THE SPIRAL OF

SILENCE
 SPIRAL OF SILENCE
Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann claims that people’s assessment of the political climate and forecast
of future trends are early, reliable indicators of what will happen in an election.

Noelle-Neumann’s spiral of silence explains the growth and spread of public opinion, which
is a powerful force.

She defines public opinion as “attitudes one can express in public without isolating
oneself.” (Noelle-Neumann, 1984)

The spiral of silence refers to the increasing pressure people feel to conceal their views
when they think they are in the minority (Noelle-Neumann,1974, 1984, 1991) > the mass
media devise a narrow docket of concerns that functions to favor a selected set of proposals that
enter public discourse while simultaneously excluding rival positions. Individuals immersed /
consonant climate of opinion >> fear of isolation/ a desire to elude negative social sanctions

The fear stimulates people to observe the media for cues about the majority’s position on
debatable issues of the day
 EXPERIMENTS ON
OBEDIENCE AND GROUP
CONFORMITY
• Solomon Asch
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYIh4MkcfJA&feature=PlayList&p=4FEDA0B1DFD77298&index=7

• Stanley Milgram
• http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoID=1798620933

• the theory of planned behavior (Ajzen, 1988, 1991) > when individuals are faced with risky
situations, they consider the possible reactions of family, friends, and others before deciding on
which behaviors to pursue.
• research inspired by the spiral of silence, which focuses on normative influence, has shown
that people tend to moderate their speech—a kind of behavior—to match their perceptions of
majority opinion rather than risk being isolated for expressing unpopular views.
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqUXRZHaj-s
 SPIRAL OF SILENCE.
GENERAL BACKGROUND
• 1965 election (Germany)
• The two major parties (Christian Democrats and Social
Democrats) were locked in a dead heat
• Last minute swing (Noelle-Neumann rejects the hypothesis that people
conform out of a desire to identify with a winner)
• 1972 election (Germany)
• The two major parties were racing neck-to-neck
• Last minute swing
THE THREAT TEST
• 1976: Smoking in the presence of nonsmokers
• A field experiment
o the control group:
o 44% : In the presence of non-smokers one should refrain from smoking.
To smoke would be inconsiderate; for those who do not smoke, it is very
unpleasant to have to breathe smoke- filled air (+ 45% were willing to
have a conversation)
o 44%: One can't expect people to refrain from smoking just because
nonsmokers are present; it’s really not that much of an annoyance to
them anyway. (+ 43% were willing to have a conversation)
o the experiment group (the train experiment)
THE TRAIN TEST
+ “one would refrain from
smoking in the presence of
nonsmokers”
Only 23% of the smoking
defenders were willing to
have a conversation about
that.
 QUESTIONS TO BE ASKED
WHEN MEASURING THE
SPIRAL OF SILENCE
Question(s) measuring the opinion of interviewee on a controversial subject (what
he/she thinks of…)

Question(s) regarding what the interview believes of what other people think about
the subject (majority)

Question(s) regarding the possible trends of future evolution of opinions

Question(s) regarding the willingness of the interviewee to publicly participate in

supporting his/her own opinion (ex: in a public debate, wear distinctive signs, signing
petitions etc.)
 ISSUE TOPICS
 membership in the European Union
 assessment of campaign candidates
 changes of office
 abortion
 capital punishment
 environmental activism
 gay marriage
 gay bullying
 genetically modified food
 affirmative action
 immigration
 OPINIONS
• Private opinions (we keep to ourselves)
• Public opinions (we feel safe to share with others)
• Public Opinion – related to the climate of opinions (people
have a sixth sense that allow them to evaluate this climate)
• Majority – vocal opinion (a symbolic majority) (people
become more talkative)
• Minority – silent opinion
 THE ACCELERATING SPIRAL
OF SILENCE
• Fear of isolation catches those in the minority in a spiral of silence.

• People sense a slight discrepancy between their position and prevailing public
opinion.

• Minority opinion holders begin to withdraw from sharing their opinion.

• They sense a widening gap and draw back from public scrutiny. 

