A long tradition in social science explains recruitment to religious cults and sects on the basis of a congruence between the ideology of a group and the deprivations of those who join. A more recent approach to recruitment argues that interpersonal bonds between members and potential recruits are the essential element. In this paper we first show that these are complementary, not competing, approaches. Then, because the available evidential base for the role of interpersonal bonds is limited and qualitative, we present quantitative data pertaining to three quite different radical religious groups. In each case there is overwhelming support for the crucial role played by social networks in the formation and growth of such groups. Next we seek the boundaries of this phenomenon.Available studies suggest that not merely cult and sect recruitment, but commitment to conventional faiths as well, is supported by social networks.However, networks do not seem to play an important role in acceptance of mildly deviant occult beliefs. Belief in seances and tarot cards, for example, seems to spread via the mass media with little mediation by social networks. We discuss the implications of these findings for a theory of cult and sect recruitment.
Current issues are now on the Chicago Journals website. Read the latest issue.Established in 1895 as the first US scholarly journal in its field, the American Journal of Sociology (AJS) presents pathbreaking work from all areas of sociology, with an emphasis on theory building and innovative methods. AJS strives to speak to the general sociology reader and is open to contributions from across the social sciences—political science, economics, history, anthropology, and statistics in addition to sociology—that seriously engage the sociological literature to forge new ways of understanding the social. AJS offers a substantial book review section that identifies the most salient work of both emerging and enduring scholars of social science. Commissioned review essays appear occasionally, offering the readers a comparative, in-depth examination of prominent titles.
Since its origins in 1890 as one of the three main divisions of the University of Chicago, The University of Chicago Press has embraced as its mission the obligation to disseminate scholarship of the highest standard and to publish serious works that promote education, foster public understanding, and enrich cultural life. Today, the Journals Division publishes more than 70 journals and hardcover serials, in a wide range of academic disciplines, including the social sciences, the humanities, education, the biological and medical sciences, and the physical sciences.
This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our Terms and Conditions
American Journal of Sociology
© 1980 The University of Chicago Press
Request Permissions
