Many researchers have claimed that the emotion of disgust functions to protect us from disease. Although there have been several discussions of this hypothesis, none have yet reviewed the evidence in its entirety. The authors derive 14 hypotheses from a disease-avoidance account and evaluate the evidence for each, drawing upon research on pathogen avoidance in animals and empirical research on disgust. In all but 1 case, the evidence favors a disease-avoidance account. It is suggested that disgust is evoked by objects/people that possess particular types of prepared features that connote disease. Such simple disgust are directly disease related, are acquired during childhood, and are able to contaminate other objects/people. The complex disgust, which emerge later in development, may be mediated by several emotions. In these cases, violations of societal norms that may subserve a disease-avoidance function, notably relating to food and sex, act as reminders of simple disgust elicitors and thus generate disgust and motivate compliance. The authors find strong support for a disease-avoidance account and suggest that it offers a way to bridge the divide between concrete and ideational accounts of disgust.
Although referred to in passing in several places, there have been few attempts to specify the functions of the human olfactory system. This article presents an initial effort at identifying and categorizing these functions, using 3 sources of information as a guide: 1) losses experienced by anosmic participants; 2) olfactory function in other mammals; and 3) capacity, namely, whether the human olfactory system can support the suggested function and whether there is evidence that it does. Three major classes of function were identified, relating to Ingestion (Detection/identification prior to ingestion; Detection of expectancy violations; Appetite regulation; Breast orientation and feeding), Avoiding environmental hazards (Fear related; Disgust related), and Social communication (Reproductive [inbreeding avoidance, fitness detection in prospective mates]; Emotional contagion [fear contagion, stress buffering]). These suggested functions were then examined with respect to 1) issues of ecological validity in human olfactory research; 2) their impact on olfactory loss; and 3) their general and specific implications for the study of human olfaction.
The phenomenon of ‘microdosing’, that is, regular ingestion of very small quantities of psychedelic substances, has seen a rapid explosion of popularity in recent years. Individuals who microdose report minimal acute effects from these substances yet claim a range of long-term general health and wellbeing benefits. There have been no published empirical studies of microdosing and the current legal and bureaucratic climate makes direct empirical investigation of the effects of psychedelics difficult. In Study One we conducted a systematic, observational investigation of individuals who microdose. We tracked the experiences of 98 microdosing participants, who provided daily ratings of psychological functioning over a six week period. 63 of these additionally completed a battery of psychometric measures tapping mood, attention, wellbeing, mystical experiences, personality, creativity, and sense of agency, at baseline and at completion of the study. Analyses of daily ratings revealed a general increase in reported psychological functioning across all measures on dosing days but limited evidence of residual effects on following days. Analyses of pre and post study measures revealed reductions in reported levels of depression and stress; lower levels of distractibility; increased absorption; and increased neuroticism. To better understand these findings, in Study Two we investigated pre-existing beliefs and expectations about the effects of microdosing in a sample of 263 naïve and experienced microdosers, so as to gauge expectancy bias. All participants believed that microdosing would have large and wide-ranging benefits in contrast to the limited outcomes reported by actual microdosers. Notably, the effects believed most likely to change were unrelated to the observed pattern of reported outcomes. The current results suggest that dose controlled empirical research on the impacts of microdosing on mental health and attentional capabilities are needed.
This study investigated the relationship between perception of an odour when smelled and the taste of a solution to which the odour is added as a flavorant. In Experiment 1 (E1) sweetness, sourness, liking and intensity ratings were obtained for 20 odours. Taste ratings were then obtained for sucrose solutions to which the odours had been added as flavorants. Certain odours were found to enhance tasted sweetness while others suppressed it. The degree to which an odour smelled sweet was the best predictor of the taste ratings. These findings were extended in Experiment 2 (E2), which included a second tastant, citric acid, and employed four odours from E1. The most sweet smelling odour, caramel, was found to suppress the sourness of citric acid and, as in E1, to enhance the sweetness of sucrose. Again, odours with low sweetness suppressed the sweetness of tasted sucrose. The study demonstrated that the effects of odours on taste perception are not limited to sweetness enhancement and apply to sour as well as sweet tastes. The overall pattern of results is consistent with an explanation of the taste properties of odours in terms of prior flavour-taste associations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.