Breaking the Spiral of Silence

Abstract

Self-censorship is pervasive in today's social climate, distorting political discourse and decision-making processes that either explicitly or implicitly take public opinion into account. What drives self-censorship, and how can misperceptions about public opinion be corrected? The Spiral of Silence theory offers insights, positing that people who hold views perceived as socially inappropriate tend to self-censor, generating a distribution of expressed views that is skewed towards appropriate opinions. If the attention paid to silence is limited, this can exacerbate self-censorship and create an equilibrium where only socially appropriate views are expressed and considered dominant. We experimentally test this hypothesis based on a simple model in which self-censorship and limited attention to silence interact to jointly establish equilibrium norms. In our experiment, college students discuss controversial political and socioeconomic issues. Our results show that students with socially inappropriate views self-censor to a significant degree. Given the limited attention students pay to silence, self-censorship amplifies over time. We experimentally increase the salience of silence and find that this both leads to more accurate beliefs about public opinion and increases the diversity of views expressed. Because inference and expression amplify each other, different levels of attention to silence produce divergent social norms in equilibrium.