Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This research measures beliefs about harmful speech in adults, indicating implications for cultural discourse.
People differ in their belief that speech can cause lasting psychological harm. We present the ten-item Words Can Harm Scale (WCHS) as a valid and reliable measure of this belief. Items assess attitudes about harmful speech (e.g., “Vulnerable people should not be exposed to certain kinds of speech, as this might harm them”) and written words (e.g., “I could be left emotionally scarred by something I read”). In a representative sample of U.S. adults ( N = 956), the WCHS demonstrated strong internal consistency (α = 0.92) and robust two-week test-retest reliability ( r = 0.80). People higher in the belief that words can harm tended to be younger, female, non-White, and politically liberal. People with higher WCHS scores rated themselves as higher in intellectual humility, empathy, moral grandstanding, and the belief in the importance of silencing others. They were also more likely to support political correctness and endorse trigger warnings and safe spaces. People who believed that words can harm had worse mental health: they reported being more anxious and depressed, less resilient, and having more difficulties in emotion regulation. The WCHS is a reliable tool for measuring beliefs about the harmfulness of words—a divisive issue within modern cultural discourse.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pratt et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: