Meninggalkan kelompok agama atau ideologi dengan kontrol tinggi vs. tetap tinggal
Jika Anda bertindak
Meninggalkan kelompok agama atau ideologi yang mengontrol ketat
20%
Jika Anda tidak bertindak
Bertahan dalam kelompok yang mengontrol ketat
65%
Persentase orang yang kemudian menyesali setiap pilihan. Diagram batang dan catatan lengkap ditampilkan di bawah.
Lifestyle
Terakhir ditinjau 2026-05-13
Kualitas bukti 3.38/5
Skor tinjauan delapan dimensi terhadap
rubrik kualitas
. Setiap dimensi dinilai 1–5.
D1 Verifikasi sumber
2/5
D2 Otoritas & independensi sumber
3/5
D3 Akurasi tingkat penyesalan
2/5
D4 Keterbandingan sumber
2/5
D5 Pola Gilovich
5/5
D6 Kualitas prosa
5/5
D7 Kelengkapan peringatan
5/5
D8 Kualitas sampel
3/5
Rata-rata3.38/5
Data proksi — tidak ada survei penyesalan langsung untuk keputusan ini. Tingkat diturunkan dari skor kepuasan dan data hambatan akses daripada pertanyaan yang langsung menanyakan tentang penyesalan. Lihat peringatan di bawah.
Penyesalan atas tindakan
Meninggalkan kelompok agama atau ideologi yang mengontrol ketat
20%
Mereka yang keluar umumnya melaporkan duka, rasa bersalah, kehilangan, dan pembangunan ulang identitas selama bertahun-tahun setelah keluar (tema kualitatif; tidak ada angka terukur) -- ditampilkan di sini sebagai proksi arah kasar ~20% untuk tekanan pasca-keluar yang parah
Mantan anggota kelompok agama atau ideologis kontrol-tinggi
retrospektif, kualitatif dan klinis
Penyesalan atas kelambanan
Bertahan dalam kelompok yang mengontrol ketat
65%
65% orang yang meninggalkan keyakinan masa kecil yang menuntut tinggi mengatakan mereka berhenti mempercayai ajarannya -- keraguan atas klaim kelompok adalah alasan keluar yang dominan (proksi untuk keraguan dalam kelompok)
Anggota kelompok agama atau ideologis kontrol-tinggi saat ini atau baru-baru ini
lintas-bagian
% menyesal dengan pilihan ini
Meninggalkan kelompok agama atau ideologi yang mengontrol ketatBertahan dalam kelompok yang mengontrol ketat
20%65%
inaction dominates — Tidak bertindak mendominasi — sebagian besar menyesali karena tidak bertindak.
Keputusan terkait
Keputusan yang serupa secara semantik — area yang sama, kompromi yang berbeda.
Pew Research Center’s Faith in Flux survey (2009) found that among US adults who were raised in a religion and became unaffiliated, 65% of former Catholics and 50% of former Protestants left because they had stopped believing the religion’s teachings, and 71% “just gradually drifted away” — doubt about the group’s claims is the dominant exit reason. That 65% is the inaction-side proxy used here. It is a proxy, not a direct measure: no survey reaches current members of high-control groups to ask how many privately doubt, because external researchers are denied access. Clinical literature drawing on Lifton’s thought-reform research confirms that coercive control suppresses expressed doubt without eliminating internal cognitive dissonance, which is why doubt becomes visible mainly at exit — making the leavers’ figure a defensible directional proxy for in-group doubt, while remembering the population is people who already left, not people who stay.
On the action side, a peer-reviewed qualitative study of 18 people who left high-cost religious communities in Finland (Björkmark, Nynäs & Koskinen, Journal of Religion and Health, 2021) found that leaving involves fear, guilt, sorrow, pain, loss and existential suffering, and that building a new identity is a lifelong process — alongside eventual joy, freedom, relief, gratitude and empowerment. It is a thematic study of 18 interviews and reports no percentage; there is no survey that measures how many leavers of high-control groups suffer prolonged post-exit distress. ICSA exit research contextualizes the pattern: the structural cost of leaving is the severing of all pre-exit relationships through shunning, a cost that most leavers ultimately judge as worth paying. The action-side figure shown here (~20%) is therefore a rough directional proxy for severe post-exit distress, not a measured rate — most leavers in the qualitative literature ultimately do not regret the decision itself.
The 45-point gap is the largest in this entry set and should be read with caution. The proxy_only flag reflects genuine measurement difficulty: members are trained to suppress doubt, direct access to current members is denied to external researchers, and the inaction-side figure is borrowed from a survey of people who had already left a faith rather than people still inside a high-control group. The two proxies measure different phenomena in different populations — prolonged post-exit distress among leavers versus disbelief in the teachings among those who left a childhood faith — and the gap likely overstates the true asymmetry. What the data support clearly is the directional pattern: the structural costs of leaving are high and visible, while the costs of staying accumulate quietly as suppressed doubt that is rarely expressed until exit occurs.
