New Series, Vol. 2, No. 9
Recent and historical efforts to control expression—despite constitutional protection of free speech in the First Amendment—increase the salience of free speech issues for many Americans. Although most people in the U.S. support free speech conceptually, the application of this belief seems to vary depending on the context or content of the speech itself (e.g., hate speech, political opposition). Although the content and methods of silencing differ, both liberals and conservatives alike advocate for state silencing of dissent and controversy, further exacerbated by algorithms in media channels that seek to maximize engagement. This study investigated how personality traits of extraversion and authoritarianism relate to individuals’ willingness to censor, broadly.
Among four overarching definitions of censorship (i.e., a larger political tolerance structure, reactions to specific controversies, discrete opinions, and an individual difference variable), this study employs a revised version of Lambe’s Willingness to Censor scale to examine an individual’s disposition to censorship. This measure invokes the First Amendment and specifies government censorship of free speech, specifically, in relevant categories of expression based on current events, as well as several different media for expression. The seven categories of expression include pornography, hate speech, speech that raises privacy issues, political speech, abortion speech, defamatory speech, and commercial speech while the seven categories of media for expression are “pure” speech, demonstrations, newspapers, magazines, television, cable, and the internet. Higher scores on this measure indicate greater support for censorship by government entities.
As an individual difference trait, authoritarianism describes individuals with strong desire for leadership, order, and adherence to social norms; who fear opinions that differ from their own and high sensitivity to other perceived threats; and has both left-wing and right-wing iterations. Left-wing authoritarianism (LWA), for example, is associated with behavioral aggression, antagonistic narcissism, psychopathy, participation in political violence, and support for punitive measures against unvaccinated individuals during the COVID-19 pandemic. LWA typically harnesses these qualities to advocate for seemingly altruistic values such as anti-racism, feminism, and redistribution of wealth. Right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) is also associated with aggression, but also conventionalism, submission to power, and retaliation against marginalized groups as condoned by authority. Although there are nuanced differences between LWA and RWA, they are ultimately cut from the same cloth. The authors thus predicted that both would be positively associated with willingness to censor.
Extraversion is one of the Big Five personality traits (i.e., extraversion, emotional stability—formerly neuroticism, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness) and describes the degree to which individuals are “social, talkative, and assertive.” Some evidence suggests a genetic component to extraversion, and high extraversion has been linked to impulsivity, confrontational behaviors, positive affect balance, enjoyment of social interaction, information-seeking behaviors and proficiency, both participation in political conversation and political intolerance, and activity level on social media. Thus, the authors investigated the nature of the relationship between extraversion and willingness to censor.
In a nationally representative sample of 2,850 U.S. adult participants, the authors tested the aforementioned hypotheses and research question with correlations (one-tailed bivariate) and investigated an additional research question further examining the relationship between extraversion and willingness to censor by controlling for both LWA and RWA using partial correlations. They found that LWA was positively associated with willingness to censor all categories of expression and that this hypothesis was fully supported. On the contrary, RWA was positively associated with willingness to censor defamation, political speech, and pornography; negatively associated with willingness to censor abortion speech, hate speech, and privacy; and had an overall negative relationship with willingness to censor. Findings for the relationship between extraversion and willingness to censor were also mixed, as extraversion was negatively associated with willingness to censor abortion speech, commercial speech, defamation, hate speech, and privacy, and had an overall negative relationship with willingness to censor. However, when controlling for RWA, extraversion was then also negatively associated with willingness to censor political speech and pornography in addition to all other categories without controlling for this variable. The authors state that these results, in particular, warrant further investigation to ensure that they are not the result of error. Controlling for LWA, however, did not significantly impact the relationship between extraversion and willingness to censor. Authors also acknowledge a small extraversion scale and the need for a more current measure of RWA as additional limitations of this study.
In sum, these results indicated a negative relationship between extraversion and willingness to censor, a positive relationship between LWA and willingness to censor, and a mixed relationship between RWA authoritarianism and willingness to censor. These results are timely, especially given our current media landscape’s shift towards dysregulation and uncensored content (e.g., X—formerly Twitter, Meta) and contemporary alignment between Americans’ political and social identities. Moreover, both those high in LWA and RWA may be more likely to interact with those with similar opinions and ideologies, reinforcing their current perspective and creating echo chambers that run counter to democratic principles and debate. This is especially concerning given tendencies to support state control and harsh punishments for dissenters among those high in LWA and prejudice and aggression toward outgroups among those high in RWA. It also worth considering that controlling for RWA when examining the relationship between extraversion and willingness to censor possibility impacted the relationship due to the support for right-wing values in the current media landscape. Extraverts, who comprise about half the U.S. population, are generally assertive and forceful and thus may feel restricted by any censorship, providing fertile ground for politically intolerant extraverts, in particular, to emerge as opinions leaders in both their local and virtual social networks. This study provides rationale for the imperative to investigate censorship as it relates to other individual difference variables to understand our current sociopolitical ecosystem in the U.S.
