The Self-Censoring Majority: How Political Identity and Ideology Impacts Willingness to Self-Censor and Fear of Isolation in the United States

Abstract

The spiral of silence theory suggests that those who hold a contrary opinion to the majority tend to remain silent; however, social media may be flipping this upside down. The majority may remain silent to the hardcore vocal minority, implying a self-censoring majority. This study examines the spiral of silence theory, and the effect of political identity and ideology has on the willingness to self-censor and the fear of isolation with social media use. Through a survey distributed through a Qualtrics panel to participants that mirror the US census ( N = 1,047), this study investigates political identity and ideology by examining self-censorship and fear of isolation of social media users. Results identify significant differences with self-censorship and identity politics between strong conservatives and liberals in comparison to the majority in the middle. Differing political ideologies seem to have an impact on fear of isolation between democrats and conservatives.

The Platformization of Violence: Toward a Concept of Discursive Toxicity on Social Media

“…Hampton et al (2014) have discussed how people felt less comfortable to discuss certain issues online if they felt the audience could respond aggressively if they didn't agree with them. Similarly, Burnett et al (2022) called this process "self-censorship" as people are silenced if they feel that others are a majority and disagree with them online.…”

Religious deconversion in adolescence and young adulthood: A literature review

“…Also, social media use during young adulthood provides exposure to a breadth of ideas, which is linked to more liberal views about religion such as endorsing beliefs and practices from multiple religious traditions (McClure, 2016). One consideration is that posts on social media tend toward the extremes (Burnett et al, 2022), suggesting that much of what is posted about religion online is fanatical against or toward religion. This polarized information about religion poses a challenge for those using social media as a primary source of information and connection in their faith journey.…”

Advocacy and the Search for Truth in Management Scholarship: Can the Twain Ever Meet?

“…Unfortunately, coercive power can also limit scientific discourse in more subtle ways, including eroding psychological safety. For example, recent empirical evidence suggests that a majority of Americans engage in self-censorship for fear of isolation or retaliation (e.g., Burnett et al, 2022), and the costs for those who do speak up are significant, including “cancelation” in academia (see Stripling, June 21, 2023 for examples). The resulting lack of discourse can lead to false consensus effects.…”