University leaders will often tout initiatives for academic success, community engagement, and mental health. Yet one factor, often overlooked, cuts across all of these goals: the climate for free speech.
In my work as a clinical psychologist and former university counselor, I’ve seen how the ability to express oneself openly is tied to emotional well-being, social connection, and intellectual growth. When students feel they must constantly monitor their words, anxiety rises and personal development slows. In fact, a Gallup & Knight Poll found that 65% of college students believe their campus discourages free speech. Given that many campuses have an openly stated goal to support mental health, they should recognize that protecting free expression is part of that mission.
The lack of free speech on campus is not just theoretical. As I explore in my new book, “Can I Say That? Why Free Speech Matters and How to Use it Fearlessly,” survey data reveal a pronounced ideological tilt across the professoriate: nationally, there are roughly six liberal professors for every conservative, and in New England, the ratio is about 28:1. At elite liberal arts colleges, voter-registration studies have found Democrat-Republican ratios around 10:1 overall. While ideological imbalance alone can shape classroom culture, it’s compounded by the fact that liberal students are more likely to condone tactics that shut down opposing views. In FIRE’s national survey, 74% of liberal students said “shouting down” a speaker is at least rarely acceptable, compared with 47% of conservatives; 52% of liberals said blocking entry to a talk is at least rarely acceptable, versus 33% of conservatives.
When you combine the faculty tilt with a greater willingness to exclude dissenting voices, it’s easy to see how the climate for open expression can become more restrictive. For students, this means less room to practice skills essential for both mental health and intellectual development.
Speech as a mental and cognitive workout
Open dialogue is not just a civic ideal – it’s a form of mental training. Sharing a viewpoint, especially one that may be unpopular, activates emotional regulation, perspective-taking, and problem-solving, while sharpening critical thinking and analysis.
When fear of backlash limits expression, students lose opportunities to strengthen these skills. Over time, avoiding certain topics – even in private – can lead to suppression of thoughts and feelings, which in clinical settings we know can contribute to anxiety, depression, and isolation.
Suppression cycle and its costs
Social pressure to conform often sets off a chain reaction: from suppression, to repression, to denial. Classroom settings can exacerbate this pressure since students are sensitive to the power dynamics of being under the guidance of a professor who not only grades them, but also has a greater breadth of knowledge. These factors can combine to induce self-doubt and self-censorship. For example, a student might hold back in class to avoid conflict, and deliver essays that parrot the professor’s talking points as a way to improve their grades. If they do this long enough and don’t pause to intentionally re-attune themselves to their actual viewpoints, they may stop fully exploring their own thoughts – this can erode critical thinking and self-awareness, as well as self-esteem.
The suppression cycle of self-censorship can also harm relationships. Genuine connections rely on authenticity, and when students feel they can’t be honest, their relationships remain superficial. Without authentic communication, these “support networks” are likely degraded – thereby decreasing the protective power that strong social bonds provide against stress.
Why the start of the school year batters
The first weeks of the semester are socially formative. Students are meeting peers, joining clubs, and setting norms for how they will interact. If free speech is embraced from the outset, it signals that differing views are part of campus life – not a threat to be avoided.
Practical steps include workshops on respectful disagreement, debate nights, and speaker events featuring a range of perspectives. These are not just intellectual exercises; they are mental health investments, giving students the tools to engage without fear.
Free speech as preventive mental health
Supporting free expression is not a distraction from mental health initiatives; it is a key mental health initiative in itself: If students believe certain views will be punished socially or academically, they may self-isolate, avoid engagement, and experience greater stress. Conversely, knowing they can share their perspective respectfully can foster confidence, resilience, and belonging, while strengthening the social connections that serve as a buffer against stress.
Universities already invest heavily in counseling, wellness programs, and peer support networks. A culture of open dialogue complements these efforts by addressing a root cause of distress: the fear of speaking honestly.
Moving forward
If universities are serious about mental health, they cannot treat free speech as an optional extra. The ability to speak freely – and to hear others do the same – is a foundation for the confidence, connection, and cognitive growth that make students truly well.
This back-to-school season, let’s challenge campuses to align their stated mental health priorities with policies and practices that welcome open, respectful expression. Because a campus where students feel safe to speak is one where they are far more likely to thrive – academically, socially, and emotionally.