• The spiral becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

• The spiral of silence theory revolves around the public discussion of a morally
controversial or value-laden issue
 THE ROLE OF MASS MEDIA
Mass media can expand or inhibit the spiral
People perceive media opinions as dominant opinions (discussion)
Mass media can create a false majority illusion
Mass media can reverse a spiral process through giving the “hard
core” a voice
Media accelerate the muting of the minority in the spiral of silence
Television is particularly influential because of its omni-presence, its
single point of view, and the constant repetition of its message
 SPIRAL OF SILENCE
Vote intentions vs. vote expectations

Bandwagon effect vs. last minute swing

People who would talk no matter what (the hard core) > attitude strength (the
extent to which an attitude is resistant to change and predictive of behavior):
extremity, intensity, personal interest or issue importance, certainty

Changes in the climate of opinions

Forming the spiral of silence: people are more afraid of being isolated than of being
wrong (the group pressure)
CRITICS OF THE THEORY
Critics question the assumption that fear of isolation is the cause of people’s silence (people may just not have an opinion)

The theory relies on the hypothetical train/plane test to measure willingness to speak rather than use the observation of
actual behavior.

While the spiral of silence focuses on national climate of public opinion, other studies have indicated that the opinion of
one’s own reference group or microclimate of family and friends is most closely linked to one’s willingness to speak out.
The theory is ignoring aspects as: positive motives for speaking out; deficient conceptualization of hardcore and avant
garde groups; alternative explanations such as bandwagon and projection; the consonance of media content and the
operation of selectivity processes

Recent studies suggest that the spiral of silence is alive and well in the twenty-first century
 THE SOCIAL MEDIA SPIRAL
OF SILENCE
 The new media landscape has raised the potential for exposure to congruent news to unprecedented
heights (Stroud, 2008; Webster, 2011) > selective exposure > niche media = one’s perception of the
opinion climate may become biased/ impression of false public consensus

 The exposure to a biased sample of exemplars renders similar opinions cognitively more accessible
and highly salient > Cognitive availability of an opinion is mistakenly interpreted as an indicator of
its frequency among the public

 The exposure to congruent partisan media > will contribute to political participation by influencing
perceptions of public opinion

 During the 2008 U.S. election campaign, exposure to congruent news increased
participation/involvement in online political discussion whereas exposure to incongruent news
decreased it (Dilliplane, 2011; Brundidge et al., 2014, Stroud, 2011)
 THE SOCIAL MEDIA SPIRAL
OF SILENCE
 Online discussion takes place in echo chambers > people in online debates selectively avoid
opposing arguments, and therefore face little resistance > assumed to reinforce and ultimately
polarize political views

 A congruent opinion climate (i.e., friendly) condition had a larger effect among individuals
with high levels of willingness to self-censor

 The online environment also increases the possibility of discussing with people who hold
considerably different points of view

 Online debates - opinions are reinforced through contradiction as well as confirmation / prior
attitudes
 THE SOCIAL MEDIA SPIRAL
OF SILENCE
 people are more willing to express a minority opinion in a virtual chat than face to face
(anonymity), (eg. Ho & McLeod, 2008)
 expected sanctions > less willing to express their opinion via social media than in face-to-
face situations (eg. Hampton et al., 2014)
 in contemporary SNSs where users commonly face a personally relevant audience, people are
prone to hold back their opinion as they expect losing control over the reactions of their
audience/ higher expectations of social sanctions such as losing relationships or being
negatively evaluated
 if Internet users are aware of a potential disinhibited behavior online (Rainie, Lenhart, &
Smith, 2012), they will be more reluctant to participate in controversial discussions as they
will fear being attacked
 THE SOCIAL MEDIA SPIRAL OF SILENCE

 the persistence of messages in online communication/ opinions are less rectifiable > new
concerns

 Facebook - a high identifiability of oneself > is supposed to be more threatening (since one is
more accountable for the minority opinion) / the more based upon real-world anchored
relationships, the more likely to include fear of isolation/ appearing unpopular or socially
undesirable

 To explore > opinion expression avoidance strategies

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTlb3lyd6jM&t=129s
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVeGBInv-pI