Abstract
The various chapters of the present volume demonstrate that self-censorship is prevalent in numerous social spheres, ranging from the narrow domain of the family to the broad domain of entire societies and their institutions, such as the mass media, the education system, and the military. Given the scope of this phenomenon, one would expect it to generate considerable interest among scholars and researchers. Yet, systematic research into self-censorship has been scarce. The present volume collects and integrates studies of self-censorship in a variety of spheres, hoping to stimulate further research on the topic. In this chapter, I discuss several general themes that emerge from the collection of chapters and can be further explored in future studies. I begin by addressing the question of why research on self-censorship has been scarce despite the prevalence of the phenomenon. In the next section, I discuss the implications of self-censorship in different spheres, focusing on the implications for individuals versus collectives and on the role of gatekeepers. In the last section I discuss the broader context in which self-censorship is more or less likely to appear.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Antilla, L. (2010). Self-censorship and science: A geographical review of media coverage of climate tipping points. Public Understanding of Science, 19(2), 240–256.
Bar-Tal, D. (2013). Intractable conflicts: Socio-psychological foundations and dynamics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bar-Tal, D., & Halperin, E. (2011). Socio-psychological barriers to conflict resolution. In D. Bar-Tal (Ed.), Intergroup conflicts and their resolution: A social psychological perspective (pp. 217–240). New York: Psychology Press.
Bar-Tal, D., Oren, N., & Nets-Zehngut, R. (2014). Sociopsychological analysis of conflict-supporting narratives: A general framework. Journal of Peace Research, 51(5), 662–675. http://doi.org/10.1177/0022343314533984
Boykoff, M. T., & Boykoff, J. M. (2004). Balance as bias: Global warming and the US prestige press. Global Environmental Change, 14(2), 125–136. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2003.10.001
Chang, T. K., & Lee, J. W. (1992). Factors affecting gatekeepers’ selection of foreign news: A national survey of newspaper editors. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 69(3), 554–561. http://doi.org/10.1177/107769909206900303
Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55(1), 591–621. http://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142015
Dechêne, A., Stahl, C., Hansen, J., & Wänke, M. (2009). The truth about the truth: A meta-analytic review of the truth effect. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14(2), 238–257.
Dixon, G. N., & Clarke, C. E. (2013). Heightening uncertainty around certain science. Science Communication, 35(3), 358–382. http://doi.org/10.1177/1075547012458290
Gelfand, M. J., Raver, J. L., Nishii, L., Leslie, L. M., Lun, J., Lim, B. C., & Yamaguchi, S. (2011). Differences between tight and loose cultures: A 33-nation study. Science, 332(6033), 1100–1104. http://doi.org/10.1126/science.1197754
Hameiri, B., Sharvit, K., Bar-Tal, D., Shahar, E., & Halperin, E. (2016) Support for self-censorship among Israelis as a barrier to resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Political Psychology. Retrieved from http://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12346
Harrington, J. R., & Gelfand, M. J. (2014). Tightness-looseness across the 50 united states. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(22), 7990–7995. http://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1317937111
Jerit, J., & Barabas, J. (2006). Bankrupt rhetoric: How misleading information affects knowledge about social security. Public Opinion Quarterly, 70(3), 278–303. http://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfl010
Mouzelis, N. (2007). Cognitive relativism: Between postivistic and relativistic thinking in the social sciences. In J. L. Powell & T. Owen (Eds.), Reconstructing postmodernism: Critical debates (pp. 15–27). New York: Nova Science.
Oxford Dictionaries. (2016). Word of the year 2016 is…. Retrieved March 2, 2016, from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/word-of-the-year/word-of-the-year-2016
Pettigrew, A. M. (1972). Information control as a power resource. Sociology, 6(2), 187–204. http://doi.org/10.1177/003803857200600202
Shahar, E., Hameiri, B., Bar-Tal, D., & Raviv, A. (2016). Self-censorship of conflict-related information in the context of intractable conflict. Journal of Conflict Resolution. Retrieved from http://doi.org/10.1177/0022002716680266
Sharvit, K., Bar-Tal, D., Hameiri, B., Zafran, A., Shahar, E., & Raviv, A. (2016). Self-censorship orientation: Scale development, correlates and outcomes (manuscript submitted for publication).
Wells, G. L., & Olson, E. A. (2003). Eyewitness testimony. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 277–295.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sharvit, K. (2017). Self-Censorship: Emerging Themes and Remaining Questions. In: Bar-Tal, D., Nets-Zehngut, R., Sharvit, K. (eds) Self-Censorship in Contexts of Conflict. Peace Psychology Book Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63378-7_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63378-7_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-63377-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-63378-7
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)