I ran into this paper in the bibliography for Carol Lynn Mithers's Therapy Gone Mad: The True Story of Hundreds of Patients and a Generation Betrayed (1994). I scanned through it once and saw that it provides a nice platform for understanding the significant differences between the "thought reform," ideological indoctrination systems invented in communist Asia during the mid-20th century... and the identity-stealing, robotizing, "mind control" cults that started in southern Asia centuries ago, spreading to the West since the late 1800s. Moreover, it points to the influence the latter have had on the evangelical, fundamentalist Christian and Islamic sects over the past half century.
The original text -- by two of the most authoritative authors in the field -- is in black. My hopefully useful attempts to update and apply it to more recent circumstances, as well as to point the way toward the use of modern (and ethical) psychotherapeutic techniques to de-condition exiters from the programming, appear in dark red. Comments are welcome, of course, but please make them via the intermediary media through which you encountered the link to this article.
Attacks
on Peripheral versus Central Elements of Self
and the Impact of Thought Reforming Techniques
(c) The
Cultic Studies Journal, Vol 3, N°1, 1986
(c) by Richard Ofshe, Ph.D. and Margaret T. Singer, Pb.D.
Abstract
This paper analyzes the literature concerning the use of
massive social pressure to substantially modify a person's world view. The use
of "coordinated programs of coercive influence and behavior control"
in China and the Soviet Union as well as in American cultic, "growth"
and psychotherapy organizations is considered. Special consideration is given
to the centrality of the aspects of a person's identity which are denigrated
and undercut in coercive influence and control programs. It is suggested that
the technology of this sort of influence has developed well beyond what was
employed in the Soviet Union and China. Applications in these cases were
largely for the purpose of extracting confessions and carrying out political
"thought reform." The development in technology reflects a focusing
upon central rather than peripheral aspects of a person's self and the use of
techniques, often borrowed from clinical psychological practice, to neutra1ize
a person's psychological defenses. Evidence is reviewed which suggests that
there is a risk factor associated with exposure to the type of influence
tactics used by some organizations that attempt thought reform.
Introduction
We are addressing an unusual topic - the technology of
influence programs used to conduct thought reform and to effect extraordinary
degrees of control over individuals. The programs to be described below depend
on selecting, sequencing, and coordinating numerous influence tactics over
periods of time that can extend from days to years.
In this paper we will address two matters. The first is an
historical review of the influence techniques employed in "first" and
"second generation of interest" influence and control programs. By first
generation of interest programs we refer to Soviet and Chinese thought reform
and behavior control practices studied twenty to thirty years ago [1956 - 1966]. Second
generation examples are of programs which are either currently operating or
have been existence during the last decade. We will suggest that the two
categories of programs differ in the sophistication of the interpersonal and
psychological influence tactics they employ.
The second concern of the paper is the presentation of a
theoretical analysis one of the principal differences we find between first [almost entirely political-ideological] and
second [largely wealth-accumulating] generation of programs. The difference is in the manner and degree to
which a person's self-concept is destabilized in the course of attempts to gain
influence and attain control over an individual. Attacking targets' evaluation
of self is a technique of present in both older and newer programs. We suggest,
however, that the focal point of attack on targets' self-conception is an
important difference between the programs. In older programs, attach on the
stability and acceptability of existing self-evaluations were typically focused
on elements we classify as peripheral [and ideological or belief-modifying]. Newer programs tend to focus on elements
of self we classify as central [and identity-reconstructive or ego-demolishing and -redeveloping].
Peripheral elements of self are defined as self-evaluations [and therefore, more temporary, verbal-symbolic, abstract cognitions] of the adequacy or correctness of public and judgmental aspects of a person's
life (e.g., social status, role performance conformity to societal norms,
political and social opinions, taste, etc.). We define as central elements of
self, self-evaluation of the adequacy or correctness of a person's intimate
life and confidence in perception of reality (e.g., relations with family,
personal aspirations, sexual experience traumatic life events, religious
beliefs, estimates of the motivations of others, etc.) [still cognitive, but with greater density of connection to more permanent, affective / emotional "complexes," embedded far more deeply in the unconscious mind; the difference between the two is significant: in the former, the agents of thought reform are "tearing up the street to replace the water lines," while in the latter, they are replacing the water lines and the very nature of the fluid in them; because I have interacted with scores of mind control cult -- as well as childhood trauma -- survivors, I will assert that this often (though not always) amounts to the same sort of personality reorganization that occurs during severe and repeated verbal and physical abuse of small children (see Beck, Beck & Freeman, Bloom, Briere, Courtois, Freud, Herman, Janet in Van der Hart, Kelly, Kernberg, Millon, Ogden, Perry, and Van der Kolk) and is often "psychotizing" in very much the same manner and method as occurs in mental illness patients with psychotic spectrum disorders (see Berger, Bermann, Esterson, Haley, Henry, Jackson, Laing & Esterson, Lidz et al, Searles, and Schatzman.)].
We assume that peripheral and central elements vary in
their emotional significance, with central elements having far greater
emotional arousal potential than peripheral elements. The basis for this
assumption rests on conventional clinical psychological understanding of the
significance of early childhood experiences, emotional development, defense
formation, and ego strength. That is, reality awareness, emotional control, and
basic consciousness are at the core of the self. Social roles reflect later and
less core learning in human development. [In the first rubric, the mental constructs of the adolescent or young adult are the focus of the manipulations; in the second, the target is no less than the mental constructs of "self" formed in infancy, toddlerhood, pre-school and early grammar school, during the target's original course of in-flow-ential conditioning, programming, instruction, socialization and normalization (see Brazelton, Erikson, Mahler, Piaget and Stern).] We propose that influence and control
programs which manipulate central self-evaluations are likely to have more
powerful and profound effects on targets than programs which focus on the
manipulation of only peripheral elements of self.
We suggest that attack on the stability and quality of
evaluations of self conceptions is the principal effective coercive technique
used in the conduct of thought reform and behavior control programs. By
attacking a person's self concept, aversive emotional arousal can be created [precisely as occurs when small children early in the course of their ego development are subjected to invalidation of their sensory experience via parental or other authoritarian insult, triangulation (including -- but not limited to -- Karpman's particular version of it), confusion, judgment, criticism, blame, ridicule, embarrassment, humiliation, denigration, persecution, isolation, scapegoating, gaslighting and other forms of mental abuse by those upon whom they depend for their very survival].
By supporting positive self conceptions, painful arousal can be avoided or
reduced in the program we have studied the ability to generate or reduce
aversive emotional arousal [precisely in the manner of "behavior modification" and "operant conditioning" described by Skinner and Watson] is used to punish or reward targets. Non-conformity
is responded to with attach on the target's self conceptions while agreement to
demands for ideological acceptance and behavioral compliance are rewarded with
support for positive self conceptions [as above; op. cit.].
Historical Context
During the last decade there has been a dramatic renewal of public and academic
interest in the procedures and effects of "coordinated programs of
coercive influence and behavior control." That is, programs designed first
to induce radical changes in facets of a person's world view (e.g., beliefs
about a political philosophy, scientific theory, psychological theory, ethical
philosophy, etc. [beliefs, which are holdovers from the past -- as opposed to empirical observation, which is inherently in the present moment -- seem to exist at the very bedrock of the mental "problem," because they are "stored" abstractions that may or may not be "appropriate" when applied to current circumstances in the environment; I see psychoeducation on "belief vs. observation" as absolutely fundamental to any program of "recovery" for "in-flow-enced" traumatees of any kind]), and subsequently to generate great conformity to
organizationally specified prescriptions for behavior. The combined effects of
1) acceptance of a particular world view [ideology, cognitive complex], 2) establishment of effective
procedures for peer monitoring, including feedback about an individual to the
controlling organization ["snitching"], and 3) the use of psychological, social, and material
sanctions to influence a target's behavior, can render a person a highly
deployable agent of an organization (Ofshe, 1980; Whyte, 1976) [which is precisely what we are seeing in the behavior of employees -- especially in the information technology industry -- subjected to certain forms of "corporate culture change" conducted by, or with the consultation or even merely in-flow-ence of, special (often covert) departments of a number of "human potential" organizations].
Over a generation ago, studies of coercive influence and
behavior control programs began to appear. They described the power of these
programs to influence cognition, behavior, and the mental health status of
program participants. The topic was reported and studied under names such as
"brainwashing" (Hunter, 1953), "thought reform" (Lifton,
1961), and "coercive persuasion" (Schein, 1961). 1
Recently renewed interest in the topic can be traced to
the actions of various "new religions and social movements" (Glock
and Bellah, 1976). Public concern has been about the recruitment activities,
apparent personality changes, and emotional disorders found in some recruits,
and the culturally distinct lifestyles associated with membership in some
groups. Some of these organizations and communities were founded or rapidly
expanded during the later 1960's and early 1970's. Beginning in the early
1970's, claims were made that some of these organizations were conducting
programs of "coercive influence and behavior control" (i.e.,
"thought reform, "brainwashing," etc.).
Not all the "new religion," "growth,"
or "radical psychotherapy" organizations have been alleged to employ
techniques of "mind control" or "coercive influence and
behavior control." Some organizations, however, have been centers of
controversy for more than a decade, and they have given rise to grass-roots
reactions and substantial media attention as early as the mid-1970's [the Church of Scientology, Silva Mind Control, Erhard Seminars Training and its many clones (e.g. psi and Actualizations), Tony Robbins Seminars, and the Center for Feeling Therapy were often the objects of both favorable and critical media coverage at the time].
General public awareness of "cults" came through
news reports of numerous bizarre crimes and acts of terrorism committed by
members of some now infamous organizations. Through these reports, the public
became somewhat educated as to the extraordinary social organization,
practices, and techniques of influence employed by the leadership of the groups
associated with the crimes.
Starting in 1969, with the several brutal murders
committed by Charles Manson and his devotees (Bugliosi and Gentry, 1974;
Watkins, 1979), the string includes the 1973 Symbionese Liberation Army
kidnapping and conversion of Patricia Hearst (Hearst, 1982); a 1977 murder
spree carried out by Mormon polygamy sect leader Ervil LeBaron and his
followers against their Mormon opponents (Bradlee and Van Atta, 1981); an
October 1978 attempted murder by rattlesnake engineered by Synanon leader
Charles Dederich (Mitchell et al., 1980. Ofshe, 1980); the November 1978 mass
murder/suicides in Jonestown, Guyana conducted at the direction of People's
Temple leader Jim Jones (Reiterman and Jacobs, 1982); an attempt by members of
a faith healing cult to bomb a sheriff's department in Arizona (Trillin, 1982);
a 1982 infant's beating death caused by his parents acting in conformity to
their cult leader's theory of child rearing (Zito, 1982); widely publicized
accusations of child abuse following from alleged conformity to the visions of
a leader of a Vermont commune called the Northeast Kingdom Community Church
(Bearak, 1984); and, most recently, allegations of child abuse carried out for
years at a nursery school reported to have used techniques of psychological
terrorism to prevent children from revealing their experiences (Los Angeles
Times, 1984).