Communication Currents Discussion Questions
- Under what conditions, if any, do you believe censorship is justified? Are there certain types of speech you believe should never be censored? Does your stance change depending on who is doing the censoring (e.g., government vs. social media platform vs. Legacy media vs. a university)? Why or why not?
- This study finds that left-wing authoritarianism is positively associated with willingness to censor, even though left-wing authoritarianism often promotes values such as anti-racism and feminism. What are the risks of aligning progressive goals with authoritarian methods? How can social justice movements promote equity while safeguarding open discourse? What alternative strategies might help disrupt echo chambers and foster a culture of democratic debate and discussion?
- The essay explores the role of extraversion in censorship, but what other personality traits might also influence someone’s likelihood to support censorship? Think about seemingly positive traits. Can you identify potential “dark sides” of these traits in political or social contexts? For example, how might a highly agreeable person be complicit in silencing others?
For additional suggestions about how to use this and other Communication Currents in the classroom, see: https://www.natcom.org/publications/communication-currents/integrating-communication-currents-classroom
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Kayla Wentzel is a Ph.D. student in the School of Communication and Information at Rutgers University.
Jennifer Lambe is an Associate Professor in the Department of Communication at the University of Delaware.
This essay, by R. E. Purtell, translates the scholarly journal article, K. Wentzel, & J. Lambe. (2025). How authoritarianism and extraversion relate to censorship. Communication and Democracy. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/27671127.2025.2472640
The full copyright and private policy link is available at natcom.org/privacy-policy/
New Series, Vol. 3, No. 1 Discussing social justice issues in college classrooms can be challenging for educators, especially in the current sociopolitical climate. Moreover, not all educators are equipped with the skills, knowledge, and confidence to facilitate such discussions effectively. They may also be wary about handling disagreements among students from different cultural backgrounds, especially considering that...
New Series, Vol. 2, No. 23 This study investigates the rhetorical strategy of white victimhood and how such rhetoric evades moderation on social media (i.e., X, formerly Twitter) to spread bigoted, white nationalist content. The authors focus on everyday social media activity and explore how individuals posting engage in “white...
New Series, Vol. 2, No. 21 Community participation is an essential component of democracy, yet gaps in participation persist due to unequal distribution of resources that disenfranchise historically marginalized groups and in turn weaken the community’s overall representativeness. This study applied sensemaking, specifically constructs of sensegiving and sensebreaking to understand...
New Series, Vol. 2, No. 20 In 2022, U.S. Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA) decided to not run for a third term. Then-Lt. Gov. John Fetterman ran and easily won the Democratic primary against young Congressman Conor Lamb and other candidates. Among Republican primary candidates, Dr. Mehmet Oz, a famous physician...
New Series, Vol. 2, No. 19 Student journalism in secondary schools has many documented benefits for participating students, including voice empowerment, improved academic performance, vocational training, and encouraging civic participation. However, when discouraged from pursuing topics that they are passionate about and/or benefit their communities because those topics may be...
New Series, Vol. 2, No. 16 Historically, US Supreme Court justices “off-bench” speech (their communications other than in judicial opinions) typically was limited in quantity, even while its content ranged from educational (justices teaching law school courses or seminars) to the personal (interviews, memoirs, etc.). Justices typically framed the Court...
New Series, Vol. 2, No. 13 Drew T. Ashby-King interviewed 32 college students at various institutions to illuminate their understanding of and their exposure to discourse surrounding institutional prestige during the admissions process. College and university rankings (e.g., U.S. News and World Report Best College Rankings) are one predominant reflection...
New Series, Vol. 2, No. 8 Metaphors, which this article defines (from Richard Gregg) as “a thoroughly rhetorical cognitive process” that “encourage us to adopt some particular perspective” and “culminates in a point of view,” have been used historically in politics, literature, religion, and beyond. This article concerns the metaphor,...
New Series, Vol. 2, No. 7 There is a long legacy of anti-literacy laws targeting Black communities in the U.S., with anti-woke legislation being only a recent iteration of these far right attacks on public education. In the piece, the author discusses the experiences and challenges of being a public...