Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 18, 2001, Page 114
supports the view that attentional depletion and other related internal states (e.g., emotion)
exacerbate specific persuasive processes.
Early Analyses of Intense Indoctrination
Almost all early descriptions of intense indoctrination acknowledged that such indoctrination
involves an initial period of psychological and physical stress (e.g., Lifton, 1961 Sargant,
1957 Schein, Schneier, &Barker, 1961). However, these explanations varied regarding
why this stress alters values, behaviors, and senses of self. Some writers simply assumed
that a stress-induced state of hypnotic-like confusion was responsible for the resulting
changes, whereas other writers took a psychoanalytic perspective, arguing that stress and
exhaustion weaken ego strength and elevate dependency needs and guilt, thereby leading
the indoctrinee to identify with the indoctrinating agent (e.g., Moloney, 1955). Other writers
assumed that conditioning principles were responsible for changes wrought by
indoctrination. Sargant (1957), for example, referring to Pavlov‘s (1927) canine stress
research, argued that the stress of indoctrination led to a state of ultraparadoxical inhibition
in which a given evaluative response was replaced with its opposite reaction. In Pavlov‘s
research, this form of inhibition was inferred when well-conditioned dogs salivated
―inappropriately‖ to negative discriminatory stimuli following extreme stress. Sargant
suggested that an analogous process explained the dramatic changes in beliefs and
attitudes observed following stressful indoctrination.
Lifton (1961) focused on changes in sense of self in his classic discussion of Chinese
communist intense indoctrination techniques. Lifton emphasized how the various highly
coercive procedures used by the Chinese effected changes in identity and self-definition.
Thus, Lifton conceptualized indoctrination as a process that manipulated guilt, shame, and
anxiety to produce a ―death‖ of the original self and a ―rebirth‖ of a reeducated self. Lifton
focused on the act of confession as a key procedural element of indoctrination, viewing it as
a direct assault on the adequacy of the self-concept and a major source of anxiety and guilt
(see also Ofshe &Singer, 1986). Although these models are interesting historically, a model
outlined by Schein et al. (1961) is more relevant to the analysis I present below. Whereas
early models tended to emphasize a specific mechanism of change, Schein et al. (1961)
suggested that an eclectic variety of mediating mechanisms produced changes in beliefs,
values, and self-conceptions. In addition, Schein et al. (1961) explicitly acknowledged that
although indoctrination altered self-conception, this change, in turn, depended on initial
changes in beliefs, values, attitudes, and behaviors (e.g., p.195). In this respect, this
account took on a decidedly social psychological perspective. Accordingly, Schein et al.‘s
(1961) model was unique among early approaches in referring to mechanisms such as
cognitive dissonance, conformity, interpersonal communication, and cognitive and semantic
organization.
Schein et al. (1961) argued that the indoctrination process involved three stages:
unfreezing, changing, and refreezing. Unfreezing was envisioned as a weakening of the
stable equilibria that supported the individual‘s beliefs and attitudes, especially those
concerning the self and influencing agents. Emotional stressors such as fear, guilt, social
ostracism, and inner conflict as well as physical stressors such as inadequate diet, sleep
deprivation, and the use of physical restraints (handcuffs) were thought to contribute to
unfreezing. Changing involved altering the cognitive structure of the indoctrinee. This stage
referred to the ―mental operations‖ involved in changing attitudes, beliefs, and semantic
systems as well as self-conception. Controlled information, cognitive dissonance, social
influence from peers and authority figures, and social identification processes were deemed
crucial here, leading to a willingness to uncritically consider and understand the doctrine
and interpretations proffered by the group. Finally, refreezing involved stabilizing the
changes wrought by the indoctrination process. Schein et al. (1961) believed that this
involved integrating new beliefs and values into the overall personality. They argued that

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 18, 2001, Page 115
interpersonal confirmation and social reinforcement by others played a crucial role in this
process. Schein et al.‘s (1961) emphasis on social confirmation strongly echoed Sargant‘s
(1957) thoughts regarding the factors affecting persistence of indoctrination-produced
changes, a process Sargant referred to as consolidation.
Schein et al.‘s (1961) framework serves as a historical precursor to the analysis presented
below in several respects. Schein et al.‘s (1961) model considered a variety of conceptual
mechanisms as agents of change rather than focusing on a single process. It emphasized
that changes in belief, attitude, values, and behavior are key outcomes of indoctrination
that are necessary to produce the changes in self-conception that characterize successful
instances of thought reform. The model viewed indoctrination as a sequential process
moving through several stages and, finally, examined the relevant experimental evidence in
social and cognitive psychology. In the analysis presented in this article, I extend this
approach by paying particular attention to interactive dynamics between emotional states,
attentional capacity, and social psychological phenomena.
Process of Indoctrination
This analysis began with extensive library research on classic instances of intense
indoctrination introduced by the communist regimes in the Soviet Union and China in the
1930s and 1940s (e.g., Hinkle &Wolff, 1956 Lifton, 1961 Sargant, 1957 Schein et al.,
1961). The analysis was also influenced by an informal series of conversations with
approximately 40 former members of cult organizations conducted between 1979 and 19901
as well as by written reports by psychologists and others specializing in the treatment of ex-
cult members (e.g., Galanter, 1989 Hassan, 1988 Singer, 1979). Many components of the
framework outlined here have been tested in a series of laboratory experiments focusing on
both group persuasion and the impact of stress on persuasion and social perception. In this
article, I review that research as well as other relevant findings.
As several others have noted (e.g., Lifton, 1961 Schein et al., 1961), the indoctrination
process can be envisioned as a series of stages. Although such distinctions are somewhat
arbitrary, in this analysis I characterize the indoctrination process as having four stages as
opposed to the three stages specified by Schein et al. (1961). These are labeled as the
softening-up stage, compliance stage, internalization stage, and consolidation stage. These
stages are discussed in more detail in the next section. Following that, the analysis lists
procedural events commonly found in classic cases of intense indoctrination, various
emotional and cognitive intervening states likely to be caused by these procedures, and a
number of social psychological processes likely to affect attitudes and values given these
procedures and reactions. The various procedural events and process features specified
here are largely a synthesis of those outlined in prior accounts (e.g., Lifton, 1961 Schein et
al., 1961). However, I expand on prior work by considering the possibility that the
emotional and cognitive states alluded to previously interact with (i.e., exacerbate) the
social psychological processes thought to underlie the belief and attitude changes produced
by intense indoctrination. Finally, I specify a number of output behaviors that are typical of
successful indoctrination. These output behaviors have the following features: (a) they
reflect a radical departure from previous values, attitudes, and behaviors (b) they seem to
be emitted freely at the moment (i.e., they are not the result of any current physical or
material threat) and (c) they involve substantial costs for the indoctrinee. This cost can
involve such things as negative publicity, violation of prior commitment, time, money, lost
opportunity, or injury to self or loved ones.
Stages of Intense Indoctrination
A variety of tactics are used to recruit individuals to totalist groups. For cases in which new
recruits are volunteers (e.g., most cases of cult recruitment), these tactics can include such
things as repeated personal contact, group meals, lectures, and weekend retreats (Hassan,