First Generation of Interest Programs
The modern literature on the intentional use of coercive influence and control
programs starts with reports of prisoner interrogation and retraining in the
Soviet Union, China, and North Korea. Studies of these "first generation
of interest" programs are consistent on several points no matter what
descriptive label the authors used (Chen, 1960; Farber et al., 1956; Schein,
1961; Schein et al., 1960; Segal, 1957 [to which I would add Gao, 2007, and Lifton, 1968, because those volumes describe upshots on grand scale the earlier authors never dreamed of]). Although significant physical abuse
was frequently a part of the influence method, it was not uniformly so (Hinkle
and Wolf, 1956; Lifton, 1961; Rickett and Rickett, 1957). Even when physical
abuse was used, the primary mechanism for accomplishing behavior control was
that of interaction between the target and those who could sanction the person
materially and socially. In addition to small material rewards, the target's
interaction partners controlled the only available source of feedback as to
what was socially correct in the new society [precisely as the abusive parent provides pretty much the sole source of feedback to the toddler in "training"] . Hence, they controlled the
target's only source of external feedback upon which new self-evaluations might
be based.
Interaction partners typically possessed superior
knowledge about both the substance of the ideology to which the target was
being exposed and the behavior rules advocated by the controlling organization.
Interaction partners were sometimes the target's organizational superiors
(jailers, officials, etc.). More often, they were ideologically advanced but
organization status equals who became the target's peer group. Targets often
developed strong emotional ties with peer group members. These individuals came
to know the target's personality and history exceedingly well. [One aware of, or -- better yet -- trained in Bowen's "family systems" theory (also see Haley, and Jackson), can see identical dynamics at work in the households of "drama-triangulated" child abuse victims who form anxious attachments to their siblings (see Bowlby, and Fonagy).]
The setting within which the influence system was
operating sometimes included prison confinement of targets, but more frequently
did not (Hinkle and Wolf 1956; Whyte, 1976). In prison settings, initial
conformity to demands for participation in interrogation sessions and
conformity to prescribed patterns of interaction with power holders (jailers,
organizational superiors, or cellmates) was instrumental to cessation of gross
punishment. In non-prison settings, participation was usually obtained without
having to resort to physical abuse, although it was often obtained from persons
knowing that imprisonment was a possible consequence of resistance (Whyte,
1976) [the frequent use of therapist-prodded shoulder-punching of "resistant" "therapy" participants by their peers at Los Angeles's Center for Feeling Therapy (CFT) and its smaller clones on LA's west side -- even including a popular acting school, is illustrative]. In settings such as revolutionary universities, initial participation in
the indoctrination process was usually voluntary since the experience was
viewed as instrumental to transforming Chinese society [especially with regard to reducing the incidence of opium addiction from over 30 percent of the general population in 1950 to about three percent in 1960; see Hanes & Sanello] or to personal upward
mobility [as was / still is the case with the CFT, Amway and Herbalife].
In all settings, participation, conformity, and
demonstrations of apparently genuine change or zeal were rewarded. In the
harshest settings, rewards would include some seemingly minor but contextually
significant material advantages (Segal, 1957). In all settings (with the
possible exception of P.O.W. camps) peer or jailer social support, acceptance,
and friendship also followed incremental changes in the prescribed direction.
The role of peer interaction in the creation and
manipulation of guilt and associated emotional states is acknowledged as
crucial in understanding how a target's behavior was shaped (Lifton, 1961;
Schein, 1961) [Miscavige-Hill's post-exit testament of her experiences in the CoS are chillingly indicative]. The target's peers did the principal work in this shaping. They
had two tools with which to mold the individual.
Targets could be subjected to various forms of punishment
by peer groups. Although punishment might be physical, most often it took the
form of group criticism of the individual's past or present social beliefs and
behaviors [Synanon introduced "hot-seating" of treatment-resistant substance abusers in the 1950s; the Veterans Health System was still using it in their SAPs in the early 2000s, albeit with ethical intentions and without targeting core ego functions via identity destabilization as had become the case at Synanon by the late 1960s]. The target's peers could withdraw support, isolate him or her, and
subject the target to seemingly endless negative feedback regarding deviations
from proper ideological positions and prescribed behavior. In these criticism
sessions, the target faced precisely those individuals on whom, due to
circumstances, he or she was totally dependent for external validation of
social identity [italics mine]. Peers acted in concert and aggressively criticized the target
from a fixed standard of evaluation. Their focus was on any degree of deviation
from absolute conformity to theoretical ideals of ideological understanding and
behavior.
It was required that individuals make public to others
within the group their life stories. This included prior social experience,
family history, and family position. They were also obliged to reveal acts
which, by the new moral code of the nearly new society, were deemed
transgressions. The group's access to the target's social and political history
provided a basis for inducing guilt in the individual for acts which, by the
old society's standards, were proper or tolerable [see again Miscavige-Hill, Wright, and Mithers, as well as Galanter, Langone, and Taylor; Hubbard's directives in this regard are reported by several sources; Corriere's by Mithers; most of this sort of shaming, remorse-and-regret-triggering, "management by intimidation" takes place among members on the mid- to upper levels of the cultic pyramids, of course]. The group demanded that the
target acquire a sense of guilt with respect to previously privileged social
position and previously acceptable actions. The target was also required to
offer appropriate expressions of guilt and display remorse before peers would
accept professed contrition regarding past transgressions.
First Generation Program Casualties
That the arousal caused by group criticism was punishing and harmful to targets
is supported by reports that this procedure was capable of producing symptoms
of severe psychological disturbance in some targets (Hinkle and Woif, 1956;
Lifton, 1961; Strassman et al., 1956). Although it might be argued that
psychological distress was to some extent caused by physical abuse and
deprivation, reports of responses directly related to physical abuse components
of the influence process are lacking. Knowledge of the potential for physical
abuse was probably a factor in the target's estimate of the threat potential of
the controlling organization. Physical debilitation due to the effects of poor
diet and other health factors should also be viewed as a context factor which,
at least, reduced the individual's ability to cope with stress. [Poor diet, overwork, physical abuse and other stress factors play a major role in the dependency formation and ego destabilization as normal, non-pathological, reality-grounded, narcissistic defenses are slowly and relentlessly breached among members at the fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth levels of the cultic pyramid.] It is probably
reasonable to describe all targets of these influence programs as 1)
physically and emotionally stressed as well as 2) extremely apprehensive if
not terrorized due to awareness of the ever-present and often arbitrary use of
punishment power by the controlling organization (Farber et al., 1956; Gaylin,
1974). [In most modern cults, the operative mechanism at the fifth through sixth of seventh pyramid levels is Bowlby's "anxious attachment" (see also Fonagy) rather than threat -- or use -- of outright physical harm.] As reported below, however, neither physical abuse nor deprivation was
necessary for the influence process to cause psychiatric casualties.
Reports of rates of severe psychiatric disturbance have
not been published. [I have read several published since 1986, including those by Miscavige-Hill, Mithers, Taylor, and Wright... and I certainly observed at least temporary "severe psychiatric disturbance" with my own eyes and ears on several occasions during my era as a volunteer in a large LGAT.] There is general recognition of the ability of all versions
of the influence procedures to induce personal confusion, disorientation, and
variously described psychological disturbances in targets (Hinkle and WVolf,
1956; Schein et al., 1960: Schein and Singer, 1962; Strassman et al., 1956). [To that list, I would add van der Hart's concept of "structural dissociation," much as we see exactly the same collection of symptoms of "ego fragmentation" in patients with lingering "complex post-traumatic stress disorder" on the heels of years (or decades) of familial, spousal, partner or even employer abuse.] In
revolutionary university and cadre training schools, there was no period of
physical abuse prior to participation in small group interaction. Typically,
these programs were entered voluntarily.
Revolutionary university and cadre training experiences
are reported to have produced the highest rate of dramatic psychopathological
response of any of the systems under discussion (Hinkle and Wolf, 1956). The
stress of struggle groups, peer pressure, constant surveillance together with
the requirements of self-exposure and self-accusation regularly resulted in
psychological breakdown... Lifton (1961) reports that influence pressures at
revolutionary universities often resulted in psychotic breaks of unspecified
severity. At cadre training schools, the majority of students ultimately
reached the point at which they went through an emotional crisis associated
with tears and depression ... A religious fervor and a feeling of
"conversion" [italics mine] frequently accompanied this emotional breakdown (Hinkle
and Wolf, 1956, p. 167). After the development of fervor, "a fair proportion
of students suffered one or more relapses of fears and doubts" (Hinkel and
Wolfe, 1956, 168). [Both Miscavige-Hill and Mithers report multiple instances of directly experienced or observed symptoms.] 2
Although the evidence is limited, it suggests that
physical brutality or deprivation, even when combined with interpersonal
coercion, did not regularly cause emotional breakdown or psychotic episodes.
There is a notable absence of reports of frequent psychotic breaks among
American military prisoners and among imprisoned Westerners in China. When
dramatic, emotional reactions are reported, they invariably occur in
violence-free settings in which targets are coerced by peers who are their
intimates (Hinkel and Wolfe, 1956, 160) [I observed this first-hand on several occasions in two HP cult settings in the '70s, and more recently among members of two substance abuse "recovery" cults; one within the umbrella of Alcoholics Anonymous, although it appears that AA World Services had no idea of what was going on at the time.]
The inference consistent with these reports is that
psychological disturbance is more likely to be induced when targets of the
influence process actively participate in group-based interaction and have been
induced to tell the group about their histories and sentiments. One explanation
for the relationship is that public exposure of even moderately intimate
aspects of self permits peers to continually manipulate the target's
emotionality. Peer group members have the ability to focus their criticisms on
significant aspects of the target's self and to repeatedly arouse guilt and
anxiety. [I witnessed this precise mechanism in use in a now-defunct, Codependents Anonymous (12 Step) group about a decade ago... and encountered it many years earlier in a Sex & Love Addicts Anonymous (12 Step) group, as well. Having participated in both in other locales, I can say that it was not typical of either organization. BUT... it demonstrates how vulnerable these non-professionally facilitated groups are to contamination and corruption.]
