As ordinary citizens increasingly moderate online forums, blogs, and their own social media feeds, a new type of censoring has emerged wherein people selectively remove opposing political viewpoints from online contexts. In three studies of behavior on putative online forums, supporters of a political cause (e.g., abortion or gun rights) preferentially censored comments that opposed their cause. The tendency to selectively censor cause-incongruent online content was amplified among people whose cause-related beliefs were deeply rooted in or “fused with” their identities. Moreover, six additional identity-related measures also amplified the selective censoring effect. Finally, selective censoring emerged even when opposing comments were inoffensive and courteous. We suggest that because online censorship enacted by moderators can skew online content consumed by millions of users, it can systematically disrupt democratic dialogue and subvert social harmony.

随着普通公民越来越多地主持在线论坛，博客和他们自己的社交媒体供稿，出现了一种新型的审查制度，人们可以从网上环境中有选择地消除对立的政治观点。在关于假定的在线论坛的行为的三项研究中，政治原因（例如堕胎或枪支权利）的支持者优先审查反对其原因的评论。在与因果相关的信仰深深植根于或与他们的身份“融合”在一起的人们中，选择性地审查与因果无关的在线内容的趋势被放大了。此外，另外六个与身份相关的措施也扩大了选择性检查的效果。最终，即使反对派的言论缺乏礼貌和礼貌，也出现了选择性的审查制度。