Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 18, 2001, Page 128
feeling personally responsible for actions that were, in truth, provoked by the manipulative
aspects of the setting. This is particularly likely in settings in which the pressure results
from psychological and social forces rather than material or physical forces and in which
individuals are confused, aroused, or debilitated by various stressors. It is interesting to
note that both Cooper et al. (1978) and Fazio and Martin (cited in Fazio &Cooper, 1983)
reported data that support these contentions. In these induced compliance dissonance
studies, individuals showed evidence of behavior-consistent attitude change even under
low-choice conditions provided that they had been aroused by either drugs or exercise. One
explanation for such effects is that the arousal in these studies diminished the ability of low-
choice individuals to correctly attribute their behavior to situational causes, thereby leaving
them with the need to justify their attitude-discrepant behavior.
Existential pressure and identity change. A number of the indoctrination procedures
discussed here heighten guilt, lower self-esteem, and generally create confusion about
appropriate and viable self-conceptions. It is likely that these states will facilitate changes in
identity. A person undergoing intense indoctrination is likely to confront aspects of his or her
actions and values that are embarrassing or inconsistent with his or her idealizations about
the self (especially given the frequent occurrence of self-criticism and confession). Indeed,
recent research indicates that under certain conditions, individuals can be led to confess and
to remember reprehensible behaviors that, in fact, they never committed (Kassin, 1997). In
short, during intense indoctrination, self-conception should be relatively labile because of
these alterations in self-esteem. As a result, changes in identity (e.g., from student to
revolutionary or from businessman to social-equality pioneer) and corresponding alterations
in values or their importance are therefore more likely (Ofshe &Singer, 1986). Such
changes seem particularly likely when the indoctrinating group offers recruits a messianic
cause. As social critic Eric Hoffer (1951) pointed out, by attaching themselves to a
transcendent cause, a true believer can feel special, dedicated, and selfless, thereby
remedying the very feelings of insignificance and low self-esteem that are elevated in the
earlier stages of the indoctrination process. This represents an important and meaningful
set of psychological benefits especially to those who were wrestling with such existential
concerns even before indoctrination (see Zimbardo, 1997). In accord with this view,
Galanter (1989) pointed out that those who deviate from cult norms often report increases
in neurotic anxiety (see Pool et al., 1998, for experimental verification of this observation).
Indeed, these feelings of purpose and certainty are aspects of cult experience that are
missed most frequently by ex-cult members (Hassan, 1988 Singer, 1995).

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 18, 2001, Page 129
Figure 4. Attitude change scores as a function of choice and attributional complexity: High attributional
complexity eliminates standard induced compliance dissonance effects. Note. From ―Attributional complexity as a
moderator of dissonance-produced attitude change,‖ by D. R. Stalder and R. S. Baron, 1998, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 75, p.453. Copyright 1998 by the American Psychological Association. Adapted
with permission.
In coercive settings, these processes of identity change are also likely to be supplemented
by such processes as identification with the aggressor and aspects of the Stockholm
Syndrome. Apparently, there is a tendency to rely on and identify with authority figures in
times of stress. Whether this is a regression to childhood learning or is attributable to other
mechanisms, it has been noted by various observers (e.g., Bettelheim, 1953 Hinkle &
Wolff, 1956). Thus, it appears that fear, confusion, and other forms of stress make it easy
for strong authority figures to become attractive role models and powerful forces of
influence.
Personal Characteristics and Indoctrination Effectiveness
In addition to the causal dynamics previously described, a number of individual
characteristics are likely to increase susceptibility to indoctrination. These include religious
and political values that are compatible with the indoctrinating organization‘s goals, having
a tentative sense of self (Galanter, 1989), or finding oneself at points of life transition (e.g.,
divorce Singer 1995). Although such individual differences undoubtedly contribute to
susceptibility to indoctrination, it would be glib to assume that only certain types of
individuals are susceptible to intensive indoctrination. Rather, the many instances of
successful indoctrination among nonvoluntary, seemingly normal individuals suggest that
only rare individuals will be unaffected by a full program of intense indoctrination.
Summarizing the Role of Attentional Capacity
As documented by this review, a good number of the findings generated since the mid-
1980s support many of the interactive patterns predicted from the attentional capacity
perspective. That is, it is apparent that the stress and attentional load so common in early
stages of intense indoctrination heighten one‘s susceptibility to a variety of social
psychological processes commonly mentioned in discussions of intense indoctrination (e.g.,
Pratkanis &Aronson, 1992 Singer, 1995). Thus, capacity-related factors (time pressure,
distraction, noise, task difficulty, individual difference variables) have been found to affect
High Choice Low Choice
Low Attributional Complexity
High Attributional Complexity
Attitude
Change
24.1
22.4
21.2
19.4