In these programs, it appears that aversive arousal,
coupled with peer rejection, became the driving force through which the target
was coerced. Through this procedure, conformity to behavioral demands was
obtained. Targets, motivated by a desire to avoid further social/emotional
punishment, learned to perform according to role prescriptions defined by the
organization. The peer group's ability to immediately punish resistance,
through members' abilities to arouse and sustain anxiety and guilt, permitted
the organization to avoid the use of physical punishment except under rare
circumstances. Social and psychological punishment by peers became the
workhorse of the system. For many individuals this process induced psychological
breakdown.
"Second Generation of Interest" Programs 3.
We term as "second generation of interest" those examples of coercive
influence and behavior control programs which are currently creating public
concern 4. They can be distinguished from "first generation" programs
in several ways. One of the significant differences is that the organizations
and residential communities within which programs are carried out lack the
power of the State to command participation. Further, they lack the right of the
State to back, demands for compliance and conformity with the use of force.
This results in a radically different method of generating the initial
involvement of targets with "second generation" organizations.
The method typically relies on capitalizing upon some area
of overlap between the interests of the target and the advertised activity or
service of the organization. The point of overlap may involve anything from an
exercise program, treatment for psychological or physical ailments, growth
programs for personal development [so-called "human potential" groups], the realization of superhuman abilities, or
an interest in affiliation with a spiritual or social movement.
In order to conduct a coercive influence and behavior
control program, an organization must obtain both psychological dominance over
an individual and a considerable measure of power in the individual's life. The
second necessary element, actual power, is often attained in newer
organizations by making the target's continuing relations with intimates and
friends, as well as economic security, contingent upon continuing membership in
the organization.
The initial phase of recruitment often involves an
organized "seduction" period during which affective bonds between
recruiting agents and the target are developed (Bainbridge, 1978; Ofshe et al.,
1974, 1980; Taylor, 1978; West and Singer, 1980) [levels one to three on the cultic pyramid under the in-flow-ence of those typically at levels three to eight]. During this period, targets
are encouraged to believe that the organization can provide a service they
desire or that it is committed to goals they value. The strength of developing
bonds is continually tested against demands for increasing involvement and
deference to the demands of the controlling organization.
Influence tactics figure in the development of a target's
dependence on an organization in at least two ways. Direct social pressure may
be used to induce a sequence of decisions leading to the establishment of power
relations which enable an organization to coerce an individual. Depending on
the basis for the apparent interest overlap between the organization and the
individual, enticements to accept the authority of the organization and to
conform to its lifestyle rules may come from promises to achieve a cure for a
longstanding problem to improve the individual, to develop a career for the
target with the organization, or through the availability of a ready-made
community into which the target may fit [see the article at this link specifically with regard to the "appeal of acceptance by a community"]. The target is confronted by people
seeming to be genuinely interested in his or her well-being. Recruiters,
whatever their sentiments, act as agents of the controlling organization and ease
the target along the road to dependence [or, some say, addiction, which generally takes place at the transition from level six to seven of the cultic pyramid].
Often, initial acceptance of the authority and rules of
the organization leads to structural and material changes in the individual's
life which render the target increasingly dependent upon [and addicted to?] continuing membership [to the extent that dis-continuation leads to painful withdrawal symptoms? It looks like that to me in many instances, and Ross reported behaviors in many of his deconditioning subjects that certainly sounded like it, as well].
For example, targets may be induced to move into a communally organized
residence, accept employment in an organization's business, leave school, or
contribute whatever economic assets they control. Given these sorts of
commitments, rejection by the organization would entail loss of job, residence,
and investment.
In addition to material and structural changes, the
ability of the organization to increase its relative power over the
individual's life depends upon shifting the target's social and emotional
attachments to individuals who have accepted the organization's authority and
rules [I see this occurring at pyramid levels three and four]. For this reason, when being recruited to some organizations, individuals
find themselves recipients of great affection, displays of interest, and
virtually endless invitations to group functions. Targets are often expected to
involve their families [, romantic partners and friends] with the recruiting organization. Family members [, romantic partners and friends], once
involved, are subject to the same influence process as was the original target.
This may lead to family members [, romantic partners and friends] becoming more committed to the organization
than to the relative [or partner or friend] who first brought them in.
With increasing time and emotional commitment to a new
group, it is obvious that a target's network of organizationally independent
intimates and friends will atrophy if for no other reason than decreasing
contact. If an organization requires proclaiming a viewpoint that seems bizarre
when baldly stated (e.g., expectations of acquisition of superhuman powers, the
new order is at hand, etc.), or if the organization requires highly assertive
or unusual demeanor, targets are liable to discover difficulties emerging in
relations with friends or family members who no longer understand them [in no small part owning to the member's ever-increasing use of jargon and subscription to idiosyncratic beliefs].
An organization will have maximized its structural and
social power over a target if it succeeds in introducing changes into the
person's life such that the individual's intimates are all subject to its
authority... and the organization controls the target's income, employment,
capital, and social life [as is so typically the case when members reach pyramid levels six, seven and eight]. Under these circumstances, a person threatened with
expulsion is threatened simultaneously with being cut off from many of the
major social supports upon which stability of identity and emotional well-being
depend. The controlling organization can create this level of extreme threat
since the individuals who matter most to the target are subject to the
organization's authority and will reject the person if the organization does
so. [See Miscavige-Hill, Mithers and Wright for numerous examples.]
If an organization succeeds in shifting a target's social
ties to other organizational members, it gains the potential to bind the person
to the organization in a fashion which far exceeds the binding power of
investments, job, and residence. [The mechanisms of binding -- and multiple-binding -- are explored in this article.] Immersed in a social world in which peer
esteem and disapproval are dispensed for conformity to community norms, an
individual will find that community standards become the only standards
available for self-evaluation. [Again, the member is increasingly trapped in a psychological "goo" of conferred, in-doctrine-ated, in-struct-ed, socialized and resultingly normalized beliefs... to the exclusion of any ability to see, hear or otherwise sense what is actually so.]
Common attributes of programs of coercive influence and
control are strict rules inhibiting private expressions of disagreement with
community or company policy. It is also often expected that members will make
frequent public expressions of agreement with policy and acceptance of
community norms. One reason for the widespread existence of such rules is their
restraining effect on the formation of political opposition within the group
(Ofshe, 1980; Selznick, 1960). [Again, see Miscavige-Hill, Mithers, and Wright -- as well as Galanter, Hassan, Langone, and Taylor -- for dozens of examples.]
In addition to inhibiting organized opposition, the
elimination of the expression of counter-authority sentiments and demands for
public displays of agreement with community standards have additional effects.
These are the elimination of evidence [via elimination of any and all awareness of empirical observation in favor of disciplined acceptance of conferred belief] of the validity and very existence of
alternative standards for judgment within the group. Promoting displays of
agreement with management policy reminds observers that others in the group
accept management directives. A person introduced into a community operating
with these requirements for inhibiting criticism and displaying agreement finds
pervasive reinforcement for particular aspects of behavior and for verbal
expressions which are consistent with community positions [i.e.: "communally agreed upon" -- but actually dictated and in-struct-ed -- beliefs, doctrines and ideology set forth by the "elites" at pyramid levels nine and ten].
Once the target chooses to interact with peers, the only
available medium for communication is in group determined modes of thought and
expression. When community-approved terminology is employed, the target gets
approval. When other vocabularies or concepts are employed, the target is
criticized and shunned. Through dispensing approval or criticism and isolation [as in any and all "dispensations of reality"; see Lifton (1960), Ofshe (2000), and Hassan (1989, 2012)],
the organization encourages the target to employ the appropriate terminology [including conferred aphorisms and cliches] and to find merit in aspects of the community position. The target is, in a
special fashion, being acculturated [or socialized and normalized] to a new world. The target is not ordered
explicitly to conform to community rules. As the process of reinforcing and
punishing the target's statements proceeds, the cumulative effect is to
restrict the target's expressions to community-approved forms.
An individual immersed in a world in which communication
is strictly limited must either remain aware of the difference between private
beliefs and permitted public expression or, somehow, come to reconcile public
expression with private self. In an environment that permits peer interaction
only in terms of certain values and beliefs, it is likely that even a person's
statements about what he or she actually values will eventually be molded into
the contours of the controlling environment. This leaves the person in the
position of surface conformity with perhaps private [but usually (conciously) suppressed or even (unconsciously) repressed] disagreement.
Having to participate for an extended period in an
environment in which an individual must, on a daily basis, use a given ideology
and set of [socialized and normalized] customs as the basis for integrating action with the behavior and
conversation of others can have a powerful cumulative effect. Because the
reinforcement structure of the environment is arranged to shape behavior,
participation in the environment will create a history of activity which, when
reviewed, would normally tend to lead the individual to conclude [i.e. decide, according to instructed, socialized and normalized belief] that
perspectives and values consistent with these activities are indeed his or her
own (Bern, 1972). In some groups, there is considerable attention given to
pointing out to the individual that conformity to group standards is, by
definition, voluntary. That is, there is pressure to publicly agree that action
is voluntary [an example of Orwellian "double-speak" or de-real-ization via "groupthink"].
Peripheral self-evaluations are also likely to be
manipulated through the same mechanisms of community control. Since
community-defined values and standards are the basis on which peers and
management dispense approval and disapproval, these standards organize
virtually all feedback to the individual. If the target is to exist in the
community, he or she must conform to community rules even if they are not
privately accepted. Once again the target is faced with the problem of
integrating public conformity to one set of standards and private disagreement [precisely the dilemma increasingly anxious children face in "crazy-making" autocratic, authoritarian and/or confusing family environments like those described by the "schizophrenogenic family" theorists of the 1950s - 1970s, including Berger, Bermann, Esterson, Haley, Henry, Jackson, Koopmans, Laing & Esterson, Lidz, Searles, and Schatzman].
The target must either remain aware of the discrepancy between personal
standards for self-evaluation and community standards, while behaviorally
conforming to community standards, or accept community standards as his or her
own. Constantly faced with this demand [and the ethical dilemmas and value conflicts it produces], it is likely that targets will abandon
personal standards in favor of those of the controlling environment.
Relinquishing these standards relieves the target of the constant burden of
being aware [italics mine] that there is, in a sense, a secret and disapproving private self
judging the performance of the person's public self. [As is so often the case with the "crazy-made" child, it becomes easier to dissociate from the "impossible" but mandated pseudo-reality and "go along to get along" by increasingly abandoning empirical awareness and ability to discriminate what is from what is not... but is said to be. (If you can come up with a more effective mechanism for subtly disconnecting the mind from perceived reality, give me a call.)]
