ON PARENTS, PEERS, ADMINISTRATORS, AND ADVISERS: DEVELOPING A SYSTEM TO UNDERSTAND SELF-CENSORSHIP OF CONTROVERSIAL TOPICS IN THE HIGH SCHOOL PRESS _______________________________________ A Dissertation presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School at the University of Missouri-Columbia _______________________________________________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy _____________________________________________________ by ADAM M. MAKSL Dr. Charles N. Davis, Dissertation Supervisor JULY 2012 © Copyright by Adam M. Maksl 2012 All Rights Reserved The undersigned, appointed by the dean of the Graduate School, have examined the dissertation entitled ON PARENTS, PEERS, ADMINISTRATORS, AND ADVISERS: DEVELOPING A SYSTEM TO UNDERSTAND SELF-CENSORSHIP OF CONTROVERSIAL TOPICS IN THE HIGH SCHOOL PRESS presented by Adam M. Maksl, a candidate for the degree of doctor of philosophy, and hereby certify that, in their opinion, it is worthy of acceptance. __________________________________________________ Professor Charles N. Davis __________________________________________________ Professor Stephanie L. Craft __________________________________________________ Professor Esther L. Thorson __________________________________________________ Professor Timothy P. Vos __________________________________________________ Professor Nicole M. Campione-Barr DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to my family, who provided exceptional support, even when I questioned whether the Ph.D. path was right for me. This is especially dedicated to the memory of my father, Joseph W. Maksl. He passed away in December 2008, before I started the Ph.D. program, but his influence was felt throughout the process. He encouraged me to follow my dreams and to always be thankful for the wonderful gifts God has provided for me. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank all the members of my doctoral committee, who provided exceptional support along the way. In particular, Profs. Charles Davis and Stephanie Craft guided me throughout all parts of my doctoral journey. Profs. Esther Thorson, Tim Vos, and Nicole Campione-Barr all appreciated my efforts to develop interdisciplinarity in this work. Thank you also to current and former members of the faculty at Ball State University, including Profs. Marilyn Weaver, Dan Waechter, Vince Filak, Scott Reinardy, and Brian Hayes, who all helped me first realize that a life in academia might be for me. Fellow doctoral students and friends at the Missouri School of Journalism and elsewhere provided input and assistance, as well as much-needed distractions at times. Special thanks to Nick Geidner, Chad Painter, Pat Ferrucci, Seth Ashley, Rachel Young, Mark Poepsel, Erin Schauster, and Erin Willis. My mother, Mary, and my brothers, Joey and Brian, supported my decision to pursue the doctorate, knowing that doing so the year after my father’s unexpected death would make the transition especially difficult. They reminded me of my strengths during initial moments of uncertainty in my ability to continue with the program. Finally, my wife, Renée Petrina, provided the most support during this process. We met right as I started this Ph.D. program, and our dating and engagement spanned the three years. I finished writing this dissertation just a few days before our wedding. She provided tireless encouragement, including accepting that this dissertation would distract me from some wedding planning. My life is made so much better with her in it. ii Thank you all for your support. This accomplishment bears your sweat and tears just as much as mine. ii i TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................. ii List of Tables ...................................................................................................................... v List of Figures .................................................................................................................... vi Abstract ............................................................................................................................. vii Chapter 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1 2. Literature Review ................................................................................................ 7 3. Study One .......................................................................................................... 50 4. Additional hypotheses and research questions .................................................. 75 5. Study Two ......................................................................................................... 89 6. Discussion ....................................................................................................... 117 Appendices 1. Appendix A: Complete survey for Study One ................................................ 131 2. Appendix B: Correlations between all variables in Study One ....................... 154 3. Appendix C: Correlations between all variables in Study Two ...................... 155 References ....................................................................................................................... 157 Vita .................................................................................................................................. 171 iv LIST OF TABLES Table Page 3.1 – Descriptive statistics for data from Study One ........................................................ 