People who seem disgusting seem more immoral

Despite unresolved questions about replicability, a substantial number of studies find that disgust influences and arises from evaluations of immoral behavior and people. Departing from prior emphases, the current research examines a novel, related question: Are people who are viewed as disgusting (i.e., people whose habits seem disgusting) perceived as more immoral than typical or unusual people? Four experiments examined this, also exploring the downstream impacts of moral character judgments. Adults who seemed disgusting were regarded as more immoral for purity and non-purity violations (Experiment 1) and less praiseworthy for prosocial acts (Experiment 2). In Experiment 3, an 8-year-old with typical (but seemingly disgusting) habits was rated as "naughtier" and likelier to misbehave than an atypical child who loved vegetables and disliked sweets. Experiment 4 revealed how, when no behavioral information is available, beliefs about target disgust influence beliefs about future behavior, helping explain why seemingly disgusting targets are viewed as more immoral, but not always more punishable for their bad behavior.

A Review of Multisite Replication Projects in Social Psychology: Is It Viable to Sustain Any Confidence in Social Psychology's Knowledge Base?

Multisite (multilab/many-lab) replications have emerged as a popular way of verifying prior research findings, but their record in social psychology has prompted distrust of the field and a sense of crisis. We review all 36 multisite social-psychology replications (plus three articles reporting multiple ministudies). We start by assuming that both the original and the multisite replications were conducted in honest and diligent fashion, despite often yielding different conclusions. Four of the 36 (11%) were clearly successful in terms of providing significant support for the original hypothesis, and five others (14%) had mixed results. The remaining 27 (75%) were failures. Multiple explanations for the generally poor record of replications are considered, including the possibility that the original hypothesis was wrong; operational failure; low engagement of participants; and bias toward failure. The relevant evidence is assessed as well. There was evidence for each of the possibilities listed above, with low engagement emerging as a widespread problem (reflected in high rates of discarded data and weak manipulation checks). The few procedures with actual interpersonal interaction fared much better than others. We discuss implications in relation to manipulation checks, effect sizes, and impact on the field and offer recommendations for improving future multisite projects.

Defensive emotions and evaluative judgements: Sensitivity to anger and fear predicts moral judgements, whereas sensitivity to disgust predicts aesthetic judgements

Aesthetic and moral evaluations engage appetitive and defensive emotions. While the role played by pleasure in positive aesthetic and moral judgements has been extensively researched, little is known about how defensive emotions influence negative aesthetic and moral judgements. Specifically, it is unknown which defensive emotions such judgements tap into, and whether both kinds of judgement share a common emotional root. Here, we investigated how participants' individual sensitivity to disgust, fear, anger and sadness predicted subjective judgements of aesthetic and moral stimuli. Bayesian modelling revealed that participants who were more sensitive to anger and fear found conventional and moral transgressions more wrong. In contrast, participants who were more sensitive to disgust disliked asymmetrical geometric patterns and untidy rooms more. These findings suggest that aesthetic and moral evaluations engage multiple defensive emotions, not just disgust, and that they may rely on different defensive emotions as part of their computational mechanism.

Sourness impacts envy and jealousy in Chinese culture

In the present study, five experiments (N = 233) were designed to explore whether sourness as a sensory experience could implicitly impact social emotions of envy and jealousy in Chinese culture. Experiment 1 (n = 63) explored the implicit conceptual association between sourness words (vs. bitterness words) and envy/jealousy words. Experiment 2 (n = 70) and 3 (n = 20) examined the priming effects of imagined and tasted sourness (vs. bitterness and sweetness) on self-rated emotional intensity in envy- and jealousy-arousing situations, respectively. Experiment 4 (n = 40) and 5 (n = 40) further testified the priming effects of imagined and tasted sourness (vs. bitterness and sweetness) on self-rated emotional intensity in four types of social situations (i.e., envy, jealousy, sad and happy events), respectively. In the results, sourness was found as the only taste that not only conceptually associated with envy/jealousy, but also significantly primed envy/jealousy feelings. The possible mechanism underlying the association of sourness-envy/jealousy was discussed.

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.

Yikes! The Effect of Incidental Disgust and Information on Public Attitudes During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Existing research has focused extensively on the role of emotions such as anger, fear, and enthusiasm in explaining public opinion, but less is known about the importance of disgust, an innate disease-related emotion. To study the independent and joint effects of disgust and information, I draw on the case of the COVID-19 pandemic. I demonstrate that experimentally induced incidental disgust and exposure to information about how to flatten the curve of the COVID-19 cases have distinctive effects on political, racial, and health attitudes. Independently, exposure to information affects preferences only for restrictive policies to fight the spread of the virus. In contrast, the stand-alone effect of incidental disgust, as well as its joint effect with exposure to information, are responsible for attitude change toward both pandemic-relevant and irrelevant policies, Asian minorities, and prevention measures. Importantly, the study finds that citizens respond symmetrically to disgusting stimuli and information across degrees of political awareness, ideology, partisan affiliation, and trait authoritarianism. The results draw attention to the far-reaching implications of disgust on public opinion under threatening conditions.

