Study finds academics reduced flagged words after government blacklist
7 reported
A new research paper examines how academics respond to political pressure by analyzing a natural experiment: the publication in early 2025 of a “blacklist” of words flagged by the U.S. government. The study found that the release of this list led to a sharp reduction in the use of these flagged words among economists at universities that rely heavily on federal funding, compared to scholars from institutions less dependent on federal funding or based in the UK. The drop was driven by content related to gender, race, and environment. The researchers show that changes are not simply semantic but reflect actual paper content, and that neither individual funding status nor time-invariant author characteristics are driving the effects. The paper also documents heterogeneous effects by department quality and author gender and ethnicity. The authors frame their results in terms of “Science under threat,” which is in the title of their paper. The source article notes that the findings are consistent with the idea that scholars respond strongly to political pressure.
What’s reported
The study exploits a natural experiment: the publication in early 2025 of a “blacklist” of words flagged by the U.S. government.
The release led to a sharp reduction in the use of flagged words among economists at universities heavily reliant on federal funding.
The drop is driven by content related to gender, race, and environment.
Changes reflect actual paper content, not just semantics.
Neither individual funding status nor time-invariant author characteristics drive the effects.
Heterogeneous effects by department quality and author gender and ethnicity are documented.
The paper is titled “Science under threat” by authors Dominic Rohner, Oliver Vanden Eynde, and Philine Widmer.
Key figures
Dominic Rohner (author of the paper)
Oliver Vanden Eynde (author of the paper)
Philine Widmer (author of the paper)
Sources: marginalrevolution.com
