Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 18, 2001, Page 116
1988). During these initial contacts, the recruits may be showered with attention and praise
and are likely to be carefully ―squired‖ by enthusiastic group members. After these initial
contacts, strong efforts are made to physically separate the recruits from their normal
environment. This is often accomplished by moving recruits to a secluded setting. In cases
involving coercion, of course, abduction and arrest serve to locate the indoctrinee in an
indoctrinating context. Following Hassan‘s suggestion, I reserve the term coercive
persuasion for such forceful indoctrination contexts. The major distinguishing feature of
such coercive settings is that initial stress levels tend to be higher and more salient to
indoctrinees given the greater threats to their person and freedom. A surprising number of
other features, however, are common to both voluntary and coercive forms of intense
indoctrination, such as physical and social separation, changes in diet, sleep deprivation,
peer pressure, and emotional manipulations. Once recruits are separated from their normal
social context, the indoctrination process unfolds.
Stage 1. In the softening-up stage, the indoctrinee is typically isolated from friends and
family. Efforts are made to keep the indoctrinee confused, excited, tired, disoriented, and,
sometimes, abused and frightened. This period can be as brief as a few hours, although it
usually is longer. Stress levels are most pronounced in the more coercive instances of
intense indoctrination. Patty Hearst (1982), as an example, was held handcuffed in a dark
closet for more than four weeks she was graphically and repeatedly threatened with death
and exposed to various other forms of severe psychological and physical abuse during this
period of confinement.
Ms. Heart‘s experience corresponds in a disturbing way to isolation procedures used
originally by Stalin‘s NKVD in some of the first cases of systematic indoctrination ever
reported. According to an excellent description by Hinkle and Wolff (1956), the Soviet secret
police used particularly intense pressure to ―break‖ new prisoners. Soviet prisoners served
months in solitary confinement, during which they were not allowed contact with anyone
except the interrogator. Isolation was so complete that when prisoners passed each other
while being escorted through the halls, they had to turn their heads from each other and
look at the corridor wall. Lights were lit continually, prisoners were deprived of sleep, cells
had no windows, and interrogation, if it occurred at all at this point, took place at irregular
intervals. All of this made it difficult for the prisoners to maintain time orientation. If
prisoners asked what they were charged with, they either were ignored or were told that
the State made no mistakes, knew their crimes, and expected the prisoners to show their
sincerity by confessing to what the State already knew. In short, prisoners were given the
oftentimes impossible chore of figuring out why they were being ―rehabilitated.‖ In addition,
prisoners‘ early attempts at confessing and giving information were generally rejected as
inadequate or insincere. As a variation on this technique, Chinese communist procedures of
the 1940s and 1950s typically involved abusive social pressure from more ―advanced‖
prisoners (coupled with the use of manacles) in lieu of solitary confinement as a key means
of elevating stress.
These police procedures represent an extreme instance of softening up an indoctrinee. More
subtle procedures, however, can also be effective at generating the stress necessary to
prepare individuals for effective indoctrination. For example, Singer (1995), describing cult
indoctrination, referred to changes in diet, appearance, sleep, arousal, and social context as
effective stressors (see also Galanter, 1989). The general point is that some period of initial
stress apparently increases the effectiveness of an intense assault on an individual‘s
attitudes, beliefs, and values.
Stage 2. In the compliance stage, the recruit tentatively ―tries out‖ some of the behaviors
requested by the group, more or less going through the motions or paying lip service to
many of the demands made by the group. Often, the recruit views this as a period of
exploration to see what the group is like or what such compliant behavior nets him or her.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 18, 2001, Page 117
In other cases, compliance occurs in response to social pressure. Although curiosity and
politeness account for some acts of compliance, other instances are induced by well-known
compliance techniques, such as reciprocal concessions procedures, appeals to authority, and
group pressure (Cialdini, 1993). Finally, in coercive settings, individuals often comply in an
attempt to reduce threatening or aversive aspects of the situation.
Stage 3. In the internalization stage, the recruit starts to consider aspects of the group
belief system. This can be triggered by various mechanisms including curiosity, persistent
social pressure, and the need to justify prior compliance. This stage, analogous to Schein et
al.‘s (1961) changing stage, can be completed within a week in some cases. In this stage,
standard theories of social influence and persuasion (e.g., Cialdini, 1993 Petty &Cacioppo,
1986) became applicable in that the individual reevaluates old beliefs and considers new
ones.
Stage 4. In the consolidation stage, the recruit solidifies his or her newly acquired
allegiance to the group. This may entail making various costly behavioral commitments that
are hard to undo (e.g., donating one‘s personal possessions to the group or recruiting new
members), isolating oneself from nongroup members, or selective exposure to information.
This final stage of indoctrination is marked by the recruit‘s total acceptance of group
doctrine and policy with a minimum of close examination. In this stage, the primary reaction
of the recruit to negative information about the group is denial and rationalization. Thus,
events and information are selectively interpreted and attended to. As this implies, cognitive
dissonance mechanisms appear to be highly relevant in this stage. Individuals at this stage
are dominated by what Chaiken, Liberman, and Eagly (1989) referred to as defense
motivation, when they process attitude-relevant information (i.e., the desire to hold or
defend a specific attitudinal position). For this reason, the indoctrinee who reaches the
consolidation stage will be highly resistant to persuasion from those outside the group.
Comments. The four stages outlined here obviously draw heavily from prior analyses. For
example, Sargant (1957) discussed the consolidation notion as early as 1957. Similarly,
Schein et al.‘s (1961) three stages of unfreezing, changing, and refreezing are very similar
to the four-stage framework. The major difference between the two is that Schein et al.‘s
(1961) unfreezing stage is subdivided by the four-stage framework into the softening-up
and compliance stages to more explicitly reflect the activities and processes present in the
early phases of indoctrination. An important caveat in this discussion of stages is that they
are intended to serve as guidelines rather than inflexible and mutually exclusive partitions.
Stages will vary in duration from case to case, and each prior stage is thought to blend into
the next. Moreover, some rare individuals remain with their groups while never making the
transition into the consolidation stage or, alternatively, they may slip in and out of this
stage. This may lead such individuals to experience conflict and doubt akin to ―crises of
faith‖ seen in various religions.
Procedural Features of Intense Indoctrination
Standard reference works regarding indoctrination (e.g., Schein et al., 1961 Singer, 1995)
indicate that a series of procedural features are commonly observed. One subset of these
procedures appears to contribute directly to the softening-up stage described previously.
These include social disruption (i.e., separation from friends and family), physical stress
(especially sleep loss and altered diet), fear or guilt manipulations, regimented daily activity
schedules, alteration in appearance (clothing, posture, hairstyle), and carefully orchestrated
social pressure. Additional procedural features include public self-criticism or confession,
repetitive mental activity (e.g., meditation, memorizing doctrine), the presence of strong
authority figures, a ―messianic‖ group purpose (from which group members can derive a
sense of importance), stereotypical depiction of nonmembers as evil or misguided,
escalation of commitment in which the recruit is asked to engage in increasingly costly