So Gross and Yet so Far Away: Psychological Distance Moderates the Effect of Disgust on Moral Judgment

Egoistic value is positively associated with pro-environmental attitude and behaviour when the environmental problems are psychologically close

Egoistic value is conceptualized as anti-environmental in many environmental value theories, yet contradictory evidence exists for its relation with pro-environmental attitude and behaviour. To provide insights into these inconsistent findings, this research examined the moderating role of the psychological distance of environmental problems on their relationship. Across one cross-sectional survey study (1008 community participants from the United States) and one World Values Survey study (66,704 nationally representative participants from 46 countries/regions), results converged in showing that psychological distance of environmental problems (i.e. climate change and local pollution) moderated the relationship between egoistic value and pro-environmental attitude and behaviour. Their association became more positive as that psychological distance got closer. Different patterns were observed for altruistic and biospheric values. These findings highlight the potential pro-environmental utility of egoistic value and the importance of paying attention to contexts when theorizing its relation with pro-environmental attitude and behaviour.

Personal relevance affects the perceived immorality of politically-charged threats

Personal similarities to a transgressor makes one view the transgression as less immoral. We investigated whether personal relevance might also affect the perceived immorality of politically-charged threats. We hypothesized that increasing the personal relevance of a threat would lead participants to report the threat as more immoral, even for threats the participant might otherwise view indifferently. U.S. participants recruited online (N = 488) were randomly assigned to write about the personal relevance of either a liberal threat (pollution), conservative threat (disrespecting an elder), neutral threat (romantic infidelity), or given a control filler task. Participants then rated how immoral and personally relevant each political threat was, as well as reported their political ideology. Partial support for our hypothesis emerged: when primed with conservative writing prompts, liberal-leaning participants rated the conservative threat as more immoral, compared with the same threat after a liberal writing prompt. We did not find these results for conservative-leaning participants, perhaps because all participants cared relatively equally about the liberal threat.

Specificity Versus Generality: A Meta-Analytic Review Of The Association Between Trait Disgust Sensitivity And Moral Judgment

Disgust seems to play an important role in moral judgment. However, it is unclear whether the role of disgust in moral judgment is limited to certain kinds of moral domains (versus many) and/or certain types of disgust (versus many). To clarify these questions, we conducted a multilevel meta-analysis ( k = 512; N = 72,443) on relations between trait disgust sensitivity and moral judgment (disgust-immorality association). Main analyses revealed a significant overall mean disgust-immorality association ( r = .23). Additionally, moderator analyses revealed significant specificity in disgust type and moral domain (grounded in Moral Foundations Theory): effects were stronger for (a) sexual disgust compared to pathogen disgust, (b) sanctity moral judgments compared to other domains of moral judgments, and (c) sexual-sanctity associations compared to other disgust type-moral domain pairings.

"Bed bugs live in dirty places"-How Using Live Animals in Teaching Contributes to Reducing Stigma, Disgust, Psychological Stigma, and Misinformation in Students

Bed bugs are on the rise and are increasingly perceived as harmful parasites. Because individuals affected by bed bugs often feel disgust and shame and are stigmatized, bed bugs are an important public health and environmental justice concern and therefore a health education issue as well. In this quasi-experimental study, we examine how different constructs, namely, forms of stigma, disgust, psychological distance, and myths about bed bugs (dependent variables), change over time (pre/posttest) in response to two forms of teaching intervention (independent variables) in upper secondary-level high school. The content of the interventions was the same, but in class, we showed live bed bugs to one group of students, assuming this would lead to a more realistic, less imaginative response to bed bugs than in the group presented with only pictures of bed bugs. Together with previous studies, we assumed that live bed bugs would be perceived as less disgusting and with a lower degree of stigmatization. Our results show that stigma, psychological distance, and myths can be reduced through intervention (regardless of live animal or picture). Disgust was more strongly reduced by live animals than by pictures. We present implications for biology education and contemporary health education.

Fear From Afar, Not So Risky After All: Distancing Moderates the Relationship Between Fear and Risk Taking

A growing line of research has shown that individuals can regulate emotional biases in risky judgment and decision-making processes through cognitive reappraisal. In the present study, we focus on a specific tactic of reappraisal known as distancing. Drawing on appraisal theories of emotion and the emotion regulation literature, we examine how distancing moderates the relationship between fear and risk taking and anger and risk taking. In three pre-registered studies (N_total = 1,483), participants completed various risky judgment and decision-making tasks. Replicating previous results, Study 1 revealed a negative relationship between fear and risk taking and a positive relationship between anger and risk taking at low levels of distancing. Study 2 replicated the interaction between fear and distancing but found no interaction between anger and distancing. Interestingly, at high levels of distancing, we observed a reversal of the relationship between fear and risk taking in both Study 1 and 2. Study 3 manipulated emotion and distancing by asking participants to reflect on current fear-related and anger-related stressors from an immersed or distanced perspective. Study 3 found no main effect of emotion nor any evidence of a moderating role of distancing. However, exploratory analysis revealed a main effect of distancing on optimistic risk estimation, which was mediated by a reduction in self-reported fear. Overall, the findings suggest that distancing can help regulate the influence of incidental fear on risk taking and risk estimation. We discuss implications and suggestions for future research.

Gross values: Investigating the role of disgust in bioethics

What is the role of disgust in moral judgements? Previous research found that disgust increases the severity of judgments; but other more recent work has cast doubt on these findings. Here we investigate roles of induced and trait disgust on moral judgments of controversial biological and medical technologies – bioethics – an area rife with proto-typical disgust cues. Participants (N = 600) viewed disgusting, frightening, or neutral pictures, rated the moral acceptability of biotechnologies, and completed questionnaire measures of trait disgust. We found a small negative effect of induced disgust (but not fear) on the acceptability of ‘existing’ biotechnology, but not ‘future’, ‘agricultural’, or ‘termination’ biotechnologies. But this effect was too small to change pre-existing opinions and would not have survived a correction for multiple tests. Although trait disgust had mostly negative relationships with the moral acceptability of biotechnologies, it did not moderate the effect of observing disgusting photos on biotechnology judgments. The larger, more consistent effects for trait disgust suggest that either (a) measures of trait disgust and moral attitudes share a source of method variance or (b) incidental, visual manipulations are too weak to capture the true effect of disgust on moral judgments.

Evolutionary psychology meets socio-ecological psychology: the motivational psychologies of disease-avoidance and parental care

Specific features of ancestral ecologies had implications for the evolution of psychological mechanisms that regulate specific aspects of human cognition and behavior within contemporary ecologies. These mechanisms produce predictably different attitudes, judgments and behavioral dispositions under different circumstances. This article summarizes two illustrative programs of research-one that focuses on the evolved psychology of disease-avoidance and its many implications, and the other that focuses on the evolved psychology of parental care-giving and its many implications. These programs of research exemplify the generative utility of evolutionary psychological conceptual methods within the domain of socio-ecological psychology.