We identify points of conflict and consensus regarding (a) controversial empirical claims and (b) normative preferences for how controversial scholarship—and scholars—should be treated. In 2021, we conducted qualitative interviews ( n = 41) to generate a quantitative survey ( N = 470) of U.S. psychology professors’ beliefs and values. Professors strongly disagreed on the truth status of 10 candidate taboo conclusions: For each conclusion, some professors reported 100% certainty in its veracity and others 100% certainty in its falsehood. Professors more confident in the truth of the taboo conclusions reported more self-censorship, a pattern that could bias perceived scientific consensus regarding the inaccuracy of controversial conclusions. Almost all professors worried about social sanctions if they were to express their own empirical beliefs. Tenured professors reported as much self-censorship and as much fear of consequences as untenured professors, including fear of getting fired. Most professors opposed suppressing scholarship and punishing peers on the basis of moral concerns about research conclusions and reported contempt for peers who petition to retract papers on moral grounds. Younger, more left-leaning, and female faculty were generally more opposed to controversial scholarship. These results do not resolve empirical or normative disagreements among psychology professors, but they may provide an empirical context for their discussion.

中文翻译：

---

美国心理学教授的禁忌和自我审查


我们确定了关于（a）有争议的经验主张和（b）应如何对待有争议的学术和学者的规范偏好的冲突点和共识。 2021 年，我们进行了定性访谈 (n = 41)，对美国心理学教授的信念和价值观进行了定量调查 (N = 470)。教授们对 10 个候选禁忌结论的真实性存在强烈分歧：对于每个结论，一些教授报告 100% 确定其真实性，而另一些教授则 100% 确定其错误。对禁忌结论的真实性更有信心的教授报告了更多的自我审查，这种模式可能会影响关于有争议结论的不准确性的科学共识。几乎所有教授都担心如果表达自己的经验信念会受到社会制裁。终身教授的自我审查和对后果的恐惧与非终身教授一样多，包括担心被解雇。大多数教授反对基于对研究结论的道德担忧而压制学术和惩罚同行，并表示蔑视以道德为由请求撤回论文的同行。年轻、左倾的女性教师普遍更反对有争议的学术研究。这些结果并不能解决心理学教授之间的经验或规范分歧，但它们可能为他们的讨论提供经验背景。