According to the popular press, college students are increasingly asking for warnings before teachers cover sensitive topics such as violence and sexual abuse in class. The logic of these "trigger warnings" appears simple. Traumatized students will experience uncontrollable distress if they encounter reminders of their trauma, and warnings offer protection by allowing them to avoid triggers of distress.
Despite its simplicity, the standard portrayal of classroom trigger warnings is based on several assumptions that may or may not be supported by research. Although almost no research has directly examined classroom trigger warnings, a review article published for teachers by Guy Boysen in Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology evaluates if the logic of trigger warnings is consistent with the existing clinical literature on PTSD.
Some of the assumptions behind trigger warnings are clearly supported by research. There is no doubt that people with PTSD do face distressing and automatic symptoms in which they reexperience their trauma. These "intrusion" symptoms are common in PTSD, and they are frequently caused by external reminders, some of which might occur in a classroom.
Research also suggests that warnings could help students reduce distress. Intrusion symptoms, such as having vivid memories of trauma, are more distressing if they occur without warning than if the person with PTSD intentionally thinks about their trauma. So, making reminders of trauma more predictable and controllable with trigger warnings could reduce distress.
Other assumptions behind trigger warnings are inconsistent with research. Although almost everyone has a traumatic experience in their lifetime — in fact, it is common to have multiple traumas — only 10% of people go on to develop the symptoms of PTSD. In other words, relatively few students who experience trauma have the PTSD-based intrusion symptoms that trigger warnings are intended to help.
Even if there are students with PTSD in class, offering general warnings about sensitive topics may be ineffective due to the unpredictable nature of triggers. Not only do many people with PTSD experience distress without knowing what triggered it, but triggers often relate to experiences occurring immediately prior to the trauma, not the trauma itself. For example, an assault victim may be triggered by reminders of the setting of the attack rather than the attack itself, and that means trigger warnings about assault will be of no benefit.
A final problematic assumption is that avoiding trauma reminders is healthy. The opposite is true. Avoidance behaviors make PTSD worse, and effective treatments include safe exposure to thoughts and feelings related to the trauma.
In summary, what teachers need to know is that they may have students diagnosed with PTSD for whom individualized trigger warnings represent a legitimate accommodation for disability, but there is little support for the idea that offering generic classroom warnings about sensitive topics is beneficial to students in general.
Citation
- Boysen, G. A. (2017). Evidence-based answers to questions about trigger warnings for clinically-based distress: A review for teachers. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 3(2), 163–177. https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/stl0000084
Note: This article is in the Educational Psychology, School Psychology & Training topic area. View more articles in the Educational Psychology, School Psychology & Training topic area.