Gender differences when touching something gross: unpleasant? No. Disgusting? Yes!

Similarities and differences in the induction and regulation of the negative emotions fear and disgust: A functional near infrared spectroscopy study

Affective processing, including induction and regulation of emotion, activates neural networks, induces physiological responses, and generates subjective experience. Dysregulation of these processes can lead to maladaptive behavior and even psychiatric morbidity. Multimodal studies of emotion thus not only help elucidate the nature of emotion, but also contribute to important clinical insights. In the present study, we compared the induction (EI) and effortful regulation (ER) with reappraisal of fear and disgust in healthy subjects using functional near infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) in conjunction with electrodermal activity (EDA). During EI, there was significant activation in medial prefrontal cortex (PFC) for fear and more widespread activation for disgust, with right lateral PFC significantly more active during disgust compared to fear. ER was equally effective for fear and disgust reducing subjective emotion rating by roughly 45%. Compared to baseline, there was no increased PFC activity for fear during ER, while for disgust lateral PFC was significantly more active. Significant differences between the two negative emotions were also observed in sympathetic nerve activity as reflected in EDA during EI, but not during ER. Lastly, compared to men, women had higher emotion rating for both fear and disgust without corresponding differences in EDA. In conclusion, in the present study we show that emotion induction was associated with differential activation in both PFC and sympathetic nerve activity for fear and disgust. These differences were however less prominent during emotion regulation. We discuss the potential interpretation of our results and their implications regarding our understanding of negative emotion processing.

Tactile disgust: Post-contact can be more disgusting than contact

Several studies have examined if disgust can be evoked by contacting an object-yet none have examined if reported disgust changes when the hand leaves the object. This is surprising given that post-contact tactile disgust is probably a driver of hand hygiene. We examined contact and post-contact tactile disgust and its sensory origins. Participants were asked to touch several objects, making sensory, disgust, and desire-to-handwash evaluations. These ratings were made at three stages-of-contact: object-contact (just touch), post-contact (just touch), and visual post-contact (touch, vision). Disgust was typically highest at post-contact (when the hand left the object). Stickiness and wetness were uniquely predictive of object-contact disgust. Only stickiness drove post-contact disgust, and only wetness visual post-contact disgust. Hand-washing desire was primarily driven by quantity of residue perceived on the hand. These findings suggest that tactile disgust is a multisensory and iterative process relating to object- and residue-adhesiveness.

COVID-19: the relationship between perceptions of risk and behaviours during lockdown

AIM

Understanding COVID-19 risk perceptions and their impact on behaviour can improve the effectiveness of public health strategies. Prior evidence suggests that, when people perceive uncontrollable risks to their health, they are less likely to engage in healthful behaviour. This article aims to understand the extent to which COVID-19 is perceived as an uncontrollable risk, and to assess whether this perceived risk is associated with health behaviour.

SUBJECT AND METHODS

We surveyed a nationally representative sample of 496 participants during the first UK lockdown. We assessed perceptions of COVID-19-related risk, self-reported adherence to infection control measures recommended by the UK Government, and general health behaviours. We predicted that increased perceived extrinsic mortality risk (the portion of mortality risk perceived to be uncontrollable) would disincentivise healthy behaviour.

RESULTS

Perceived threat to life was the most consistent predictor of reported adherence to infection control measures. Perceived extrinsic mortality risk was found to have increased due to the pandemic, and was associated with lower reported adherence to Government advice on diet, physical activity, and smoking.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that health messages that highlight threat to life may be effective in increasing adherence to infection control, but may also lead to a reduction in health-promoting behaviours. We suggest that messages that highlight threat to life should be accompanied by statements of efficacy. Further, messages evoking feelings of concern for others may be effective in promoting compliance with anti-infection measures, without the potential for the unwelcome side-effect of discouraging healthy behaviour.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10389-021-01543-9.

Does Touching Real Objects Affect Learning?

