Knowledge from cult research a missed opportunity for understanding terrorism recruitment

Using the PRISMA methodology, the author shows how cults and terrorist organizations use strikingly similar processes, with important implications for terrorism research and prevention.

This is a summary version of an academic article written by Darin J. Challacombe, first published in IJCAM Vol. 3 2022. Read the full academic article on the ICSA Online Library, and the summary below.

At a glance

This systematic review examines the overlapping recruitment and radicalization processes used by religious cults and terror organizations. The author argues that because these groups share similar characteristics—such as controlling leadership and the use of isolation—the archival knowledge from cult research is a vital, yet underused, tool for understanding terrorism. By analyzing various models of social conditioning, the article illustrates how individuals are moved from initial contact to total immersion in extremist ideologies.

Who this article is for: This article will be of interest to counter-terrorism professional, cultic studies scholars, psychologists, sociologists, intelligence and security professionals, and policymakers seeking deeper insight into recruitment, radicalization, and prevention across high-control and extremist groups. It also provides valuable insights for psychologists and social workers supporting individuals vulnerable to recruitment.

You can read the full academic article written by Darin J. Challacombe and published in IJCAM Vol. 3 2022, on the IJCAM website.

Key points

The blurred line between cults and terror

The distinction between religious cults and terror organizations is often more a matter of perception than behavior. Groups like the Rajneeshees and the People’s Temple began as religious collectives but committed major acts of domestic terrorism, while organizations like Aum Shinrikyo transitioned from cults to terror groups following violent attacks. Previous research suggests these groups are more similar than they are different, sharing controlling leaders, grievance narratives, and membership-vetting processes.

Recruitment as a shared structural process
The review demonstrates that recruitment in cults and terrorist organizations follows comparable structural patterns rather than isolated or idiosyncratic paths. Across both literatures, recruitment is shown to involve staged engagement, escalation of commitment, and gradual detachment from prior identities and relationships. Models from cult research—such as Zimbardo and Hartley’s Contract–Indoctrination–Conversion framework—closely mirror terrorism radicalization models. This structural similarity suggests recruitment should be understood as a process rather than a single moment of choice.

“Just as cults and terror organizations are similar in many other aspects, they also tend to follow similar recruitment patterns. Understanding cult recruitment can be useful to terror researchers.”

Tactics of psychological manipulation

Cults and terror groups utilize specialized techniques to gain compliance from potential recruits, often starting with “love-bombing”—showering targets with intense affection and attention. Deception is frequently employed to hide the group’s true nature until the individual is sufficiently engaged. These strategies are designed to reduce interference from critics and rapidly influence the “contact-prone” individual toward the group’s goals.

“Cults often employ overt deception to prevent potential recruits from knowing the true nature of the organization.”

The role of isolation in consolidation and control
Isolation emerges as a core mechanism across both cult and terror recruitment processes. Recruits are encouraged or compelled to disengage from family, friends, and alternative sources of meaning, either physically or psychologically. This isolation facilitates dependence on the group and accelerates internalization of its belief system. The review shows that isolation is not incidental but deliberately cultivated, creating a controlled environment where grievance narratives and obedience can take root.

“Isolation occurs when new recruits are strongly encouraged or forced to ignore their established support structure or former lifestyle.”

Grievance narratives and identity provision
Both cults and terrorist organizations recruit by exploiting personal grievances and offering a compelling alternative identity. The literature consistently identifies narratives of injustice, humiliation, or victimization as recruitment catalysts. These narratives are paired with promises of belonging, purpose, and moral clarity. Recruitment succeeds not simply by persuasion, but by reframing the recruit’s self-concept in relation to the group’s ideology and goals.

“Recruitment is the movement of an individual to become part of a group, whereas radicalization is considered the process in which an individual exhibits more interest in an idea, theory, or belief that the group stands for.”

Voluntariness, manipulation, and false dichotomies
The article challenges simplistic distinctions between voluntary recruitment and coercive manipulation. Research reviewed shows that recruits may initially seek out groups, yet still be subjected to systematic influence techniques that constrain autonomy over time. The author argues that self-selection and manipulation are not mutually exclusive, and that recruitment processes often involve both. This reframing undermines claims that terrorist recruitment is fundamentally different from cult recruitment on the basis of choice alone.

“Because the recruitment process for terror organizations is often similar to that process for cults, terrorism researchers can benefit by gaining a better understanding of cult-recruitment processes.”

Social conditioning and the “demonization” of others

The social-psychological conditioning used by both groups often follows a specific five-phase model: depluralization, self-individuation, other-deindividuation, dehumanization, and finally, demonization. This progression allows individuals to justify violence or extreme actions because they eventually come to believe that those outside the group are “bad” or should be targeted. These pathways are similar enough that the recruitment and conversion processes of cults and terror groups are frequently interchangeable.

“Eventually, the individuals get to a point of demonization—either believing others outside the cult are bad or believing others outside the terror organization should be targeted.”

Implications for terrorism research and prevention
A central contribution of the article is its argument that terrorism studies have underutilized decades of cult research. By ignoring this body of work, terrorism research has missed established insights into recruitment, influence, and disengagement. The author suggests that integrating cultic studies into terrorism research could improve conceptual clarity, prevention strategies, and early-intervention efforts. Understanding recruitment as a shared process opens new analytical and practical pathways.

“Because contemporary researchers have focused more on terror groups than on cults, the archival knowledge from cult survivors and years of cult research has not been adequately illuminated as a guide for terror studies.”

Conclusion summary

The article concludes that religious cults and terrorist organizations are more alike than different in their recruitment processes. Shared mechanisms—particularly isolation, grievance framing, and staged commitment—undermine rigid categorical distinctions between the two. Because many terrorist organizations have religious foundations, the overlap is both conceptual and practical. The author argues that terrorism researchers can substantially benefit from incorporating cult recruitment research into their frameworks and methodologies.

Why this is important

This article highlights a significant missed opportunity in security studies: the failure to fully integrate decades of cult research into contemporary terror studies. While terrorism is a major focus of modern policy, the author notes that the psychological “blueprints” for how these groups operate have already been documented by cult survivors. This area is often under-researched because the two fields—cultic studies and counter-terrorism—frequently operate in silos despite dealing with nearly identical human behaviors.

---

ICSA International Conference 2026​

Topics like this will be examined as part of the theme for the 2026 ICSA International Conference​: Expanding the scope of coercive control: Understanding abusive dynamics and their impacts across interpersonal, institutional, and cultic contexts.

In an era marked by increasing polarization, disinformation, and organized manipulation, understanding and protecting against coercion is more relevant than ever. While the mechanisms of abuse and resulting harm differ in form and social context, there are striking parallels across abusive intimate relationships, gangs, sexual exploitation and trafficking networks, ideological radicalization, and, of course, cultic environments. Despite their prevalence, research and evidence-based knowledge of these phenomena remain relatively underdeveloped.

Join us at this year’s conference. Tickets on sale soon.

Darin J. Challacombe, Ph.D., is a social psychologist, researcher, and education professional. He is an adjunct professor with Fort Hays State University and Director of Learning and Employee Development at Verisma, where he oversees organizational education initiatives. He holds a Ph.D. in Social Psychology and has worked in educational settings since 2002. His research interests include personality, nonverbal communication, embodied cognition, and terrorism-related topics. He is Associate Editor for Behavioral Sciences of Terrorism and Political Aggression.