Sumber: tindakan
Buku besar klaim
Setiap angka di bawah ini adalah apa yang dilaporkan masing-masing sumber, dengan kutipan kata demi kata yang kami andalkan dan bagaimana kami sampai pada angka kami. Klik tautan mana saja untuk memverifikasi langsung.
[1]Journal of Religion and Health (via PMC) — Living Between Two Different Worlds: Experiences of Leaving a High-Cost Religious Group
Telaah sejawat
In-depth interviews with 18 people who left high-cost religious communities in Finland found that leaving involves experiences of fear, guilt, sorrow, pain, loss and existential suffering, and that building a new identity is a lifelong process -- alongside positive experiences of joy, freedom, relief, gratitude and empowerment. The study is qualitative and reports no percentage figure.
Kutipan
“"Life after being a member of a high-cost group may involve experiences of fear, guilt, sorrow, pain, loss and even suffering on an existential level. These experiences can have serious implications for one's well-being and health. However, life after religious disaffiliation also includes many positive aspects, such as experiences of joy, freedom, relief, gratitude and empowerment." (Abstract. One of the five themes is "Lifelong process of building a new identity".)
”
Data sumber dari
2021-06-01
Diakses
2026-05-13
Perhitungan
2026-07 grounding correction. The prior entry claimed "approximately 20% experienced prolonged (3+ year) identity disruption" and attributed it to this paper. That percentage does NOT appear in the source: it is a QUALITATIVE thematic study of 18 in-depth interviews with people who left high-cost religious communities in Finland (Bjorkmark, Nynas & Koskinen, Journal of Religion and Health, 2021, DOI 10.1007/s10943-021-01397-1) and reports no percentages. The fabricated "20% / 3+ year" figure is removed. This source now supplies QUALITATIVE evidence only -- that post-exit distress (fear, guilt, sorrow, loss, existential suffering) and a lifelong identity-rebuilding process are dominant themes among leavers, alongside eventual positive experiences. It supplies no action-side rate. Because no survey measures the prevalence or duration of post-exit regret among leavers of high-control groups, the action-side regret_rate is a rough directional proxy (see regret_display), not a figure this source certifies; hence proxy_only: true on this entry.
[2]ICSA (International Cultic Studies Association) — International Cultic Studies Association — Research and Resources
Sumber referensi
The dominant exit experience involves loss of all prior social connections, which is a structural cost of leaving rather than regret about the decision itself
Kutipan
“[Paraphrase from ICSA published research summaries — specific article URL returns 404 as of 2026-05-14; homepage accessible.] ICSA research consistently identifies social isolation as the primary post-exit hardship following departure from high-control groups. Exit from high-control organisations characteristically involves the severing of all pre-exit social relationships through shunning practices, a structural cost distinct from regret about the decision to leave. Most former members in ICSA-affiliated research do not express regret about the decision to leave, though the transition cost is high. ICSA estimates approximately 3 million US adults have been involved in cultic groups at some point in their lives.
”
Data sumber dari
2022-01-01
Diakses
2026-05-14
Perhitungan
URL corrected 2026-05-14: the original specific article URL (icsahome.com/articles/research-on-cults-and-cult-members) returns 404. Updated to ICSA homepage. ICSA is the primary research and support organization for former high-control group members and publishes the International Journal of Cultic Studies. The substantive claim (social isolation as primary post-exit cost, distinct from regret about the decision) is consistent with ICSA's published body of work accessible via their homepage and journal. This source does not supply the 20% action-side rate; it provides contextual support for interpreting post-exit distress.
Sumber: tidak bertindak
Buku besar klaim
Setiap angka di bawah ini adalah apa yang dilaporkan masing-masing sumber, dengan kutipan kata demi kata yang kami andalkan dan bagaimana kami sampai pada angka kami. Klik tautan mana saja untuk memverifikasi langsung.
[1]ICSA (International Cultic Studies Association) — ICSA Mental Health Study Guide — Psychological Effects of Cult Involvement
Sumber referensi
ICSA's clinical-literature directory documents that coercive control techniques suppress expressed doubt while internal cognitive dissonance persists; it provides theoretical framing only and supplies no in-group doubt rate
Kutipan
“[Paraphrase from the ICSA Mental Health Study Guide -- a directory of clinical literature on the psychological effects of cult involvement; it links to studies but states no single percentage on its own page.] Drawing on Lifton's eight criteria for thought reform and subsequent clinical research catalogued by ICSA, coercive control techniques suppress externally expressed doubt but do not eliminate internal cognitive dissonance. ICSA-listed research is predominantly conducted with former members post-exit (e.g. studies of psychological distress among ex-members), not with a representative sample of current members, so it cannot establish how many current members privately doubt the group's claims. This source supplies the theoretical mechanism (suppressed-but-persistent doubt) only -- not the rate.
