The Psychology of Cancel Culture: Do Public Shaming Tactics Really Work?

In the age of social media, cancel culture has become a powerful, polarizing phenomenon.

With a single tweet or video, someone can go from admired to ostracized in a matter of hours.

While cancel culture is often framed as holding individuals accountable, its psychological underpinnings and real-world impacts are far more complex.

Does cancel culture genuinely bring about meaningful change, or does it perpetuate harm?

Let’s unpack the psychology, effectiveness, and ethics behind public shaming tactics to see if they truly work.

The Psychology Behind Cancel Culture

Cancel culture has become a powerful social phenomenon, and its roots lie in human psychology—especially our need to connect with others and our response to people breaking social norms.

Here’s a closer look at the psychological forces driving it:

The need for social belonging

Humans have an innate need to belong to a group.

Psychologists have found that feeling connected to others is essential for mental health and survival.

In the context of cancel culture, joining a movement against a perceived wrongdoer creates a sense of unity.

People feel like they’re part of something bigger—a collective effort to uphold values or punish harmful behavior.

This shared purpose can strengthen group identity and provide a sense of purpose.

Interesting stat: A 2021 study in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin found that when people feel their group identity is threatened, they’re more likely to support collective punishments like canceling someone.

The power of public shaming

Public shaming has always been a tool for enforcing social norms.

In medieval times, wrongdoers were placed in stocks for public humiliation.

Today, social media plays a similar role, amplifying mistakes for a global audience.

The act of “canceling” someone—calling them out, shaming them, or boycotting them—often feels satisfying to those participating.

It can provide a sense of justice, especially when the individual being canceled is seen as someone who has abused their power or caused harm.

However, social media’s reach and anonymity can turn minor mistakes into massive scandals.

The punishment often outweighs the offense, with people facing career-ending consequences for a single misstep.

The Dunning-Kruger effect

The Dunning-Kruger effect—a cognitive bias where people overestimate their knowledge—also plays a big role in cancel culture.

When a controversy arises, people often form quick opinions based on limited information.

Social media rewards this behavior with likes and shares, creating an environment where snap judgments thrive.

This can lead to widespread outrage without a full understanding of the facts.

Example: Sometimes, a statement or post taken out of context sparks outrage, even though a closer look might reveal a more nuanced or innocent explanation.

But by the time the truth comes out, the damage is often already done.

The Effectiveness of Public Shaming

Does canceling someone actually work? The answer is more complicated than a simple yes or no.

Short-term vs. long-term consequences

In the short term, public shaming can seem very effective.

It’s quick, and the results are immediate:

• Companies drop their endorsements.
• Social media platforms ban individuals.
• The person at the center of the controversy often issues an apology.

These immediate actions can make it feel like the person is being held accountable for their actions.

In fact, a 2022 survey by the Pew Research Center found that 44% of adults believe cancel culture effectively holds people accountable for their actions.

However, when we look at the long-term outcomes, things become more complicated.

Some people use the backlash as an opportunity to reinvent themselves, bouncing back stronger and even gaining support from new audiences.

Others face prolonged harassment and damage to their mental health, career, and personal life. 

The backlash effect

Cancel culture doesn’t always work the way it’s intended.

Sometimes, when people feel the punishment is too severe or unjustified, it can backfire, leading to sympathy for the person being canceled.

This backlash can turn the person into a martyr or victim, undermining the original intent of holding them accountable.

Example: Comedian Dave Chappelle faced calls for cancellation after releasing controversial Netflix specials.

Rather than losing his audience, Chappelle’s fanbase grew.

Many fans saw him as a free speech advocate and rallied around him, shifting the conversation from his alleged wrongdoings to his right to express his views. 

The role of nuance and forgiveness

One of the major criticisms of cancel culture is that it often lacks nuance.

In the rush to judge, many important factors are ignored, such as:

• Context: What was the situation surrounding the incident?
• Intent: Did the person mean to cause harm, or was it a mistake?
• Willingness to change: Is the individual showing genuine remorse or a desire to grow from the experience?

Research insight: A study in Social Psychological and Personality Science found that when people believe there’s a chance for redemption, they are more likely to support accountability measures rather than harsh punishments.

This suggests that offering opportunities for growth and learning can lead to more positive outcomes than outright cancellation.

The Ethical Implications of Cancel Culture

While cancel culture seeks to address injustice, it raises several ethical concerns that merit serious consideration.

The slippery slope

A major ethical issue with cancel culture is the lack of clear guidelines about who gets to decide what is “cancel-worthy.”

In many cases, cancel culture operates without a structured system, leading to subjective and inconsistent judgments.

This means that decisions are often based on personal opinions, emotions, or even vendettas, rather than objective standards of behavior.

The impact on mental health

One of the most troubling aspects of cancel culture is its effect on mental health.

Public shaming, especially when amplified on social media, can have devastating consequences for the people who are targeted.

Those who are “canceled” often face intense emotional distress, and this harassment can lead to anxiety, depression, and even suicidal thoughts.

Important fact: A 2020 study in Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking found that individuals who experienced online shaming were three times more likely to report severe psychological distress.

This highlights the heavy toll that cancel culture can take on a person’s well-being.

The importance of due process

Cancel culture often bypasses established systems of accountability, such as legal processes or workplace investigations.

While these systems are not perfect, they are designed to carefully assess evidence, weigh context, and ensure that the punishment fits the crime.

Cancel culture, on the other hand, is often swift and lacks this careful consideration.

Final Thoughts

Cancel culture is a double-edged sword.

On one hand, it empowers marginalized voices and holds powerful individuals accountable.

On the other, it can perpetuate harm, ignore nuance, and undermine the possibility of growth and redemption.

To move forward, we must shift from a culture of punitive cancellation to one of accountability and learning.

Mistakes are part of being human, and creating space for dialogue and growth is essential for a healthier, more compassionate society.

FAQs