52 3.2 – Factor loadings based on a principal axis factoring with Promax rotation for controversial topics .................................................................................................. 59 3.3 – Descriptive statistics for independent and dependent variables used in the Study One model ................................................................................................................ 64 3.4 – Study One hierarchical regression predicting one’s own comfort levels with stories about controversial social issues running in the school newspaper ......................... 66 3.5 – Study One hierarchical regression predicting one’s own comfort levels with stories about controversial school topics running in the school newspaper ........................ 67 3.6 – Study One hierarchical regression predicting awareness-of-self dimension of trait autonomy .................................................................................................................. 68 3.7 – Study One hierarchical regression predicting feeling of choice of trait autonomy . 69 5.1 – Descriptive statistics for entire dataset as well as former high school journalist subset of Study Two ................................................................................................. 91 5.2 – Descriptive statistics for independent and dependent variables used in the entire Study Two model. .................................................................................................... 97 5.3 – Study Two hierarchical regression predicting one’s own comfort levels with stories about social-oriented controversial issues running in the school newspaper .......... 99 5.4 – Study Two hierarchical regression predicting one’s own comfort levels with stories about school-oriented controversial issues running in the school newspaper ....... 101 5.5 – Study Two hierarchical regression predicting awareness-of-self dimension of trait autonomy ................................................................................................................ 103 5.6 – Study Two hierarchical regression predicting feeling-of-choice dimension of trait autonomy ................................................................................................................ 104 5.7 – Study Two hierarchical regression predicting one’s own comfort levels with stories about social-oriented controversial issues running in the school newspaper, with high school journalism experience added to the demographic model ................... 115 5.8 – Study Two hierarchical regression predicting one’s own comfort levels with stories about school-oriented controversial issues running in the school newspaper, with high school journalism experience added to the demographic model ................... 116 v LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 2.1 – Full Study One model predicting comfort levels of covering controversial topics . 48 3.1 – Study One hypothesized structural equation model ................................................. 71 3.2 – Study One SEM predicting comfort levels with stories about school topics ........... 73 3.3 – Study One SEM predicting comfort levels with stories about social topics ............ 74 4.1 – Full Study Two model predicting comfort levels of covering controversial topics 88 5.1 – Hypothesized structural equation model for Study Two ....................................... 105 5.2 – Study Two SEM predicting comfort levels with stories about school topics ........ 107 5.3 – Study Two SEM predicting comfort levels with stories about social topics ......... 108 5.4 – Scatterplot showing best line fit for the effect of perceived peer’s comfort levels with school-oriented controversial issues on personal comfort levels, for both high and low maternal autonomy support ...................................................................... 111 5.5 – Scatterplot showing best line fit for the effect of perceived peer’s comfort levels with social-oriented controversial issues on personal comfort levels, for both high and low maternal autonomy support ...................................................................... 112 5.6 – Scatterplot showing best line fit for the effect of perceived peer’s comfort levels with school-oriented controversial issues on personal comfort levels, for both high and low adviser autonomy support ........................................................................ 113 v i ON PARENTS, PEERS, ADMINISTRATORS, AND ADVISERS: DEVELOPING A SYSTEM TO UNDERSTAND SELF-CENSORSHIP OF CONTROVERSIAL TOPICS IN THE HIGH SCHOOL PRESS Adam M. Maksl Dr. Charles N. Davis, Dissertation Supervisor ABSTRACT Two surveys of young college students (N =134; N =372) were used to examine what 1 2 perceived familial and educational factors influenced former high school journalism students’ comfort levels with controversial stories running in the student newspaper. Using theory from developmental psychology, newsroom sociology, communications, and legal studies, this dissertation develops a model for understanding both direct and indirect influences on freedom of expression in the scholastic press. Specifically, results suggest that perceptions of peers’ and advisers’ comfort with publishing controversial stories influences individual comfort levels. Contrary to suggestions from other scholastic journalism research, former scholastic journalists’ perceptions of their principals’ opinions were not predictive of individual comfort levels with running controversial stories. Both theoretical and practical implications are discussed. vi i