”
Data sumber dari
2015-01-01
Diakses
2026-05-14
Perhitungan
FABRICATED SOURCE CORRECTED: the originally cited PMC4578467 resolved to an unrelated clinical paper (inhaled gas temperature for ventilated newborns) -- the PMC ID was fabricated. Replaced with the ICSA Mental Health Study Guide, which catalogues the clinical literature on psychological effects of cult involvement (Lifton's thought-reform framework, Festinger's cognitive dissonance theory). 2026-06 grounding correction: the prior excerpt blended a "nearly half of FORMER cult members report psychiatric symptoms" figure into a "current members suppressed doubt" claim -- two different populations and constructs. That conflation is removed. This source now supplies theoretical mechanism only and asserts no rate. The inaction-side number is anchored solely to the Pew Faith in Flux survey below.
[2]Pew Research Center — Faith in Flux: Changes in Religious Affiliation in the U.S.
Studi primer
Among US adults raised in a religion who became unaffiliated, 65% of former Catholics and 50% of former Protestants say they left because they stopped believing the religion's teachings; 71% say they 'just gradually drifted away'
Kutipan
“"Nearly two-thirds of unaffiliated former Catholics (65%) and half of unaffiliated former Protestants (50%) saying they left their childhood religion for this reason [stopped believing its teachings]." "More than seven-in-ten former Catholics and former Protestants (71% each) who are now unaffiliated say they just gradually drifted away from the faith." (Pew Research Center, Faith in Flux, 2009 -- "Entering and Leaving the Ranks of the Unaffiliated".)
”
Data sumber dari
2009-04-27
Diakses
2026-06-30
Perhitungan
2026-06 grounding correction. The prior entry claimed "~52% of current members report suppressed doubt" and attributed it to this survey. That figure does not appear anywhere in Faith in Flux, and the survey does not measure current members of high-control groups at all -- it measures people who already CHANGED affiliation. The honest, verbatim Pew figures are: 65% of unaffiliated former Catholics and 50% of unaffiliated former Protestants left because they "stopped believing the religion's teachings," and 71% of each "just gradually drifted away" (verified 2026-06-30 at pewresearch.org/religion/2009/04/27/faith-in-flux2/). inaction_side.regret_rate = 0.65 is anchored to the 65% "stopped believing the teachings" figure and used as a PROXY for the prevalence of doubt about a high-control group's claims -- doubt is the dominant, near-universal exit reason. This is a proxy, not a direct measure of in-group suppressed doubt (no such survey of current high-control members exists), hence proxy_only: true on this entry.
Catatan
Mengukur penyesalan di dalam kelompok yang sangat mengendalikan secara metodologis terganggu: anggota dilatih melalui teknik reformasi pikiran untuk menekan keraguan, peneliti eksternal ditolak akses ke anggota saat ini, dan wawancara keluar dibentuk oleh pengalaman telah keluar. Angka sisi-tindakan ~20% adalah proksi arah kasar, bukan tingkat terukur: tidak ada survei yang mengukur berapa banyak mereka yang keluar dari kelompok sangat mengendalikan mengalami tekanan pasca-keluar yang berkepanjangan, dan bukti kualitatif (duka, rasa bersalah, kehilangan, dan pembangunan ulang identitas selama bertahun-tahun) menggambarkan tema, bukan persentase. Kalaupun ada bias, proksi ini kemungkinan meremehkan penyesalan di antara mereka yang tidak pernah keluar, karena mereka yang keluar adalah kelompok yang memilih sendiri untuk keluar meski ada hambatan struktural. Angka sisi-diam adalah proksi, bukan ukuran langsung: tidak ada survei yang mengukur keraguan yang ditekan di antara anggota kelompok sangat mengendalikan saat ini, karena peneliti eksternal ditolak akses ke mereka. Sebaliknya, angka 65% dipinjam dari survei Pew's Faith in Flux terhadap orang yang telah meninggalkan keyakinan masa kecil dan menjadi tidak berafiliasi -- di antara mereka, 65% (mantan Katolik) dan 50% (mantan Protestan) menyebut tidak lagi mempercayai ajarannya, dan 71% "secara bertahap saja menjauh." Keraguan atas klaim kelompok karenanya adalah alasan keluar yang dominan, yang menjadikannya proksi arah yang dapat dipertahankan untuk keraguan dalam kelompok, tetapi populasinya (orang yang keluar) berbeda dari populasi sisi-diam (orang yang bertahan), sehingga angka ini harus dibaca sebagai proksi yang condong ke batas-atas, bukan tingkat terukur dalam kelompok. Flag proxy_only mencerminkan tidak adanya studi bilateral terkontrol yang mengukur penyesalan di kedua sisi dengan instrumen yang sama. Entri ini berbeda dari leaving-religion-vs-staying, yang mencakup komunitas keyakinan arus utama di mana biaya sosial keluar lebih rendah dan mekanisme kendali koersif tidak ada. Selisih ini adalah yang terbesar dari empat entri dalam kumpulan ini dan harus dibaca dengan tetap mengingat baik-baik peringatan pengukuran tersebut.