The effects we describe are not easily produced or
maintained. We suspect that if the environment is to approach even temporary
realization of these effects on cognition and self-evaluation, rules about expression
of dissent from community positions must be successfully enforced. If targets
are able to share with one another their private doubts and reservations, the
principles of the reinforcement structure are violated [which is precisely what occurred in a psychological "wildfire" over the course of a few days in the CFT cult (see Mithers)... and had begun to occur among some of the Branch Davidians and People's Temple (according to televised documentaries) members in the last days before they committed mass suicide]. Knowledge that others
maintain private standards different from supposed community consensus, will
support independent judgment [and critical thinking leading to disruption of prescribed logical fallacies]. If a target were to discover that many of those
who participate in the criticism of the target's deviant actions actually
shared the target's disagreement, the genuineness of the criticism would be
destroyed and the punishment value of the activity significantly reduced. If,
however, a target lacks even occasional external support for doubts, it is
seductively easy and conflict-resolving to, at some point, literally abandon
old standards by creating the rationalization that "I now understand"
the correctness of the community's viewpoint, or even that "I don't
understand it, but I will trust the community and conform."
Although it is theoretically possible to maintain a double
standard of public conformity and private disagreement indefinitely, there is
evidence that even in prisoner populations, at least temporary attribution to
self for beliefs and values demanded by captors was common. [The capacity of the CoS and CFT members to maintain the duplicity for years (and even decades) is well-documented by Miscavige-Hill, Mithers, and Wright. I certainly observed the very same capacity in many members of -- and exiters from -- several HP cults and LGATs. But, in my experience, the financial rewards for those at the higher levels of several MLMs appear to induce an ability to rationalize unmatched, cynical and even sociopathic duplicity. One individual I knew while he coursed through several MLMs fit the description of an "almost irresistably charming, wealth-chasing, ethics-challenged thug."] A substantial part
of the interest in "first generation" programs of influence and
control was caused by the unexpected reactions of non-Chinese released from
thought reform camps and returning POW's. For at least a short period after
their release, many former prisoners expressed sentiments seemingly reflective
of the ideology of their captors. Although these sentiments were rapidly shed
upon release from captivity, their attitudes and judgment standards were very
much biased by their experiences.
[I am forced here to assert that some exiters "take the best and leave the rest" over time. And that the more cynical and sociopathic they became during their active membership, the more likely they seem to be able to continue to rationalize unethical beliefs and behaviors well after "recovering" from the complex PTSD they suffered that drove them into therapy. At the other end of a moral spectrum, others who are far less anti-social (if anti-social at all) see the value of some of the concepts they acquired during their active participation and continue to utilize them to their own and others' benefit.]
Unlike attitude changes as ordinarily treated in the
literature, the sort of shift to the community's position we are describing
does not seem to result in stable cognitive reorganization or even stable
attributions to self as the source of beliefs. Persons fully involved in the
controlling environment may maintain that they " believe" the group's
ideology and that they freely accept it. It is often the case, however, that
after terminating membership, and therefore being removed from the constant
support and coercion present in the environment, seeming belief and confidence
in the ideology of the group rapidly erode. [Again, I suggest that readers here take this to be a generalization rather than an absolute. Because, like many who have been through years of therapy for childhood trauma, "under stress, one may regress." And sometimes, when the promise of some significant reward -- such as intimacy with an especially valued potential partner -- is presented, old conditionings perceived to be empowering and likely to help achieve such a goal may be employed. Including manipulations based consciously or unconsciously on behavioral modeling by the "successful" or "effective" members of the cult.] This often leaves the person in a
state of considerable confusion since he or she can no longer understand the
basis for prior conformity to the group's standards.
Rather than conceive of the shift towards conformity
standards during residence in the group as the result of attitude change, it
may be more fruitful to view the shift in behavior as the result of direct
suppression of aspects of the person's self. Once separated from the
reinforcement structure of the environment and, therefore, lacking constant
group pressure to refrain from acting upon or even entertaining deviant
thoughts, old viewpoints, and standards for evaluation may reassert themselves.
This reassertion may be surprising to the former group member and may cause the
member to doubt that the group's ideology was ever believed. [Suffice it to say that just as the sort of pre-condtionings described in the articles here and here may have predisposed people to become members and advance their way up the levels of the pyramid, it is also possible for those who exit to continue to be conditioned (especially subconsciously) by what occurred during their participation in the cult to "acting upon or even entertaining deviant thoughts, old viewpoints, and standards for evaluation."]
Milieu Control
First and second generation programs differ in the extent to which they
effectively use milieu control as an influence tactic. Milieu control in first
generation programs was extensive over an environment which was distinct from
the target's usual environment. Whether it was a prison, training center, or
reeducation camp, it was a special place at which targets resided for defined
periods. While in residence, targets could be obliged to participate in special
activities and subjected to close monitoring. The social organization of these
environments could be, and was, designed to foster cognitive change in targets.
The milieu was, however, merely a temporary place for the individual and the
persons with whom the target interacted. They had concerns for one another
which were limited to their common, relatively short-term, residence in these
special places with their limited and special goals.
Second generation programs often far exceed this level of
milieu control by expanding the size of the milieu which is controlled and the
length of time it is to be the target's milieu. Expansion of the milieu
involves including within it a greater range of the target's life activities
while still maintaining a high level of control over all activities. One method
for accomplishing this is to establish residential communities within which
family, occupational, educational, spiritual, and social life is conducted. In
these communities all aspects of life can, at least in theory, be defined for
residents, and residents can be subject to peer group monitoring as to
conformity on my and all of these aspects. In effect, unique worlds are created
within which people often expect to live their entire lives. With expectations
for lengthy residence and total involvement, it is not surprising to find that
residents are under pervasive pressure to accept the standards of the society
as their own. [Thus the Gold Base near San Jacinto; the Rajneesh Ranch in Oregon; the Waco compound in southeast Texas; the YFZ "white fortress" outside Eldorado City, Texas; and the village in the jungle in British Guiana... where isolation from the general cult-ure was assured. That said, all of the mind-control-for-elite-wealth-accumulation cults I have encountered personally have utilized psychological -- rather than physical -- isolation mechanisms, the principle example being that of time: Members at pyramid levels six to eight were kept busy. Really busy. Making money for the guru in one fashion or another.]
Control in such a world comes in two ways. One is in the
power of leadership to specify precisely what will be the values and norms of
the environment. The second source of control in the community is the power to
choose how and when to utilize methods of coercive influence to promote
conformity to chosen beliefs and policies.
Techniques of Coercive Influence
As with first generation programs, second generation
programs employ procedures which undermine self-confidence and manipulate a
target's emotional arousal to motivate learning and for purposes of behavioral
control. Unlike first generation programs, second generation programs tend to
rely on the target's already established [italics mine; see this article] standards for judging guilt and
performance. They tend to direct their efforts at magnifying awareness of guilt
or inadequacy by focusing the target's attention on memories of stressful and
emotionally significant events in his or her past. [I do not see this nearly so much -- indeed, if at all -- in the evangelical and/or fundamentalist religious, nor in the pure meditation -- cults as I do in the human potential category. "Sin" -- and guilty memories thereof -- do play a role in many of the Western, Abrahamic, ultra-authoritarian (see Altemeyer, and Horkheimer), hyper-legalistic religious cults, but the guilt dynamics there are more often packaged in current conflicts about perfectionistic moral standards including marital fidelity and parent honoring (when the perfectionistic and demanding parents are not that honorable; children living for parents instead of the other way around is a way of life in that world).] The result is often a
dramatic increase in anxiety and the creation of a strong need to resolve it. Since
participation in these activities is typically promised to result in relief
from emotional problems or in improved performance, targets of second
generation programs are likely to participate fully.
The cause of existing emotional or physical problems or
inferior performance is often explained as the result of particular
"improperly" experienced events or inadequate behaviors in the
target's past. For example, one growth program alleges that imperfect vision is
caused by a person's having refused to see something in the past. Others claim
that all of a target's interpersonal problems are caused by unexpressed
feelings associated with childhood events. [The fact that such is actually often the case is not the issue here; it's the leveraging -- and cynical manipulation -- of such unprocessed emotions that is. Real therapy processes unexpressed emotions to the point of "digestion and discharge" (as in the process of this particular type of emotion-processing psychotherapy). The bogus cult variety actually amplifies the emotions to the point of physical inflammation of neural chains in the brain's limbic emotion regulation system and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, which is understood by such as Courtois, Levine, Ogden and van der Kolk to be the physiological cause of the chronic anxiety and/or depression characteristic of complex post-traumatic stress disorder.] As a method for rapidly curing
problems allegedly caused by particular past events, some organizations advocate
recalling memories of traumatic or difficult events and attempting to
"fully experience" and express all associated emotions. Supposedly,
the full expression of the emotion associated with the event will immediately
cure the target's current problems. [Heaps of efficacy research since the age of Brewer, Freud, and Janet support that notion. BUT...] This theory rationalizes inducing the
target to focus attention on emotionally difficult past events and justifies
the organization's use of any available techniques to promote intense emotional
arousal. [...therein lies the problem. Patients with trauma histories and resulting CPTSD should never be forced to recall the visual, aural and/or sensational memories of any form of trauma. Licensed professionals may use empathically crafted, carefully administered, ethically guided techniques from such as Eye-Movement Desensitization & Reprocessing
(EMDR), Narrative Exposure Therapy (NET), Internal Family Systems Therapy
(IFST), Trauma Focused Therapy (TFT), Hakomi Body Centered Psychotherapy
(HBCP), Somatic Experiencing Psychotherapy (SEPt), Sensorimotor Processing for
Trauma (SP4T), and the Neuro-Affective Relational Model (NARM) to assist patients to "digest and discharge" such memories and their affects. But legitimate psychotherpists never force patients to engage in process.]
Some second generation programs rely heavily on peer group
techniques, similar to encounter groups, but with a focus on intimate rather
than peripheral topics. Other second generation program employ more
sophisticated emotion-arousing tactics. Techniques used in clinical
psychotherapeutic practice are often appropriated to the programs [see above; in the era covered by the original article here, however, the most popular and widely used therapies included Fritz & Laura Perls experiential and Irwin Yalom's existential approaches, Arthur Janov's Primal Therapy (which was expropriated by a number of less-than-ethical pseudo-therapies including the CFT (see Mithers) and Erhard's est, all manner of psychoanalytic and psychodynamic "emotional catharsis" techniques; legitmate, southern Asian "meditative regression" therapies -- far more adroit, sophisticated and compassionate than Janov's rather clunky PT -- were coming into vogue at the time, but were not yet in widespread use outside a number of quite ethical Yogic Hindu and Buddhist groups which had not yet spun off unethical sects... or gone over the dam themselves]. Hence, much
of what has been learned about the management of emotional experience in the
practice of clinical psychology and psychiatry is brought into play as a method
through which to cause the target to experience intense emotion.
Given a target's initial willingness to participate, a
range of exercises can be use to generate intense emotional arousal. For
example, in some cases meditative and hypnotic techniques are used to
accomplish arousal. In some programs, targets in trance states are induced to
imagine hypothetical events and react to them with full emotional expression.
