Beginning in the 1930s, new religious movements perceived as cults became an object of sociological study within the context of the study of religious behavior.^[1] The term "cult" in this context saw its origins in the work of sociologist Max Weber (1864–1920). Weber was an important theorist in the academic study of cults, which often draws on his theorizations of charismatic authority, and of the distinction he drew between churches and sects.^[2][3][4][5] This concept of a church–sect division was further elaborated upon by German theologian Ernst Troeltsch,^[6] who added a "mystical" categorization to accommodate more personal or individual religious experiences.^[7]

American sociologist Howard P. Becker further bisected Troeltsch's first two categories, splitting church into ecclesia and denomination; and sect into sect and cult.^[8][3] Like Troeltsch's "mystical religion", Becker's cult refers to small religious groups that lack organization and that emphasize the private nature of personal beliefs.^[9]

Later sociological formulations built on such characteristics, placing an additional emphasis on cults as deviant religious groups, "deriving their inspiration from outside of the predominant religious culture."^[10] This is often thought to lead to a high degree of tension between the group and the more mainstream culture surrounding it, a characteristic shared with religious sects.^[11] According to this sociological terminology, sects are products of religious schism and therefore maintain a continuity with traditional beliefs and practices, whereas cults arise spontaneously around novel beliefs and practices.^[12]

Scholars William Sims Bainbridge and Rodney Stark have argued for a further distinction between three kinds of cults: cult movements, client cults, and audience cults, all of which share a "compensator" or rewards for the things invested into the group. In the Bainbridge–Stark typology, a "cult movement" is an actual complete organization, differing from a "sect" in that it is not a splinter of a bigger religion, while "audience cults" are loosely organized, and propagated through media, and "client cults" offer services (i.e. psychic readings or meditation sessions). One type can turn into another, for example the Church of Scientology changing from audience to client cult.^[13] Sociologists who follow the Bainbridge–Stark classification tend to continue using the word "cult", unlike most other academics; however Bainbridge later stated he regretted having used the word at all.^[13] Stark and Bainbridge, in discussing the process by which individuals join new religious groups, have even questioned the utility of the concept of conversion, suggesting affiliation as a more useful concept.^[14]

In the early 1960s, sociologist John Lofland studied the activities of Unification Church members in California in trying to promote their beliefs and win new members. Lofland noted that most of their efforts were ineffective and that most of the people who joined did so because of personal relationships with other members (often family relationships).^[15][16] Lofland published his findings in 1964 as a doctoral thesis entitled "The World Savers: A Field Study of Cult Processes", and in 1966 in book form by as Doomsday Cult: A Study of Conversion, Proselytization, and Maintenance of Faith. This work is considered to be one of the most important and widely cited studies of the process of iijreligious conversion.^[17][18]

J. Gordon Melton stated that, in 1970, "one could count the number of active researchers on new religions on one's hands". However, James R. Lewis in 2004 wrote that the "meteoric growth" in this field of study can be attributed to the cult controversy of the early 1970s. Because of "a wave of nontraditional religiosity" in the late 1960s and early 1970s, academics perceived new religious movements as different phenomena from previous religious innovations.^[19]

Some Stanford University research published in 1994 has documented and discussed "cultism" and "cult-like" characteristics^[20] in "visionary companies".^[21]

The scholars who deal with new religious groups do not usually call them cults, but use another term: New Religious Movement. This expression is more accurate than the term "cult" because it is used in a scientific context, while the latter bears numerous associations in daily speech. Speaking about common perception of a certain word, one should mention that the term "cult" is often used in a pejorative sense due to the notions associated with its meaning. In particular, the notions of manipulations, danger, violence, and irrational behavior are associated with this word. As for these associations, they are based on personal perceptions and are not backed up with objective facts. Thus, the term in question may be called biased and misleading, which makes it inappropriate for scholarly use.^[22]

Speaking about the term "New Religious Movement", one should say that it is much broader and more neutral than its alternative. Its use allows one to research religious movements from a neutral standpoint and without making assumptions of their being dangerous, criminal, and socially controversial. Scholars studying this field may analyze how these movements emerge, attract followers, build faith systems, and relate to the rest of the society. In other words, the scholars do not need to accept positive or negative judgments associated with these movements. What they actually need is to examine them carefully using scientific methods.^[23]

