Campus Discourse Works.

Campus programs are built on peer-reviewed research demonstrating measurable reductions in polarization and improvements in student engagement and mental health outcomes.

Why This Matters

We hope you can use this research to design programs, justify institutional investment, and guide the growth of evidence-based dialogue initiatives on college campuses.

What is this section?

A curated, research-backed evidence base showing that structured civil dialogue works.

Why are we providing it?

To demonstrate that discourse on college campuses is grounded in peer-reviewed scholarship and rigorous field experiments, not ideology.

How is it populated?

By reviewing, vetting, and summarizing academic research on depolarization, dialogue, and student outcomes.

The Campus Speech Climate Today

National survey data from FIRE shows rising intolerance for dissent and widespread self-censorship among college students—conditions that structured dialogue programs are designed to address.

Source: Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), 2026 National Campus Speech Surveys

0%

Acceptance of Violence

34% of students say using violence to stop someone from speaking on campus is acceptable, at least in rare cases.

+2 points from previous year

+10 points from 2022

0%

Acceptance of Shouting Down Speakers

72% of students say shouting down a speaker on campus is acceptable, at least in rare cases.

+4 points from previous year

+6 points from 2022

0%

Self-Censorship with Fellow Students

24% of students report they often self-censor when speaking with other students on campus.

No change from previous year
0%

Self-Censorship in the Classroom

28% of students say they often self-censor during classroom discussions.

+2 points from previous year
0%

Low Trust in Administration

27% of students say their administration is unlikely to defend a speaker's right to express their views.

–1 point from previous year

–1 point from 2022

Explore FIRE Campus Rankings

Click here to explore the FIRE Campus Free Speech Rankings and see how institutions across the country are performing on free speech metrics.

Visit Rankings

What This Means

These trends point to growing hesitation to speak freely and increasing tolerance for coercive tactics. Structured, facilitated dialogue programs are one of the few interventions shown to reverse these patterns.

What the Evidence Shows

Peer-reviewed research demonstrating the impact of structured dialogue on college campuses

Do civil dialogue interventions on U.S. college campuses have any impact?

Ebuka A. Ifeanyichukwu, Lindsay H. Hoffman, Wyatt E. Dawson • 2025

Key Finding: Longer, structured dialogue interventions significantly increase intellectual humility and willingness to engage across political differences.

This field experiment examined the effects of discourse-based interventions on college students intellectual humility and political participation. With 606 participants across three conditions, results demonstrate that structured civil dialogue interventions significantly increase participants intellectual humility and likelihood to discuss politics with opponents.

Student Outcomes
Read Full Article

Detailed Findings

The American public has become more polarized along partisan lines than ever before. This culture of divergence, known as affective polarization, has been found to impede trust, forestall interpersonal relations, and prevent economic cooperation. College campuses have become microcosms of this larger polarization divide. This study examined the effects of discourse-based interventions at a large mid-Atlantic university with 606 participants. Key Findings: 1. Dosage matters - The longer, structured intervention had significantly greater positive effects. 2. Intellectual humility increases with civil dialogue interventions. 3. Greater willingness to engage across difference. 4. Psychological factors like intellectual humility and political efficacy were significant predictors. 5. Political participation intentions increase with longer interventions.

The Online Educational Program Perspectives Improves Affective Polarization, Intellectual Humility, and Conflict Management

Keith Welker, Mylien Duong, Macrina Dieffenbach, Jonathan Haidt, Peter Coleman • 2023

Key Finding: A brief, scalable online educational program produces small to medium-sized decreases in affective polarization and increases in intellectual humility and conflict resolution skills.

This research tested an asynchronous online educational program called Perspectives, rooted in psychological principles, designed to address record levels of affective polarization. Across three studies, results showed that Perspectives users experienced meaningful decreases in political distrust and increases in intellectual humility and conflict management skills.

Polarization
Read Full Article

Detailed Findings

Solving the most pressing problems of our time requires broad collaboration across political party lines. Yet, the United States is experiencing record levels of affective polarization. In response to these trends, researchers developed and tested an asynchronous online educational program called Perspectives. Key Findings: Reduced affective polarization across all three studies. Increased intellectual humility. Improved conflict resolution skills in college students. The program is scalable as an asynchronous online solution. Cross-population effectiveness was demonstrated across general users, government professionals, and college students.

How We Curate Research

We prioritize peer-reviewed studies with rigorous methodologies, measurable outcomes, and direct relevance to campus dialogue initiatives. Our selection criteria emphasize field experiments, longitudinal studies, and research that translates into actionable program design.