The hypothetical circumstances might involve a disaster or the realization of
the target's greatest fear. In other instances hypnosis is used to induce
targets to recapture the details of an event such as rape or a parent's death
scene. Using simple hypnotic techniques, some programs manipulate targets into
fantasizing events from "past lives," the moment of their conception,
or other memories they expect now to be available to them. Through the use of
hypnosis and suggestion targets can be led to supposedly re-experience moments
of intense emotion from their pasts or even from their imagined "past
lives."
[We know from reams of efficacy research developed in the '90s and since that ethical, compassionate, carefully administered "memory retrieval" and "emotion processing" does produce reduction of complex PTSD symptoms including anxiety, depression and obsessive-addictive behaviors. Some therapists, especially those trained by Milton Erickson or his associates, utilize hypnosis in this process. Many others do not, because of the taint on hypnotic suggestion. Therapists of the newish mindfulness approach to such work (including those mentioned two paragraphs above) generally agree that memories and emotions will be triggered in the course of group and individual psychotherapy and do not need to be "suggested" in any fashion. When such feelings, sensations, "affects" and memories pop up, patients are directed to use the already acquired, distress tolerance and emotion regulation techniques derived from such "technique-al" therapies as Mindfulness-Based
Cognitive Therapy (MBCT), Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT, the long-time gold
standard for severe PTSD and anxiety symptom management), Acceptance & Commitment
Therapy (ACT), Mind-Body Bridging Therapy (MBBT), and Mindfulness-Based Stress
Reduction (MBSR) to "manage" their experience of such affects while they are "digested and discharged" in the brain's limbic emotion regulation system. The very same therapies and skills training regimens are now being used to "de-condition" cults exiters, as well, because the recovery process for cult exiters is very similar to that for patients who "caught" CPTSD from childhood trauma, rape victimization, a rough-house divorce, excessive work-related stress, etc. (Please see the earlier article at this link, as well as this newer one on "re-developing" the mind of anyone whose "self" has been split into fragments by thought reform techniques.)]
Similarly, some groups employ emotional flooding
techniques, the stripping away of psychological defenses, and provide elaborate
emotion-working exercises. [There were legitimate psychotherapists who used emotional flooding well into the '90s that I know of. Most legitimate therapists do not only not use it now, but recommend against it save for very carefully controlled, specific circumstances.] Targets may be expected to engage in role-playing
exercises and replay scenes from their pasts. They may be expected to role-play
themselves or others, now acting out what they "really felt." In all
such exercises there is an expectation that what the target will discover is a
strong emotion underlying the character's behavior and the target is expected
to express this emotion.
Often the arousal techniques used by second generation
programs are linked into sequences which have a "marathon" character [e.g.: est, TRS, and other large-group awareness, "break-down-and-build-up" trainings usually staged on weekends].
That is, the intensive indoctrination portion of the organization's system for
managing new participants may continue for a weekend or for as long as a month.
In some instances, the organization may stretch the intensive indoctrination
period over a span of several months with short breaks between portions [in my experience, these very long indoctrinations are more typical of what occurs in ultra-fundamentalist, evangelical religious settings, usually in rural compounds; the Branch Davidians were an example]. The
effects of repeatedly employing techniques for generating intense arousal
should not be overlooked. There is likely to be an interaction between the
frequency of raising of psychologically stressful topics and the strength of
the target's response. For example, if stress experience disturbs a target's
sleep cycle, the person's ability to control subsequent stress responses will
likely deteriorate as fatigue increases [which is widely understood to induce at least temporary, post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms in some people; see Sapolsky, and van der Kolk]. As fatigue and disorientation
increase, the effects of the techniques used to generate arousal are likely to
increase.
Given the initial desire of targets to benefit from involvement
with the training organization and the ability of the organization to
manipulate the target, peer group, and environment to provide targets with
experiences that can be interpreted within the framework of the organization's
theory, it is not surprising: that targets can be significantly influenced [in-flow-enced] (Bem
1972; Schacter, 1965). For example, one mass "training" organization
reports that fully 25% of those who begin the organization's first course are
subsequently induced to become unpaid labor and recruiters [italics mine; this bunch much be really "good" at what they're doing to accomplish that; Erhard's est at its best figured on 10% or less] for the
organization. As a method for preparing targets for long term residence in a
"therapeutic" community, one psychotherapy cult subjected targets to
a several-week-long period of emotional stress. Another organization prepares
targets for long-term involvement through early extensive hypnosis training and
exercises [ostensibly] directed at the recovery of stressful moments from the target's past.
Given a theory that asserts that cure, transformation, or
enhanced functioning follows from fully experiencing stressful events and fully
expressing emotions associated with these events, if a target is not cured,
transformed, or improved, the reason is obvious: The target must have failed to
fully experience the event or to have fully expressed the associated emotions. [How many times did I hear the term "resistance" used to describe this circumstance in est, around the CoS and CFT? Answer: Scores, at least. Members all the way up to pyramid level seven become increasing conditioned, indoctrinated, instructed, socialized and normalized to see "treatment failure" or inability to "get it" as the fault of the "patient" or "newbie," who is demeaned and exonerated for being "resistant."] Therefore, until the target acknowledges relief from whatever emotional problem
or deficiency prompted initial interest in the program, he or she may be
required to repeat the exercise of locating and "reliving" difficult
life events. Even if the target is willing to agree that he or she is
"fixed," the organization may not always allow the target to claim
transformation. In some organizations, when an individual's productivity goes
down, or when the person is inadequately enthusiastic, it is assumed that the
further release of supposed problem-causing emotion is required [Miscavige-Hill, Mithers and Wright ran down numerous examples in their books]. The person is
obliged to undergo more of the group's curative exercises [which themselves induce further symptoms of anxiety and/or depression].
Second Generation Program Casualties
We believe that in the course of seeking to gain power over the individual
through the use of arousal states as influence techniques, some programs may
have the effect of unleashing more anxiety and emotion than the person can
tolerate. Traumatic events, about which the target has successfully established
defenses, may be recalled in such a way as to neutralize the person's
established method for handling the emotion related to the topic. Stripping a
person's defenses in this manner may have devastating consequences. [None of the pseudo therapies I ran into taught anything remotely like "stress reduction for distress tolerance and emotion regulation."]
Often the procedures used to accomplish emotional arousal
are applied simultaneously to large groups, or when done on an individual basis
follow a fixed format. When done in either fashion, there is no possibility of
monitoring the content of the experience remembered by the target. When the
event recalled is something such as childhood physical or sexual abuse, rape,
the death of a parent, or an action about which the target is particularly
ashamed, fully experiencing the emotion associated with the event may prove
quite overwhelming ["negative abreaction," a circumstance well-understood and purposely avoided in this day and age by most ethical, licensed psychotherapists].
Judging from reports of studies of targets of both first
and second generation influence systems, long periods of exposure to the
surveillance and interpersonal control procedures necessary to maintain high
levels of conformity can induce a state of at least temporary confusion and disorientation
when the controlling system is withdrawn (Hinkle and Wolf 1956; Lifton, 1961;
Singer. 1978. 1979,1986).
There is a growing suspicion and slowly accumulating
evidence that the practices of some spiritual or psychological "
growth" programs which in our opinion can be considered examples of second
generation influence programs have a significant potential to induce far more
serious damage than disorientation. Clark ( 1977, 1978) reports that long term
involvement can lead to transient problems for those whose histories suggest
that they were normal prior to involvement and can exacerbate problems for
those with histories of psychological diffculties. Reports by Glass et al.,
(1977), Kirsch and Glass (1977), Higgit and Murray (1983), and Haaken and Adams
(1983) suggest that some psychological " growth" programs which
depend heavily on the manipulation of unusual body states and emotional arousal
have the potential to induce psychiatric disturbances. Glass et al. and Kirsch
and Glass report on seven casualties of a mass "training" program.
Five casualties were diagnosed as schizophrenic, three with paranoid symptoms,
one was manic-depressive, and one was diagnosed as having a depressive
neurosis. Only one of the seven had a previous history of disorder. All seven
patients presented symptoms during or shortly after completion of the program. [See also this article.]
Peripheral and Central Elements of Self:
Psychodynamic Commentary
Second generation programs of coercive influence and behavior control appear to
directly attack the core sense of being - the central self-image, the very
sense of realness and existence of the self. In contrast, the attack of first
generation programs is on a peripheral property of self, one's political and
social views. The latter views could be seen as mere wrong learning imposed
from the outer world, for which there could be easy substitutions; the inner
person, the self, was not the focus of attack. The newer programs can make the
target feel that the "core me" is defective. Alter the self or perish
is the motto. Thus intense anxiety can be engendered about the worthiness and
even the existence of the self. The self is under attack to merge with and
identify with the offered new model. Feelings of personal disintegration can be
induced. For many, there is a temporary to more lasting identification with the
contents, demeanors, and prescribed behaviors advocated by the program's
operators just as there was with the first generation programs. It also appears
that attacks on the central elements of self may have certain grave and not yet
fully determined effects.
[I ran into and briefly worked for famed author (including The Psychology of Self Esteem and The Disowned Self) and psychologist Nathaniel Branden in the late 1970s. He was all over the concepts described here like a wet blanket on a camp fire back then. Although he was careful not to entangle himself in litigation with the already sizable -- and very litigious -- human potential cults in the Los Angeles area at the time, he was quite clear about what was happening, treating a number of exiters for the next three decades, as far as I know. Branden is gone now, but his books remain available, and are useful for orienting exit counselors and therapists to the core issues faced by the "psychologically toxified."])
The self-elements threatened by second generation programs
are those which have grown out of experiences and feelings generated in deeply
intimate relationships and emotionally charged transactions over the person's
lifetime. These are the elements of the historical, experiencing self which has
feelings dating back to early childhood. Coping with emotions over the years
shapes the development of specific psychological defense mechanisms used by the
person for handling emotions from past and present interactions. The central
self has to cope with resonating to memories of experiences of intimacy,
intense affective states, family relationships, sexual experiences, and
traumatic life events. These central self-elements define the inner, private
domain in which emotions, past and present, are experienced and dealt with and
where that special sense of self experienced as "me" is located.
Psychological coping and balance is maintained through the central self's
ability to monitor and control emotions stirred up by reacting to and providing
interpretations for both outer and inner perceptions and through judging what
is real.
["Judging what is real" on what basis? On the basis of introjected, common cultural beliefs and values? On the basis of beliefs and values indoctrinated, instructed and installed by authority figures with extreme beliefs and values of their own? Or -- worse yet -- on the basis of beliefs and values indoctrinated, instructed and installed by authority figures with cynical, ulterior motives, e.g.: to take command of other's minds for the purpose of looting their wallets and turning them into free laborers and slaves?