Lorne L. Dawson raises an issue related to terminology usage in his book "Comprehending Cults: The Sociology of New Religious Movements". According to him, terms like "cult" tend to reflect public controversies and mass media perception of new religious movements. The term "New Religious Movement" is neutral and precise. It reflects the reality and gives an opportunity to compare various movements regardless of their similarity and public controversies associated with them.^[24]

• Ashcraft, W. Michael (2006). "African Diaspora Traditions and Other American Innovations". In Gallagher, Eugene V. (ed.). Introduction to New and Alternative Religions in America. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98717-6.
• Barker, Eileen (1999). "New Religious Movements: Their Incidence and Significance". In Wilson, Bryan; Cresswell, Jamie (eds.). New Religious Movements: Challenge and Response. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-20050-9.
• Bromley, David G.; Melton, J. Gordon, eds. (2002). Cults, Religion, and Violence. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-66064-8.
• Chryssides, George D. (1999). Exploring New Religions. Issues in Contemporary Religion. London; New York: Cassell. ISBN 978-0-304-33652-4.
• Chryssides, George D.; Zeller, Benjamin E., eds. (2014). "Resources: A–Z". The Bloomsbury Companion to New Religious Movements. Bloomsbury Companions. London: Bloomsbury. ISBN 978-1-4411-9005-5.
• Cowan, Douglas E. (2003). Bearing False Witness? An Introduction to the Christian Countercult. Westport, CT: Praeger. ISBN 978-0-275-97459-6.
• Dawson, Lorne L. (1998). Cults in Context: Readings in the Study of New Religious Movements. Transaction Publishers. ISBN 978-0-7658-0478-5.
• Fahlbusch, Erwin; Bromiley, Geoffrey W., eds. (1999). "Sect". The Encyclopedia of Christianity. Vol. 4. p. 897. ISBN 978-90-04-14595-5. Retrieved 21 March 2013 – via Google Books.
• Jenkins, Phillip (2000). Mystics and Messiahs: Cults and New Religions in American History. Oxford University Press, US. ISBN 978-0-19-514596-0.
• Kaslow, Florence Whiteman; Sussman, Marvin B. (1982). Cults and the Family. Haworth Press. ISBN 978-0-917724-55-8.
• Lewis, James R. (2004). The Oxford Handbook of New Religious Movements. US: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-514986-9.
• Marshall, Paul (2013). Persecuted: The Global Assault on Christians. Thomas Nelson Inc.
• Newman, Dr. David M. (2006). Sociology: Exploring the Architecture of Everyday Life. Pine Forge Press. ISBN 978-1-4129-2814-4.
• Pargament, Kenneth I. (1997). The Psychology of Religion and Coping: Theory, Research, Practice. Guilford Press. ISBN 978-1-57230-664-6.
• Penny, Benjamin (2012). The Religion of Falun Gong. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-65501-7.
• Petty, Richard E.; Cacioppo, John T. (1996). Attitudes and Persuasion: Classic and Contemporary Approaches. Westview Press. ISBN 0-8133-3005-X.
• Saliba, John A. (2003). Understanding New Religious Movements (2nd ed.). Walnut Creek: Altamira Press. ISBN 978-0-7591-0356-6.
