995).
The central phenomenon of interest in each of the above-mentioned studies was exposure
to a specific, theoretically distressing set of experiences. In the case of cultism, there was
no preexisting instrument that measured individual exposure to stressful events in the cult
milieu. Thus, the ICE Index was developed. Consequently, the ICE Index provided a
quantitative measure for studying the relationship between cult involvement and postcult
distress. The ICE Index has the potentiality of being a clinical instrument as well.
Development of the Individual Cult Experience Index
Because people can have very different experiences even within the same group, the ICE
Index was not designed to characterize groups. Such has already been achieved with the
development of the Group Psychological Abuse Scale (GPAS) by Chambers et al. (1994),
which examines a group‟s “cultishness.” Rather, the aim of this instrument has been
primarily to tap group experiences that are hypothesized to have a negative effect on
members‟ psychological adjustment, and secondarily to distinguish between cult-involved
and non-cult-involved individuals. Items were developed to assess for those experiences
that were either mentioned repeatedly in the literature on cultism or were suggested by
empirical research. They were worded to be as clear and unambiguous as possible, and to
describe events and practices that were potentially observable by all group members.
Themes of psychological manipulation in the cult literature were examined for their
theoretical relationship to postcult distress (e.g., Boulette &Anderson, 1986 Clark,
Langone, Schechter, &Daly, 1981 Conway &Siegelman, 1982, Conway et al., 1986
Hassan, 1988 MacHovec, 1991 Ofshe &Singer, 1986 Singer &Ofshe, 1990 West, 1990
West &Singer, 1980). Those that met criteria for inclusion in the ICE Index included
techniques central to control of cult members --for example, social isolation and alienation,
information control, sensory overload, and suppression of critical thought. The ICE Index
assesses for this type of manipulation by determining, for example, how much time
members spent at lectures and sermons or practicing Anon-reflective, repetitive tasks,” and
whether “members were free to live with non-members.”
The emotional manipulation of group members is also hypothesized to be problematic. It
includes induction of guilt (Hassan, 1988), fear and uncertainty (West &Singer, 1980),
double bind communication (Bloch &Shor, 1989), and unpredictable reward and
punishment (Yalom &Leiberman, 1971). An example of an item relating to this aspect of

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 14, No. 2, 1997, page 77
cult involvement asked whether “Members were warned that if they did not perform as
expected, they would fail all of humanity.”
Physical control over cult members may render them more susceptible to psychological
manipulation (Hassan, 1988), deplete resources needed to leave the group, and lead to
subsequent distress (Gaines, Wilson, Redican, &Baffi, 1984 Valatx, 1994). Therefore,
some items were designed to assess the extent to which members were deprived of sleep,
nutrition, or exercise engaged in extended periods of inactivity or hyperactivity and
experienced exploitation of personal resources (i.e., money, time, and labor).
The ICE Index also assesses for abuse experiences that are known to create psychological
distress and which, though not unique to cultism, may be fostered in a cultic milieu. These
include verbal abuse, fear of bodily injury, physical or sexual abuse, and perceived life
threat. Items were drawn from the Assessing Environments-III Questionnaire (Berger,
Knutson, Mehm, &Perkins, 1988), Sexual Abuse Experiences Questionnaire (Rowan et al.,
1994), and the Conflict Tactics Scale-Revised (Hornung, McCullogh, &Sugimoto, 1981),
which have been psychometrically validated to assess for victimization and trauma. These
instruments offer behavioral descriptions for traumatic events based upon previously
operationalized definitions of the events. The ensuing clarity of language was expected to
reduce subjective interpretation of these items by research participants. For example, rather
than asking participants if they were “sexually abused,” the ICE Index asks, “Did someone
in the group who was in a position of authority over you touch your genital area, direct
another to do so, or direct you to offer yourself sexually to another? If yes, do you feel
discomfort or regret over this experience?”
Other empirical literature provided material for several items. For example, Yalom &
Lieberman‟s (1971) study of encounter group casualties identified group leadership styles
associated with psychological injury. This produced such items as, “The group leader
humiliated you by telling you in front of others what was wrong with you and what you
needed to change.”
Several items were adapted from existing surveys of cult characteristics. For example, the
GPAS item (Chambers et al., 1994), “The group explicitly taught that deceit was ethical
when used for the group‟s objectives” captured several important features of destructive
cultism, including deception, alienation from nonmembers, and double bind
communications. The item, “The group did not advocate the use of violence against those
who publicly criticized its teachings or practices (false),” was adapted from Dole &Dubrow-
Eichel (1985), where it was rated as highly damaging to cult members by the expert panel
consulted in that study.
Validation and refinement of the ICE Index began with a review of items by a panel of 10
clinicians and researchers, each with at least 10 years of professional cult-related
experience. Panel members were asked to decide if an item was “essential,” “useful but not
essential,” or “not useful” with respect to its ability to (1) isolate experiences within a cultic
milieu which may significantly predict postcult distress, and (2) discriminate cultic from
noncultic group involvement. Panelists were also invited to propose alternate items and
modify item wording. Subsequently, 16 graduate psychology students completed the
instrument and provided feedback primarily regarding clarity of instructions and item
wording, and on overall ease of instrument completion. Items were rewritten to minimize
individual interpretation by test takers, and were worded in alternately positive and
negative directions to control for test-taking bias.
The ICE Index was organized into four sections with a total of 47 structured items. Sections
were organized by convenience, allowing subjects to respond to items with similar
instructions and response sets in a consecutive manner. Section 1 inquired about elements
of the group‟s doctrine and practices. Items were worded to address behaviors, predicated