Which is why mental health professionals informed by Classical Greek (e.g.: Socratic, Aristotelian) and European Enlightenment (e.g.: Spinozan, Kantian, et al) "empiricism" -- as well as Pali Canon Buddhist and early Taoist -- concepts assert that which belief is often less the issue than belief, period. But "what is reality?" is an immense topic beyond the scope of the material here.]
First generation program attacks focused on peripheral
elements of self. They constituted a degree of attack on the psychological
stability of the person far different from second generation attacks on central
self-elements. Attacking a target's confidence in the rightness of political
opinions and appropriateness of social class position may have caused
humiliation, embarrassment, and punishing emotional arousal. It may even have
been life-threatening. We do not mean to imply that such treatment did not
evoke strong emotional reactions in those so treated. Rather, we want to contrast
the hypothesized difference in impact of having one's own political [or religious] background
attacked and the attendant distress caused thereby, with the impact of having
one's core psychological stability and defense mechanisms stripped away as can
be done by the techniques used in second generation programs.
[I called out "religious" above with the intention of pointing to a (sometimes "fuzzy") demarcation between the older type of religious cults from the newer types, as well as the modern, "thought reform" and "wholesale identity reformation" cults of the past half century or so. My observation is that we are seeing quite a number of "new religious movements" taking on the identity-stripping-and-restructuring techniques of the Asian religious cults (e.g.: SRF) that first appeared in the West about a century ago. Some of the modern, pseudo-Christian cults resemble and function far more like those Asian religious cults than even the millenarian, psuedo-Christian cults of the early 20th century. (Koresh's Branch Davidians were a far cry from the Millerite and Adventist sects that spawned them.) Finally, and for example, it may only be because of the work milieu I am in that I see evidence of a widespread and very cynical and sociopathic contamination and corruption of ostensibly Christian, substance abuse recovery organizations in which classic "thought reform," "milieu control," high-pressure influence, assertive dogmatism, harsh reward-and-punishment, and "identity-stripping" techniques are being used for far more than helping the "clients" get clean and sober. Because too many of the clients are still "in treatment" a decade later... and working at low-paying jobs accumulating wealth for the "good reverend" running the show.]
We suspect that this sort of stripping of a person's
central coping mechanisms is the key to understanding the reason for
psychological casualties in these programs as well as understanding why some
programs are able to cause such a rapid and apparently dramatic acceptance of
the program's advocated ideology. Apparently for some persons, bypassing
traditional coping mechanisms by inducing them to vividly recall or relive
events of great emotional significance can create a psychologically powerful
experience. For some, the experience appears to be sufficient to induce
psychological decompensation.
For those not so overwhelmed by the experience, we suspect
that it creates circumstances in which the easiest way to reconstitute the self
and obtain a new equilibrium is to "identify with the aggressor" and
accept the ideology of the authority figure who has reduced the person to a
state of profound confusion. In effect, the new ideology (psychological theory,
spiritual system, etc.) functions as a defense mechanism. It protects the
individual from having to further directly inspect emotions from the past which
are overwhelming. The person is then able to focus attention on some
intellectual abstraction rather than on details of the distressing events
themselves.
[Ofshe's & Singer's] Notes
1. The phrase "coordinated programs of coercive influence and behavior
control" is introduced to escape any suggestion that this form of
influence and social control depends upon the unique historical circumstances
under which it was previously studied. Further, and of equal importance, our
introduction of a new term is motivated by a desire to separate this analysis
from some of the connotations which have become associated with the terms
"thought reform," "coercive persuasion, " and
"brainwashing."
"Brainwashing" is the least satisfactory of the
common names for the phenomenon. It conjures up, at least for the
non-professional reader, ideas of mindless automatons deprived of their
capacity for decision-making. "Thought reform" is a more neutral term
but has an historical connotation linking it to a range of attempts to
propagandize, indoctrinate, and re-educate as well as coercively influence and
control China's population after Mao's revolution [see Gao, and Lifton]. As generally used, "coercive persuasion" connotes a substantial reliance on physical abuse and
imprisonment. It is a term developed to describe procedures used on U.S. and
U.N. military personnel who were captured during the Korean War.
2. The only available experimental evidence relating to
the ability of group pressure to cause psychological casualties is reported in
Yalom and Lieberman (1971). In their study of short duration, 30-hour encounter
group experiences, a 94 per cent casualty rate was found. Casualties were not
associated with all varieties of encounter group experience. Casualties
occurred in groups in which leaders focused upon individuals, were
authoritarian, and acted in an intrusive, confrontational, and challenging
manner.
3. Our analysis of second generation programs is based on
research and clinical work exceeding two decades, if our separate experiences
are totaled. We have interviewed well over one thousand individuals, or
relatives of individuals, who were formerly or currently involved in different
coercive influence and behavior control programs. We have studied casualties of
various programs, and have conducted participant observation field research and
direct observation studies of different programs. Because of issues of
confidentiality of informants and court ordered silence, as well as [threat of litigation by] the
controversy surrounding many of the programs we have studied, we are being
deliberately opaque as us program identities.
4. Not all second generation programs are used to
influence and control targets for lengthy periods of time or to lead
individuals to become completely deployable agents of the organization with
which they become involved. Some organizations tend to involve people as agents
used to sell commercial programs to others. For the purposes of this paper we
are drawing primarily on programs which involve targets for lengthy periods of
time and often include either communal residence or near isolation from
relationships from non-group members.
Links to Articles on Cult Dynamics
[Ofshe's & Singer's] References
Bainbridge, W. S. 1978 Satan's Power. A Deviant Psychotherapy Cult. Berkeley. University of
Califomia Press.
Bearak, B. 1984 Raid on Cult Stirs Dispute in Vermont. Los
Angeles: Los Angeles Times. July 10.
Bem,D.J. 1972 Selfperception theory. Advances in
Experimemal Social Psychology, 6, L. Berkowitz (ed.) New York: Academic.
Bradlee, B. Jr. and D. Van Atta 1981 Prophet of Blood. New
York: G.P. Putnam's Sons.
Bugliosi, V. and C. Gentry 1974 Helter Skelter. New York:
Bantam Books.
Chen, T.F.X. 1960 Thought Reform ofthe Chinese Intellectuals.
New York: Oxford.
Clark, J.G. 1976 Investigating the effects of some
religious cults on the health and welfare of their converts. Statement before
the Vermont State Legislature.
Clark, J.G. 1978 The manipulation of madness: clinical
study. Praxis der Kinder Psychologie und Kinder Psychiatric 2: 5563.
Farber, I. E., H. F- Harlow and L. J. West 1956
Bralnwashlng conditionlng and DDD: debility, dependency and dread- Sociometry
20: 271-85.
Galanter, M. and P- Buckley 1978 EvangelicaI religion and
meditation: Psychotherapeutic effects. Journal of Nervous and Memal Disease
166: 68591.
Gaylln, W. 1974 On the borders of persuasion. Psychiatry
37. 19.
Gerstel, D. 1982 Paradise Incorporated: Synanon. Novato,
California: Presidio.
Glass, L. L., M. A- Kirsch and F. N. Parris 1977
Psychiatric disturbances associated with &hard Seminars Training:I. A
report of cases. American Journal of Psychiatry 134:245-47.
Glock, C. V. and R. Bellah (eds.) 1976 The New Religious
Consciousness. Berkeley. University of California Press.
Haaken, J. and R. Adams 1983 Pathology as "personal
growth". a participant observation study of Lifespring Training.
Psychiatry 46: 270-80.
Hearst, P. 1982 Every Secret Thing. New York: Norton.
Higget, A. C. and R. M. Murray 1983 A psychotic episode
following Erhard Seminars Training. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavia 67. 436-39.
HinkIe, I. E. and H. G. Wolfe 1983 Communist interrogation
and indoctrination of enemies of the state. Archives of Neurology and
Psychiatry 76: 11574.
Hunter E. 1953 Brainwashing in China:The Calculated
Destruction of Men's Minds. New York: Vanguard.
Kirsch, M. A. and Glass, L. L. 1977 Psychiatric
disturbances associated with Erhard Seminars Training: II. additional cases and
theoretical considerations. American Journal of Psychiatry 134. 125458.
Lifton, R. J. 1961 Thought Reform and the Psychology of
Totalism. New York:Norton.
Los Angeles Times 1984 March 15.
Mitchell, D. C. Mitchell and R. Ofshe 1980 The Light on
Synanon. New York: Seaview.
Ofshe, R., Eisenberg, N., Coughlin, R., Dolinajec, G.,
Johnson, A. 1974 Social structure and the social control in Synanon. Voluntary
Action Research 3: 67-76.
Ofshe, R. 1976 Synanon: the people business. In C. Glock
and R. Bellah (eds.) The New Religious Consciousness. Berkeley. University of
California Press.
Ofshe, R. 1980 The social development of the Synanon cult:
the managenal strategy of organizational transformation. Sociological .
Analysis 41: 10927.
Rickett, A. and A. Ricket 1957 Prisoner of Liberation. New
York: Cameron.
Reiterman, T. and D. Jacobs 1982 The Raven. New York:
Dutton.
Schacter, S. 1965 The interaction of cognitive and
physical determinants of emotional state. In Advances in Experimental Social
Psychology, 2, L.
Berkowitz (ed.) New York: Academic.
Schein, E. H., W. E. Cooley and M. T Singer 1960 A
Psychological Follow-up of Former Prisoners of the Chinese Comnmnunists, Parc
J. Results of Interview Study. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of
Technology.
Schein, E. H. 1961 Cocrcive Persuasion. New York: Norton.
Schein, E. H. and M. T. Singer 1962 Follow-up intelligence
data on prisoners repatriated from North Korea. Psychological Reports 11.
93-94.
Segal, J. 1957 Correlates of collaboration and resistance
behavior among U. S. Army POWs in Korea.Journal of Social Issues 13. 31-41.
Singer, M. T. 1978 Therapy with ex-cult members. Journal
of thle National Association of Private Psychiatric Hospitals 9. 13- 18.
Singer, M. T. 1979 coming out of the cults. Psychology
Today 12: 72-82.
Singer, M.T. " 1986 Consultation with families of
cultists. In Wynne, L.C., et at. (eds.). A New Perspective for Family Therapy.
New York: Guilford Press.
Strassman, H. B., Thaler, M. and Schein, E. H. 1956 A
prisoner of war syndrome: apathy as a reaction to stress. AmericanJournal of
Psychiatry H12: 998-1003.
Taylor, D. 1978 Social organization and recruitment in the
Unifcation Church. Masters Thesis: University of Montana.
Trillin, C. 1982 U. S.journal: Miracle Valley, Arizona.