Moral disciplining: The cognitive and evolutionary foundations of puritanical morality

Why do many societies moralize apparently harmless pleasures, such as lust, gluttony, alcohol, drugs, and even music and dance? Why do they erect temperance, asceticism, sobriety, modesty, and piety as cardinal moral virtues? According to existing theories, this puritanical morality cannot be reduced to concerns for harm and fairness: It must emerge from cognitive systems that did not evolve for cooperation (e.g., disgust-based "purity" concerns). Here, we argue that, despite appearances, puritanical morality is no exception to the cooperative function of moral cognition. It emerges in response to a key feature of cooperation, namely that cooperation is (ultimately) a long-term strategy, requiring (proximately) the self-control of appetites for immediate gratification. Puritanical moralizations condemn behaviors which, although inherently harmless, are perceived as indirectly facilitating uncooperative behaviors, by impairing the self-control required to refrain from cheating. Drinking, drugs, immodest clothing, and unruly music and dance are condemned as stimulating short-term impulses, thus facilitating uncooperative behaviors (e.g., violence, adultery, free-riding). Overindulgence in harmless bodily pleasures (e.g., masturbation, gluttony) is perceived as making people slave to their urges, thus altering abilities to resist future antisocial temptations. Daily self-discipline, ascetic temperance, and pious ritual observance are perceived as cultivating the self-control required to honor prosocial obligations. We review psychological, historical, and ethnographic evidence supporting this account. We use this theory to explain the fall of puritanism in western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic (WEIRD) societies, and discuss the cultural evolution of puritanical norms. Explaining puritanical norms does not require adding mechanisms unrelated to cooperation in our models of the moral mind.

Teaching Research in Principle and in Practice: What Do Psychology Instructors Think of Research Projects in Their Courses?

Psychology majors typically conduct at least one research project during their undergraduate studies, yet these projects rarely make a scientific contribution beyond the classroom. In this study, we explored one potential reason for this—that student projects may not be aligned with best practices in the field. In other words, we wondered if there was a mismatch between what instructors teach in principle and what student projects are in practice. To answer this, we asked psychology instructors ( n = 111) who regularly teach courses involving research projects questions about these projects. Instructors endorsed many of the commonly assumed pitfalls of student projects, such as not using rigorous methodology. Notably, the characteristics of these typical student projects did not align with the qualities instructors reported as being important in research practice. We highlight opportunities to align these qualities by employing resources such as crowdsourced projects specifically developed for student researchers.

What is the link between personality and food behavior?

A number of personality characteristics have been linked to various aspects of taste (gustation), trigeminal, and olfactory perception. In particular, personality traits have been linked to olfactory sensory thresholds and olfactory identification abilities, as well as to the sensory-discriminative aspects of taste/flavour perception. To date, much of the research in this area has focused on Sensation Seeking (including Experience Seeking, and Openness to Novel Experiences), with the latter being linked to a preference for spicy, and possibly also crunchy, sour, and bitter foods/drinks. Novelty-seeking has also been linked to a preference for salty foods, while anxious individuals appear to enjoy a much narrower range of foods. A bidirectional link has also been documented between taste and mood. Certain of the personality-based differences in taste/flavour perception and food behaviour have been linked to differences in circulating levels of neurotransmitters and hormones in both normal and clinical populations. Taken together, therefore, the evidence that has been published to date supports a number of intriguing connections between personality traits and taste perception/food behaviour.

Replicability, Robustness, and Reproducibility in Psychological Science

Replication-an important, uncommon, and misunderstood practice-is gaining appreciation in psychology. Achieving replicability is important for making research progress. If findings are not replicable, then prediction and theory development are stifled. If findings are replicable, then interrogation of their meaning and validity can advance knowledge. Assessing replicability can be productive for generating and testing hypotheses by actively confronting current understandings to identify weaknesses and spur innovation. For psychology, the 2010s might be characterized as a decade of active confrontation. Systematic and multi-site replication projects assessed current understandings and observed surprising failures to replicate many published findings. Replication efforts highlighted sociocultural challenges such as disincentives to conduct replications and a tendency to frame replication as a personal attack rather than a healthy scientific practice, and they raised awareness that replication contributes to self-correction. Nevertheless, innovation in doing and understanding replication and its cousins, reproducibility and robustness, has positioned psychology to improve research practices and accelerate progress. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Psychology, Volume 73 is January 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

Beyond vernacular: Measurement solutions to the lexical fallacy in disgust research

Disgust may play an important role in several mental disorders, in part because disgust seems impervious to corrective information, a feature noted long before it was studied by clinical psychologists. A deeper understanding of disgust could improve not only the treatment of mental disorders, but also other societal problems involving this peculiar emotion. In this paper, we review the measurement of disgust and identify issues that hold back progress in understanding how to treat this emotion. First, self-report measures of disgust, although optimized in terms of reliability, are compromised in terms of validity due to the "lexical fallacy," that is, the assumption that vernacular usage of emotion terms reveals natural kinds. Improved self-report measures that parse disgust from neighboring states of discomfort and disapproval can address this limitation, but these approaches are absent in clinical psychology. Second, "objective" measures of disgust, although free of vernacular limitations, require greater psychometric scrutiny. In a critical review, we find that most instrument-based measures fail to demonstrate adequate reliability, rendering them unsuitable for the individual differences research crucial to clinical psychology. In light of this assessment, we provide several recommendations for improving the reliability and validity of disgust measurement, including renewed attention to theory.

Does inappropriate behavior hurt or stink? The interplay between neural representations of somatic experiences and moral decisions

Embodied models suggest that moral judgments are strongly intertwined with first-hand somatic experiences, with some pointing to disgust, and others arguing for a role of pain/harm. Both disgust and pain are unpleasant, arousing experiences, with strong relevance for survival, but with distinctive sensory qualities and neural channels. Hence, it is unclear whether moral cognition interacts with sensory-specific properties of one somatic experience or with supramodal dimensions common to both. Across two experiments, participants evaluated ethical dilemmas and subsequently were exposed to disgusting (olfactory) or painful (thermal) stimulations of matched unpleasantness. We found that moral scenarios enhanced physiological and neural activity to subsequent disgust (but not pain), as further supported by an independently validated whole-brain signature of olfaction. This effect was mediated by activity in the posterior cingulate cortex triggered by dilemma judgments. Our results thus speak in favor of an association between moral cognition and sensory-specific properties of disgust.