Based on theories of multimedia learning, the present study investigated whether the haptic sense serves as an additional channel to enhance the learning experience and learning outcomes. We therefore set up an experimental exhibition with two showrooms. In the first showroom, the sensory access of the participants to the exhibition objects was systematically varied in a 2 × 2 design with the between-subjects factors vision and haptics. While one group of participants could touch and see the objects, others could either only see or only touch them. The fourth group of participants found a showroom without objects. To address the auditory access, all participants were provided with information about each object via an audio guide. In the second showroom, further information was presented using posters. This showroom was the same for every participant. We aimed to investigate whether the haptic experience in the first showroom served as a motivator to engage further with the topic. The participants filled out questionnaires before visiting the first showroom, after visiting the first showroom, and after visiting the second showroom. To investigate the differences between the experimental groups on different outcomes, a memory test, a knowledge test, and various motivational-affective scales were used. The long-term effects of the information presentation were measured after 3 weeks. We found an advantage for recalling the objects and a heightened negative affect due to the haptic experience. Implications and further directions for this research will be discussed.

Aversive textures and their role in food rejection

Texture is a prominent feature in foods and consequently can be the reason a food is accepted or rejected. However, other sensory attributes, such as flavor/taste, aroma, sound, and appearance may also lead to the rejection of food and motivations other than unpleasantness exist in unacceptance. To date, these motivations for food rejection have been studied in isolation and their relationships with psychological factors have not been tested. This study measured reasons people reject a food and probed into the specifics of texture rejection. A large U.S. sample (N = 473) was asked to rate their motivations for rejecting a food, list foods that were disliked due to unpleasant sensory attributes, specify the unpleasant sensory attribute(s), and complete an assessment of general touch sensitivity. Results showed 94% of individuals reject a food due to its texture, a rate comparable to flavor-based rejection. Looking at the number of foods being rejected, flavor was the most common food attribute, followed by texture and then aroma. From a linguistic standpoint, aversive textures encompass a large vocabulary, larger than liked textures, and the same food may be rejected due to a single or combination of texture terms. Viscosity (e.g., slimy) and hardness (e.g., mushy) are the most common aversive texture types, but through cluster analysis subsets of individuals were identified that are more aversive to other textures. This study emphasizes the role of aversive textures in food rejection and provides many avenues for future investigations.

Perceptual and cognitive determinants of tactile disgust

Tactile cues are said to be potent elicitors of disgust and reliable markers of disease. Despite this, no previous study had explored what the full range of tactile properties are that cue disgust, nor how interpretation of these sensations influences disgust. To answer these questions, participants were asked to touch nine objects, selected to cover the range of tactile properties, and evaluate their sensory, affective, and risk-based characteristics (primarily how sick they thought the object would make them). Object contact was manipulated in four ways, with participants randomly allocated to corresponding groups-one that could see the objects (i.e., the control) and three that could not (i.e., the blind groups). To manipulate disease risk interpretation of the objects, labelling was used on the blind groups, with one receiving Disgust-Labels, one True-Labels and one no labels. Disgust was strongly associated with sticky and wet textures, and moderately with viscous, cold, and lumpy textures, suggesting adherence-to-skin may predict disgust. The participants in the disgust-labelled condition had the highest disgust ratings, and this was mediated by their increased sickness belief and fear of the objects. Object identification was poor when labels or visual cues were absent. Our findings suggest that tactile disgust may reflect a bottom-up sensory component-skin adhesion-moderated by judgements of disease-related threat.

A Proximal Perspective on Disgust

The functional basis of disgust in disease avoidance is widely accepted; however, there is disagreement over what disgust is. This is a significant problem, as basic questions about disgust require knowing if single/multiple forms/processes exist. We address this issue with a new model with one form of disgust generated by multiple processes: (a) pure disgust experienced during gastrointestinal illness; (b) somatosensory disgust elicited by specific cues that activate the pure disgust state; (c) anticipatory disgust elicited by associations between distance cues for somatosensory disgust and requiring threat evaluation; (d) simulated disgusts elicited by imagining somatosensory and anticipatory disgust and frequently involving other emotions. Different contamination processes interlink (a–d). The implications of our model for fundamental questions about disgust (e.g., emotion status; continuation into animals) are examined.