Nothing but holiness. New Yorker, December 10.
Watkins, P. 1980 My Life with Charles Manson. New York:
Bantam.
West L. J. and M. T. Singer 1980 Cults, quacks and
non-professional psychotherapies. In H. I. Kaplan, A. M. Freedman and B. J.
Sadock (eds.). Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiacry, Third Edition. Baltimore:
Williams and Wilkins.
Whyte, M. 1976 Small Groups and Policical Behavior in
China. Berkeley. University of California Press.
Yalom, I. and M. Lieberman 1971 A study of encounter group
casualties. Archives of General Psychiatry 25: 16-30.
Zito, T. 1982 Stonegate discipline. Washington, D.C.:
Washington Post. November 26.
Richard Ofshe, Ph. D., is Professor of Sociology at the
University of California, Berkeley.
Margaret T- Singer, Ph. D., is Professor of Psychology at
the University of California, Berkeley.
Commentator's References & Resources
Altemeyer, R.: The Authoritarian Specter, Boston: Harvard
University Press, 1996.
Altemeyer, R.: The Authoritarians, Charleston, SC: Lulu,
2006.
Arterburn, S.; Felton, J.: Toxic Faith: Understanding and
Overcoming Religious Addiction, Nashville: Oliver-Nelson, 1991.
Asch, S. E.: Effects of Group Pressure upon the
Modification and Distortion of Judgments,
in H. Guetzkow (ed.): Groups, Leadership and Men, Pittsburgh: Carnegie
Press, 1951.
Beck, A.: Prisoners Of Hate: The Cognitive Basis of Anger,
Hostility, and Violence, New York: Harper-Collins, 1999.
Beck, A.; Freeman, A.: Cognitive Theory of the Personality
Disorders, New York: Guilford Press, 1990.
Beder, S.: Selling the Work Ethic: From Puritan Pulpit to
Corporate PR, London: Zed Books, 2001.
Berger, M. (Ed.); Beyond the Double Bind: Communication
and Family Systems, Theories, and Techniques with Schzophrenics, New York:
Brunner/Mazel, 1978.
Berger, P.; Luckman, T.: The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the
Sociology of Knowledge, New York: Doubleday, 1966.
Bermann, E.: Scapegoat: The Impact of Death on an American
Family, Ann Arbor: U. of Michigan Press, 1973.
Bloom, S.: Creating Sanctuary: Toward the Evolution of
Sane Societies, London: Routledge, 1997.
Bowlby, J.: A Secure Base: Parent-Child Attachment and
Healthy Human Development. London: Routledge; New York: Basic Books, 1988.
Branden, N.: The Psychology of Self-Esteem, New York:
Bantam Books, 1973.
Branden, N.: The Disowned Self, New York: Bantam Books,
1976.
Brazelton, T.; Cramer, B.: The Earliest Relationship:
Parents, Infants and the Drama of Early Attachment, Reading, MA:
Addison-Wesley, 1990.
Breuer, J.: Studies in Hysteria, orig. pub. 1895, New
York: Basic Books, 2000.
Briere, J.: Therapy for Adults Molested as Children:
Beyond Survival (Revised and Expanded Ed.), New York: Springer, 1996.
Burrow, T.: The Social Basis of Consciousness, New York:
Harcourt, Brace, 1927.
Cialdini, R.: Influence: Science and Practice, 4th Ed.,
New York: Allyn and Bacon, 2000.
Conway, F.; Siegelman, J.: Snapping: America's Epidemic of
Sudden Personality Change, New York: Dell Delta, 1978.
Courtois, C.; Ford, J.: Treatment of Complex Traumatic
Stress: A Sequenced, Relationship-Based Approach, New York: Guilford Press,
2012.
Courtois, C.; Ford, J.: Treating Complex Post-Traumatic
Stress Disorder in Children and Adolescents, New York: Guilford Press, 2013.
Courtois, C.: It's Not You... It's What Happened to You:
Complex Trauma and Treatment, Dublin, OH: Telemachus Press, 2014.
Deikman, A.: The Wrong Way Home: Uncovering the Patterns
of Cult Behavior in American Society, Boston: Beacon Press, 1990.
Deikman, A.: Them and Us: Cult Thinking and the Terrorist
Threat, Berkeley CA: Bay Tree, 2003.
Durkhem, E.: The Elementary Forms of Religious Life, orig.
pub. 1912, London: Allen & Unwin, 1915.
Erikson, E.: Childhood and Society, New York: W. W.
Norton, 1950, 1967, 1993.
Erikson, E.: Identity and the Life Cycle, New York: W. W.
Norton, 1959, 1980.
Erikson, E.: The Problem of Ego Identity, in Stein, M., et
al: Identity and Anxiety, Glencoe, IL: The Free Press, 1960.
Esterson, A.: The Leaves of Spring: Schizophrenia, Family
and Sacrifice, London: Tavistock, 1972.
Evans, P.: The Verbally Abusive Relationship, Expanded
Second Edition, Avon, MA: Adams Media Corp., 1996.
Evans, P.: Controlling People, Avon, MA: Adams Media
Corp., 2002.
Fonagy, P.: Attachment Theory and Psychoanalysis, New
York: Other Press, 2001.
Forward, S.: Emotional Blackmail: When the People in Your
Life Use Fear, Obligation and Guilt to Manipulate You, New York: HarperCollins,
1997.
Freud, A.: The Ego and the Mechanisms of Defense, London:
Hogarth Press and Institute of Psycho-Analysis, 1937.
Freud, S.: Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego,
orig. pub. 1920, New York: W. W. Norton, 1989.
Freud, S.: The Future of an Illusion, orig. pub. 1927, New
York: W. W. Norton, 1989.
Friedman, J.; Jack, A. I.: What Makes You So Sure?
Dogmatism, Fundamentalism, Analytic Thinking, Perspective Taking and Moral
Concern in the Religious and Nonreligious, in Journal of Religion and
Health, 2017; DOI: 10.1007/s10943-017-0433-x
Friedman, M.: Post-Traumatic and Acute Stress Disorders:
The latest assessment and treatment strategies, 4th Ed., Kansas City, MO: Dean
Psych Press dba Compact Clinicals, 2006.
Friedman, M.: PTSD and Related Disorders, in Stein, D.;
Friedman, M.; Blanco, C.: Post-traumatic Stress Disorder, New York:
Wiley-Blackwell, 2011.
Fromm, E.: Escape from Freedom, New York: Avon, 1965.
Galanter, M.: Cults: Faith, Healing and Coercion, New
York: Guilford Press, 1989.
Gao, W.: Zhou Enlai: The Last Perfect Revolutionary, New
York: Public Affairs, 2007.
George, J.; Wilcox, L.: America Extremists: Militias,
Supremacisists, Klansmen, Communists, & Others, Amherst, NY: Promethius
Books, 1996.
Gergen,K.: An Invitation to Social Construction, Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 1999.
Greenwald, A.: The Totalitarian Ego: Fabrication and
Revision of Personal History, in American Psychologist, Vol. 35, No. 7, July
1980.
Haley, J.: The family of the schizophrenic: a model
system, in American Journal of Nervous and Mental Disorders, Vol. 129, 1959.
Haley, J.: The Art of Being Schizophrenic, in The Power
Tactics of Jesus Christ... and Other Essays, New York: Penguin, 1969.
Haley, J.: Leaving Home: The Therapy of Disturbed Young
People, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1980.
Hanes, W. T.; Sanello, F.: The Opium Wars: The Addiction
of One Empire and the Corruption of Another, New York: Barnes & Noble,
2005.
Herman, J. L.: Trauma and Recovery, New York: Basic Books,
1992.
Hare, R.: Without Conscience, New York: Guilford Press,
1993.
Haslam, A.; Reicher, S.: Contesting the "Nature"
of Conformity: What Milgram and Zimbardo's Studies Really Show, in PLOS /
Biology, Vol. 10, No. 11, November 2012.
Hassan, S.: Combating Cult Mind Control: The #1
Best-selling Guide to Protection, Rescue, and Recovery from Destructive Cults,
South Paris, ME: Park Street Press, 1989.
Hassan, S.: Freedom of Mind: Helping Loved Ones Leave
Controlling People, Cults & Beliefs, Newton, MA: Freedom of Mind Press,
2012.
Henry, J.: Culture Against Man, New York: Random House,
1964.
Henry, J.: Pathways to Madness, New York: Random House,
1965.
Henry, J.: On Sham, Vulnerability and other forms of
Self-Destruction, London: Allan Lane / Penguin Press, 1973.
Hoffer, E.: The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of
Mass Movements, New York: Harper and Row, 1951, 1966.
Hood, R.; Hill, P.; Williamson, W. P.: The Psychology of Religious
Fundamentalism, New York: Guildford Press, 2005.
Horkheimer, M.: Authoritarianism and the Family Today, in
R. N. Anshen, ed.: The Family: Its Function and Destiny, New York, Harper,
1949.
Jackson, D. (ed.): The Etiology of Schizophrenia: Genetics
/ Physiology / Psychology / Sociology, London: Basic Books, 1960.
Jackson, D.: Myths of Madness: New Facts for Old
Fallacies, New York: Macmillan & Co., 1964.
Janet, P. (see van der Hart)
Kant, I.: A Critique of Pure Reason; orig. pub. 1781,
London: Cambridge U. Press, 1999.
Karpman, S.: Fairy tales and script drama analysis, in
Transactional Analysis Bulletin, Vol. 7, No. 26, 1968.
Kelly, J.: The Psychology of Personal Constructs, New
York: W. W. Norton, 1955.
Kernberg, O.: Severe Personality Disorders:
Psychotherapeutic Strategies, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1977.
Koopmans, M.: Schizophrenia and the Family: Double Bind
Theory Revisited, presented at the National Council on Family Relations, 1995;
the American Psychological Assn., 1995; and the International Congress of
Psychology, Montreal, 1996.
Kramer, J.; Alstad, D.: The Guru Papers: Masks of
Authoritarian Power, Berkeley, CA: Frog, Ltd., 1993.
Laing, R. D.; Esterson, A.: Sanity, Madness and the
Family, London: Tavistock, 1964.
Lalich, J.: Bounded Choice: True Believers and Charismatic Cults, Berkeley CA: U. California Press, 2004.
Lalich, J., Tobias, M.: Take Back Your Life: Recovering from Cults and Abusive Relationships, Berkeley CA: Bay Tree Publishing, 2006.
Lalich, J.; McLaren, K.: Escaping Utopia: Growing Up in a Cult, Getting Out, and Starting Over, London: Routledge, 2017.
Langone, M., ed.: Recovery from Cults: Help for Victims of
Psychological and Spiritual Abuse, New York: W. W. Norton, 1993.