• Stark, Rodney; Bainbridge, William Sims (1987). The Future of Religion: Secularization, Revival and Cult Formation. Berkeley: University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-05731-9.
• Stark, Rodney; Bainbridge, William Sims (1996). A Theory of Religion. Peter Lang Publishing. ISBN 978-0-8135-2330-9.
• Swatos, William H. Jr., ed. (1998). Encyclopedia of Religion and Society. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira. pp. 90–93. ISBN 978-0-7619-8956-1.
  • Barker, Eileen. "Conversion". In Swatos (1998).
  • Campbell, Colin. "Cult". In Swatos (1998).
  • Richardson, James T. "Unification Church". In Swatos (1998).
  • Shupe, Anson; Bromley, David G. "Anti-Cult Movement". In Swatos (1998).
  • Swatos, William H. Jr. (1998a). "Church-Sect Theory". In Swatos (1998).
• Richardson, James T., ed. (2004). Regulating Religion: Case Studies from Around the Globe. Critical Issues in Social Justice. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. ISBN 978-0-306-47887-1.
• Shupe, Anson; Darnell, Susan (2006). Agents of Discord: Deprogramming, Pseudo-science, and the American Anti-cult Movement. Transaction Publishers. ISBN 978-0-7658-0323-8.
• Soldatov, Andreĭ; Borogan, I. (2010). The New Nobility: The Restoration of Russia's Security State and the Enduring Legacy of the KGB. New York: PublicAffairs. ISBN 978-1-61039-055-2.
• Stangor, Charles (2004). Social Groups in Action and Interaction. Psychology Press. ISBN 978-1-84169-407-8.
• Stein, Alexandra (2016). Terror, Love and Brainwashing: Attachment in Cults and Totalitarian Systems. Taylor and Francis. ISBN 9781138677951.
• Thomas, Aled; Graham-Hyde, Edward, eds. (2024). 'Cult' Rhetoric in the 21st Century: Deconstructing the Study of New Religious Movements. Religion at the Boundaries. London: Bloomsbury Academic. ISBN 978-1-350-33323-9.
  • Chryssides, George D. "A History of Anticult Rhetoric". In Thomas & Graham-Hyde (2024).
  • Crockford, Susannah. "'There Is No QAnon': Cult Accusations in Contemporary American Political and Online Discourse". In Thomas & Graham-Hyde (2024).
  • Dubrow-Marshall, Roderick P. "The Recognition of Cults". In Thomas & Graham-Hyde (2024).
  • Thomas, Aled; Graham-Hyde, Edward (2024a). "'Cult' Rhetoric in the Twenty-First Century: The Disconnect between Popular Discourse and the Ivory Tower". In Thomas & Graham-Hyde (2024).
• Tourish, Dennis; Wohlforth, Tim (2000). On the Edge: Political Cults Right and Left. Armonk: M. E. Sharpe. ISBN 978-0-7656-0639-6.
• Turner, Francis J.; Bloch, Arnold Shanon; Shor, Ron (1995). "105: From Consultation to Therapy in Group Work With Parents of Cultists". Differential Diagnosis & Treatment in Social Work (4th ed.). Free Press. p. 1146. ISBN 978-0-02-874007-2.
• Zablocki, Benjamin; Robbins, Thomas, eds. (2001). Misunderstanding Cults: Searching for Objectivity in a Controversial Field. University of Toronto Press. ISBN 978-0-8020-8188-9.
  • Rubin, Julius H. "Contested Narratives: A Case Study of the Conflict Between a New Religious Movement and Its Critics". In Zablocki & Robbins (2001).

