The Predictors of Self-Censorship on College Campuses

Across U.S. colleges, speech climates are poor. Self-censorship and discomfort expressing views are common. At the same time, we find wide variation in speech climates across different institutions. This study is the first to identify factors that predict variation in speech climates. Drawing on data from multiple sources, including a survey of 58,807 undergraduates across 257 colleges and universities from the Foundation from Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), this study constructs a first-of-its-kind dataset to test three core theories of self-censorship found in the literature—student-centric theories, faculty-centric theories, and administrator-centric theories. We find moderate evidence to support each theory. Overall, students appear to be the biggest contributors to self-censorship—student progressivism predicts self-censorship and speech discomfort across domains. Faculty play a stronger role in academic settings—faculty progressivism predicts speech discomfort in classroom discussions and on written assignments. The relationship between the prevalence of administrators and self-censorship is more muted across domains. Rates of student and faculty-driven self-censorship vary across institution types—student-driven self-censorship is highest at small, private, and liberal arts colleges, and faculty-driven self-censorship is highest at large, public, and professions-oriented institutions.