Lasch, C.: The Culture of Narcissism: American Life in an
Age of Diminishing Expectations, New York: W. W. Norton, 1979, 1991.
LeBon, G.: The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind,
orig. pub. 1895, Minneola, NY: Dover Publications, 2002.
Levine, S.: A Gradual Awakening, New York: Anchor Books /
Doubleday, 1979, 1989.
Lidz, R.; Lidz, T.: The family environment of
schizophrenic patients, in American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 106, 1949.
Lidz, T.: The Origin and Treatment of Schizophrenic
Disorders, New York: Basic Books, 1973.
Lidz, T.; Fleck, S., Cornelison, A.: Schizophrenia and the
Family, 2nd Ed.; New York: International Universities Press, 1985.
Lifton, R.: Methods of Forceful Indoctrination, in Stein,
M.; Vidich, A.; White, D. (editors): Identity and Anxiety: Survival of the
Person in Mass Society, Glencoe, IL: The Free Press of Glencoe, Illinois, 1960.
Lifton, R.: Revolutionary Immortality: Mao Tse-Tung and
the Chinese Cultural Revolution, New York: Random House, 1968.
Mahler, M.; Pine, S.; Bergman, A.: The Psychological Birth
of the Human Infant: Symbiosis and Individuation, New York: Basic Books, 1975.
Marcia, J.: Development and validation of ego identity
status, in Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 3, 1966.
Martin, J.: The Kingdom of the Cults, Minneapolis: Bethany
House, 1985.
McDougall, W.: The Group Mind: A Sketch of the Principles
of Collective Psychology, orig. pub. 1920, North Stratford: Ayer Company, NH,
1973.
Meerloo, J.: Brainwashing and Menticide, in Stein,
M.; Vidich, A.; White, D. (editors): Identity and Anxiety: Survival of the
Person in Mass Society, Glencoe, IL: The Free Press of Glencoe, Illinois, 1960.
Meerloo, J.: The Rape of the Mind: The Psychology of
Thought Control, Menticide, and Brainwashing, orig. pub. 1956, Unknown:
Progressive Press, 2009.
Mehta. G.: Karma Cola: Marketing the Mystic East, New
York: Simon & Schuster, 1979.
Milgram, S.: Obedience to Authority, London: Pinter &
Martin, 1974.
Miller, A. G.: The Obedience Experiments, New York:
Prager, 1984.
Millon, T.; Simonsen, E.; Birket-Smith, M.; Davis, R.:
Psychopathy: Antisocial, Criminal, and Violent Behavior, Guilford Press, 1998.
Millon, T.; Grossman, S.; Meagher, S., Millon, C., Everly,
G.: Personality Guided Therapy, New York: John Wiley & Sons,
1999.
Miscavidge Hill, J.; Pulitzer, L.: Beyond Belief: My
Secret Life inside Scientology and My Harrowing Escape, New York: Morrow /
HarperCollins, 2013.
Mithers, C. L.: Therapy Gone Mad: The True Story of
Hundreds of Patients and a Generation Betrayed, Menlo Park CA: Addison-Wesley
Publishing, 1994.
Negrao, C.; Bonanno, G.; et al: Shame, Humiliation and
Childhood Sexual Abuse: Distinct Contributions and Emotional Coherence, in
Child Maltreatment, Vol. 10, No. 4, November 2005.
Neumann, F.: Anxiety and Politics, in Maurice Stein et al (editors): Identity
and Anxiety: Survival of the Person in Mass Society, Glencoe, IL: The Free
Press, 1960.
Ofshe, R.: Coercive Persuasion and Attitude Change, in
Borgata & Montgomery: Encyclopedia of Attitude Change, Vol. 1, 2nd Ed., New
York: Macmillan, 2000.
Ogden, P.; Minton, K.: Sensorimotor Psychotherapy: One
Method for Processing Traumatic Memory, in Traumatology, Vol. 6, Issue 3,
October 2000.
Ogden, P.; Minton, K.: Trauma and the Body: A Sensorimotor
Approach to Psychotherapy, New York: W. W. Norton, 2006.
Ogden, P.; Fisher, J.: Sensorimotor Psychotherapy:
Interventions for Trauma and Attachment, New York: W. W. Norton, 2015.
Parsons, T.: Social Systems and The Evolution of
Action Theory, New York: The Free Press, 1975.
Perry, B.: Incubated in Terror: Neurodevelopmental Factors
in the Cycle of Violence, in Osovsky, J. (ed.): Children, Youth and Violence:
The Search for Solutions, New York: Guilford Press, 1997.
Perry, B.: Childhood Experience and the Expression of
Genetic Potential: What Childhood Neglect Tells Us About Nature and Nurture, in
Brain and Mind, Vol. 3, 2002.
Perry, B.; Szalavitz, M.: The Boy Who was Raised as a Dog…,
New York: Basic Books, 2007.
Piaget, J.: The Origins of Intelligence in Children, New
York: International University Press, 1936, 1952.
Rapson, J.; English, C.: Anxious to Please: 7
Revolutionary Practices for the Chronically Nice, Naperville, IL: Sourcebooks,
Inc., 2006.
Riezler. K.: The Social Psychology of Fear, in Maurice
Stein et al (editors): Identity and Anxiety: Survival of the Person in Mass
Society, Glencoe, IL: The Free Press, 1960.
Rokeach, M.: The Open and Closed Mind: Investigations into
the Nature of Belief Systems and Personality Systems, New York: Basic Books,
1961, 1973.
Ross, R. A.: Cults Inside & Out: How People Get In and
Can Get Out, Seattle: CreateSpace Independent Publishing, 2014.
Ruggiero. V.: Beyond Feelings: A Guide to Critical
Thinking, 5th Ed., Mountain View, CA: Mayfield, 1998.
Russell, B.: The Impact of Science on Society, New York:
Columbia U. Press, 1951.
Sapolsky, R.: Why Zebras Don't Get Ulcers: The Acclaimed
Guide to Stress, Stress-Related Diseases and Coping, 3rd Ed., New York: Holt,
2004.
Schatzman, M.: Soul Murder: Persecution in the Family, New
York: Random House, 1973.
Schein, E.: Coercive Persuasion: A Socio-psychological
Analysis of the Brainwashing of American Civilian Prisoners by the Chinese
Communists, New York: W. W. Norton, 1961.
Schore, A.: Affect Dysregulation and Disorders of the
Self, New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 2003.
Searles, H.: The Effort to Drive the Other Person Crazy --
An Element in the Aetiology and Psychotherapy of Schizophrenia, in British
Journal of Medical Psychology, Vol. 32, No. 1, March 1959.
Simon, G.: In Sheep's Clothing: Understanding and Dealing
with Manipulative People, Revised Ed., Marion, MI: Parkhurst Brothers, 1996,
2010.
Singer, M.; Goldstein, H.; Langone, M.; et al: Report of
the APA Task Force on Deceptive and Indirect Techniques of Persuasion and
Control; New York: American Psychological Association, 1986.
Singer, M.: Cults in our Midst: The Hidden Menace in our
Everyday Lives; San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1995.
Singer, M. T.; Lalich, J.: Crazy Therapies: What are They? Do they Work?, Hoboken NJ: Jossey-Bass Div. of Wiley, 1996.
Skinner, B. F.: Beyond Freedom and Dignity, New York:
Alfred A. Knopf, 1971.
Skinner, B. F.: About Behaviorism, New York: Random House,
1974.
Stein, A.: Terror, Love and Brainwashing: Attachment in Cults and Totalitarian Systems, London: Routledge, 2016.
Stern, D.: The Interpersonal World of the Infant: The View
from Psychoanalysis and Developmental Psychology, New York: Basic Book, 1985.
Stern, D.: The First Relationship: Infant and Mother,
Cambridge, MA: Harvard U. Press, 2002.
Tangney, J. P.; Wagner, P.; et al: Relation of Shame and
Guilt to Constructive Versus Destructive Responses to Anger Across the
Lifespan, in Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 70, No. 4,
1996.
Tangney, J. P.; Dearing, R.: Shame and Guilt, New York:
Guilford Press, 2002.
Tart, C.: Waking Up: Overcoming the Obstacles to Human
Potential, New York: New Science Library, 1987.
Taylor, K.: Brainwashing: The Science of Thought Control,
London: Oxford University Press, 2004.
Tobias, M.; Lalich, J.: Captive Hearts, Captive Minds: Freedom and Recovery from Cults and Other Abusive Relationships, Alameda CA: Hunter House Publishing, 1994.
Toch, H.: Social Psychology of Social Movements,
Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1965.
Trotter, W.: Instincts of the Herd in Peace and War, orig.
pub. 1916, New York: Cosimo Classics, 2005.
Trungpa, C.: Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism,
Boston: Shambala: 1973, 2002.
Van der Hart, O.; Brown, P.; and Van der Kolk, B.: Pierre
Janet’s Treatment of Traumatic Stress, in Journal of Traumatic Stress, Vol. 2,
No. 4, 1989.
Van der Hart, O.; Friedman, B.: A Reader's Guide To Pierre
Janet: A Neglected Intellectual Heritage, in Dissociation, Vol. 2, No. 1, 1989.
Van der Hart, O.; Horst, R.: The Dissociation Theory of Pierre
Janet, in Journal of Traumatic Stress, Vol. 2, No. 4, 1989.
Van der Kolk, B.: The Compulsion to Repeat the Trauma:
Re-enactment, Re-victimization, and Masochism, in Psychiatric Clinics of North
America, Vol. 12, No. 2, 1989.
Van der Kolk, B: Traumatic Stress: The Effects of
Overwhelming Experience on Mind, Body and Society, New York: Guilford Press,
1996 / 2007.
Van der Kolk, B: The Body Keeps the Score: Brain, Mind,
and Body in the Healing of Trauma, New York: Viking Press, 2014.
Walker, P.: Complex PTSD: From Surviving to Thriving,
Lafayette, CA: Azure Coyote, 2013.
Watson, J.: Behaviorism, Revised Edition, Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1930.
Watts, A.: Psychotherapy East and West, New York: Random
House / Pantheon, 1961.
Weber, M.; Parsons, T. (translator): The Protestant Ethic
and the Spirit of Capitalism, Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1930.
Wiltermuth, S.; Flynn, F.: Power, Moral Clarity, and
Punishment in the Workplace, in Academy of Management Journal, 2012; DOI: 10.5465/amj.2010.0960
Wright, L.: The Apostate: Paul Haggis vs. The Church of
Scientology, in The New Yorker, February 14, 2011.
Wright, L.: Going Clear: Scientology, Hollywood, & the
Prison of Belief, Alfred A. Knopf, 2013.
Zimbardo, P.: The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good
People Turn Evil, New York: Random House, 2007.
