The Trouble With Trigger Warnings

There’s a better way to protect the vulnerable

Trigger warnings, like so much in life, began with the best of intentions but quickly devolved into the absurd. First used in online discussions of sexual violence, they expanded exponentially and now include warnings about everything from racism to classism, as well as books such as The Great Gatsby and The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. This isn’t merely amusing. These warnings have real-world consequences. Rather than risk censure, some professors are simply eliminating any sensitive material from the classroom.

I am not reflexively opposed to trigger warnings. They are, as I said, well-intentioned, designed to prevent harm by allowing someone to “emotionally prepare” before being exposed to material that might reactivate a past trauma. Again, it sounds good. If I had, say, been brutally attacked by a Doberman as a child, I’d like to know if my new next-door neighbors own a large dog, especially if it happens to be a Doberman. But a growing body of evidence strongly suggests trigger warnings don’t work — and, in fact, do more harm than good.

In the latest study, published in the journal Memory, some 200 participants were asked to recall a negative event that took place within the past two weeks. They were then separated into two groups: one which was…