preprints_ui: 576ja_v1

Denormalized preprint data with contributors and subjects for efficient UI access

Data license: ODbL (database) & original licenses (content) · Data source: Open Science Framework

id	title	description	date_created	date_modified	date_published	original_publication_date	publication_doi	provider	is_published	reviews_state	version	is_latest_version	preprint_doi	license	tags_list	tags_data	contributors_list	contributors_data	first_author	subjects_list	subjects_data	download_url	has_coi	conflict_of_interest_statement	has_data_links	has_prereg_links	prereg_links	prereg_link_info	last_updated
576ja_v1	Speech repression and threat narratives in politics: social goals and cognitive foundations	Political movements often bind around mobilizing narratives, denouncing an evil or villains encroaching on a sacred prosocial value, such as national grandeur, faith, a class, racial, or gender equality. In their most devoted activists, this triggers moral motivations to protect the narrative from being argumentatively challenged, with accuracy and nuance as inevitable victims. Repressive reactions range from expressions of outrage or public shaming on social media to the “deplatforming” and “canceling” of controversial speakers to censorship and imprisonment of dissidents. Speech repression phenomena are puzzling because the ideological narratives activists try to protect are generally simplistic and inaccurate. Here, I argue that speech repression likely derives from three main socio-cognitive motivations. First, hyper-sensitive dispositions to detect threat, from hostile outgroups in particular. Second, motivations to try to keep people mobilized for moral causes and against dangerous groups, by controlling information flows and beliefs. Third, motivations to signal personal devotion to moral causes and ingroup to gain status. Political activists and leaders only need to believe that speech restriction will bring about desired effects to engage in it, not that their beliefs be true. Given selection pressures for genuine moral intuitions, speech restriction tactics may often spring from sincere ideological convictions.	2025-05-09T18:11:14.294301	2025-05-09T18:24:21.358086	2025-05-09T18:23:58.777825			osf	1	accepted	1	1	https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/576ja_v1	CC0 1.0 Universal		[]	Antoine Marie	[{"id": "vjm9d", "name": "Antoine Marie", "index": 0, "orcid": "0000-0002-7958-0153", "bibliographic": true}]	Antoine Marie	Social and Behavioral Sciences	[{"id": "584240da54be81056cecac48", "text": "Social and Behavioral Sciences"}]	https://osf.io/download/681e455124166806ae700142	0		not_applicable	not_applicable	[]		2025-05-10T00:11:34.189771