Dignity Index workshop at Hinckley Institute teaches students to score contempt and dignity in public talk

SALT LAKE CITY — Presenters from Project Unite and the Dignity Index told students at a Hinckley Institute of Politics forum that measuring how people speak to one another can help reduce polarization.

"We think contempt is the main thing that is tearing us apart as a country," said Madeline Jones, a program associate and trainer with the Dignity Index, which she described as an eight‑point tool that scores moments of disagreement from contempt to dignity. Jones explained the scale and guided students through multiple scoring exercises during the session.

A video clip from Unite co‑founder Tammy Pfeiffer framed the project’s origins: Pfeiffer described a family with widely differing political views and said contempt had crept into their conversations, motivating efforts to change how people talk to one another. "It kind of captures who he is as a musician," Pfeiffer said while introducing a personal anecdote; later she urged attendees to consider how contempt affects their own relationships.

Workshop leaders had students score real‑world examples, including a congressional post the presenters said evoked high contempt and a social post about a public figure that attendees typically scored as a 2 or 3 because it used dehumanizing language. Presenters also played a Ted Lasso clip and asked small groups to compare scores and discuss why lines fit particular points on the scale.

Jones described early evidence from the project’s pilot and follow‑on work: the Dignity Index began with a 2022 University of Utah pilot of 22 students, and organizers later convened a national citizens panel in which participants agreed about whether passages were dignified or contemptuous roughly 90 percent of the time. Jones characterized a 12‑week study that she said increased participants’ awareness of contempt in conversation but did not claim policy outcomes beyond changes in measured awareness.

Presenters emphasized that the index measures moments of interaction rather than labeling people. "This isn’t about labels for people," Jones said, adding that individuals can move up and down the scale depending on situation and pressure. Facilitators led role‑play scenarios so students could practice responding at different index levels; volunteers described responses consistent with scores labeled "3" (personal attack comeback), "5" (acknowledge but not seek common ground) and "7" (engage, admit mistakes and seek mutual understanding).

The session closed with a short question‑and‑answer period. When asked whether social media amplifies contempt, Jones replied that the attention economy makes contemptuous statements attractive and that short‑form platforms can make longer, more dignified responses harder to sustain. Organizers asked attendees to take a two‑minute survey and offered a $15 Amazon gift card as an incentive.

The presenters left contact information and a scoring guide at dignity.us for those who want to learn the method; they said they will continue to work with colleges and community groups to apply the Dignity Index in educational settings.