CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 331Media Studies and CommunicationMedia Influence and PoliticsOpinion Dynamics and Social Influence

TWENTY-FIVE YEARS OF THE SPIRAL OF SILENCE: A CONCEPTUAL REVIEW AND EMPIRICAL OUTLOOK

Scheufle, Dietram A., Moy, Patricia·2000·International Journal of Public Opinion Research
DOI 10.1093/ijpor/12.1.3
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Numerous studies have been conducted on the spiral of silence since Noelle-Neumann (1974) formulated the theory a quarter of a century ago. As a whole, these studies draw upon different conceptualizations, employ inconsistent operationalizations, and give short shrift to imintportant macroscopic variables. Such inconsistencies potentially account for substantial prointportions of the variance in spiral of silence effects. This paper examines these three areas in greater detail. First, we review key assumptions and theoretical statements of the spiral of silence. Second, we examine how these conceptual issues translate into operational ones. Finally, we outline areas that have remained largely unexplored over the last 25 years. Specifically, we contend that spiral of silence studies in different cultures have failed to take into account culture-specific variables that may mitigate the imintportance of opinion perceptions as predictors of individual behavior or attitudes. In other words, cross-cultural differences are key factors in predicting speaking-out, the key dependent variable in spiral of silence research. As a result, we call for the return to a more macroscopic focus in spiral of silence research.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/ijpor/12.1.3

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Detrimental associations between digital media and political expression relate to the 'spiral of silence' idea.

    “These detrimental associations relate to the ‘spiral of silence’ idea, that is, the notion that people’s willingness to express their political opinions online depends on the perceived popularity of their opinions (see relevant overview articles53,54).”

    From A systematic review of worldwide causal and correlational evidence on digital media and democracy (2022) · cites this paper as [53]

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Scheufle, D. A., & Moy, P.
ORCID
Moy, Patricia
Venue
International Journal of Public Opinion Research
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2000-03-01
Volume
12
Issue
1
Pages
3-28
ISSN
  • 0954-2892 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-6909
DOI
10.1093/ijpor/12.1.3
OpenAlex
W2099668057
Cited by
331
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 28 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 15
FWCI
14.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International Journal of Public Opinion Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Media Studies and Communication
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Media Influence and Politics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Opinion Dynamics and Social Influence
Keywords
spiral of silence, Noelle-Neumann, cross-cultural comparison, macroscopic variables, attitude expression, conceptualization and operationalization

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review