• Ayella, Marybeth (1990). "They Must Be Crazy: Some of the Difficulties in Researching 'Cults'". American Behavioral Scientist. 33 (5): 562–577. doi:10.1177/0002764290033005005. S2CID 144181163.
• Bader, Chris; Demaris, Alfred (1996). "A Test of the Stark-Bainbridge Theory of Affiliation with Religious Cults and Sects". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. 35 (3): 285–303. doi:10.2307/1386560. ISSN 0021-8294. JSTOR 1386560.
• Barker, Eileen (1986). "Religious Movements: Cult and Anti-Cult Since Jonestown". Annual Review of Sociology. 12: 329–346. doi:10.1146/annurev.so.12.080186.001553.
• Davis, Dena S. (1996). "Joining a Cult: Religious Choice or Psychological Aberration". Journal of Law and Health. 11 (1): 145–172.
• van Driel, Barend; Richardson, James T. (1988). "Categorization of New Religious Movements in American Print Media". Sociological Analysis. 49 (2): 171–183. doi:10.2307/3711011. ISSN 0038-0210. JSTOR 3711011.
• Edelman, Bryan; Richardson, James T. (2003). "Falun Gong and the Law: Development of Legal Social Control in China". Nova Religio. 6 (2): 312–331. doi:10.1525/nr.2003.6.2.312.
• Heggie, Rachel (2020). "When Violence Happens: The McDonald's Murder and Religious Violence in the Hands of the Chinese Communist Party". Journal of Religion and Violence. 8 (3): 253–280. doi:10.5840/jrv202131682. ISSN 2159-6808. JSTOR 27212326.
• Hill, Harvey; Hickman, John; McLendon, Joel (2001). "Cults and Sects and Doomsday Groups, Oh My: Media Treatment of Religion on the Eve of the Millennium". Review of Religious Research. 43 (1): 24–38. doi:10.2307/3512241. ISSN 0034-673X. JSTOR 3512241.
• Introvigne, Massimo (2014). "Advocacy, brainwashing theories, and new religious movements". Religion. 44 (2): 303–319. doi:10.1080/0048721X.2014.888021. S2CID 144440076.
• Ogloff, J. R.; Pfeifer, J. E. (1992). "Cults and the law: A discussion of the legality of alleged cult activities". Behavioral Sciences & the Law. 10 (1): 117–140. doi:10.1002/bsl.2370100111.
• Olson, Paul J. (2006). "The Public Perception of 'Cults' and 'New Religious Movements'". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. 45 (1): 97–106. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2006.00008.x. ISSN 0021-8294. JSTOR 3590620.
• Richardson, James T.; Introvigne, Massimo (2001). "'Brainwashing' Theories in European Parliamentary and Administrative Reports on 'Cults' and 'Sects'". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. 40 (2): 143–168. doi:10.1111/0021-8294.00046.
• Richardson, James T. (1993). "Definitions of Cult: From Sociological-Technical to Popular-Negative". Review of Religious Research. 34 (4): 348–356. doi:10.2307/3511972. JSTOR 3511972.
• Seiwert, Hubert (2003). "Freedom and Control in the Unified Germany: Governmental Approaches to Alternative Religions Since 1989". Sociology of Religion. 64 (3): 367–375. doi:10.2307/3712490. ISSN 1069-4404. JSTOR 3712490.
• Robbins, Thomas (2002). "Combating 'Cults' and 'Brainwashing' in the United States and Europe: A Comment on Richardson and Introvigne's Report". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. 40 (2): 169–176. doi:10.1111/0021-8294.00047.
• Stark, Rodney; Bainbridge, William Sims (1980). "Networks of Faith: Interpersonal Bonds and Recruitment to Cults and Sects". American Journal of Sociology. 85 (6): 1376–1395. doi:10.1086/227169. ISSN 0002-9602. JSTOR 2778383.
• Weber, Max (Spring 1985). "'Churches' and 'Sects' in North America: An Ecclesiastical Socio-Political Sketch". Sociological Theory. 3 (1): 7–13. doi:10.2307/202166. JSTOR 202166.
• Wright, Stuart A. (1997). "Media Coverage of Unconventional Religion: Any 'Good News' for Minority Faiths?". Review of Religious Research. 39 (2): 101–115. doi:10.2307/3512176. ISSN 0034-673X. JSTOR 3512176.
• Zhu, Guobin (2010). "Prosecuting 'Evil Cults:' A Critical Examination of Law Regarding Freedom of Religious Belief in Mainland China". Human Rights Quarterly. 32 (3): 471–501. doi:10.1353/hrq.2010.0004. ISSN 0275-0392. JSTOR 40784053. SSRN 1664950.

• Borden, Jane (2025). Cults Like Us: Why Doomsday Thinking Drives America (1st hardcover ed.). New York: One Signal Publishers/Atria Books. ISBN 978-1668007808. OCLC 1510770522.

• The dictionary definition of wht1229/cult at Wiktionary
• Quotations related to Cult at Wikiquote

While studying in the field of academia, researchers do not use the word cult when describing new religions. Instead, the phrase "new religious movement" is preferred since the term "cult" carries a negative connotation and is commonly used in non-scholarly discourse. In common usage, cult has a negative meaning that suggests either manipulation or violence, and the term is neither precise nor unbiased enough to be applied within scholarly contexts.That is why researchers tend to describe new religions using the phrase "new religious movement," which is broader and less subjective than the cult term. While a cult is not automatically perceived as an inherently bad organization or a cult of violence, new religious movements are studied scientifically in their sociological context and in the field of religious studies as outlined by Dawson in his book Comprehending Cults: The Sociology of New Religious Movements.