Pandemic elevates sensitivity to moral disgust but not pathogen disgust

Schwambergová, Dagmar; Kaňková, Šárka; Fialová, Jitka; Hlaváčová, Jana; Havlı́ček, Jan

doi:10.1038/s41598-023-35375-2

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our findings are consistent with the notion of the BIS which rapidly detects potential infection risks and promotes reactions of disease avoidance (Schaller et al, 2022) and with findings that disgust regulates pathogen exposure (Cepon-Robins et al, 2021), and hence largely drives the evaluations of violations of mitigation rules. Our results align with findings showing that moral disgust is relevant for reactions during the pandemic (Schwambergová et al, 2023).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Immoral, infectious, or both? How disgust sensitivity predicts judgments of violations against COVID‐19 mitigation actions

Schwarz,

Klümper,

Jansen

et al. 2023

Social & Personality Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Violations against mitigation actions to prevent the spreading of the SARS‐CoV‐2 virus causing COVID‐19, such as not wearing a mask or not practicing social distancing, were seen as immoral and could also increase the likelihood of spreading the virus. In two studies (N1 = 318, N2 = 293), we found that moral and pathogen disgust sensitivity differentially predicted perceptions of such COVID‐19 violations against mitigation actions, framed as a moral, pathogen, or on a good‐bad dimension, albeit in a less specific way than initially hypothesized (e.g., regarding the pathogenic framed violations, not only pathogen but also moral disgust was associated with higher perceptions of infectiousness). These results suggest that individual differences, especially in pathogen disgust (and, more inconsistently, moral disgust), are important when evaluating violations against mitigation actions. Further research on the role of moral disgust is needed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Immoral, infectious, or both? How disgust sensitivity predicts judgments of violations against COVID‐19 mitigation actions

Schwarz,

Klümper,

Jansen

et al. 2023

Social & Personality Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Modern disgust stimuli, such as chemical pollution and radioactivity, triggered distinct anger responses, suggesting that these threats carry a moral dimension ( Salerno and Peter-Hagene, 2013 ; Giner-Sorolla et al, 2018 ). Additionally, pandemic threats connected with disgust elicitors were also specific triggers of anger, highlighting the multifaceted nature of emotional reactions to global health crises ( Mota et al, 2020 ; Pfefferbaum and North, 2020 ; Schwambergová et al, 2023 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When food was associated with the odour of faeces, these animals were less inclined to feed and often vacated the area. Conversely, there was no discernible difference in their feeding behavior when exposed to the odours of blood or semen, which are not necessarily linked to pathogen avoidance but could be related to antipredator behavior or reactions to conspecific aggression ( Sarabian et al, 2017 ; see a review by Schwambergová et al, 2023 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, it remains a topic of inquiry as to how disgust may reduce the risk of infections transmitted through the respiratory route, such as tuberculosis or viral influenzas ( Schwambergová et al, 2023 ). Yet, sudden outbreaks of bacterial or viral diseases with the potential to rapidly spread globally present one of the biggest health challenges humans will need to face in the future.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Human emotional evaluation of ancestral and modern threats: fear, disgust, and anger

Peléšková,

Polák,

Janovcová

et al. 2024

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionAnimal and human ancestors developed complex physiological and behavioral response systems to cope with two types of threats: immediate physical harm from predators or conspecifics, triggering fear, and the risk of infections from parasites and pathogens leading to the evolution of the behavioral immune system with disgust as the key emotion. Integration of the evolutionary concepts of the fear module and behavioral immune systems has been infrequent, despite the significant survival advantages of disgust in various contexts. Studies comparing attention to ancestral and modern threats accompanied by fear have yielded ambiguous results and what qualifies as salient modern disgusting stimuli remains unclear. We do not know whether disgust or the behavioral immune system, as inherent aspects of human psychology, have adapted to safeguard us from pandemic risks or poisoning by modern toxic substances.MethodsTo test these effects, we have developed a survey comprised of 60 short vignettes describing threats evoking fear and disgust belonging to one of the three main categories of threats: (1) ancestral (phylogenetic), (2) modern (ontogenetic), and (3) pandemics of airborne disease. Each vignette was evaluated on a 7-point Likert scale based on fear, disgust, and anger. In total, 660 respondents completed the survey. The data were analysed using a factor analysis and general linear model with the respondent as a random factor.ResultsThe results show that the strongest fear is triggered by modern threats (electricity, car accidents), while the highest disgust is evoked by ancient threats (body waste products, worms, etc.). Interestingly, disgust does not respond to modern threat stimuli such as toxic substances or radioactivity as these evoke mainly fear and anger. Finally, a distinct response pattern was found for pandemic threats, in which both fear (e.g., of disease and death) and disgust (e.g., of used face masks) are employed.DiscussionOur study offers valuable insights into the emotional responses to ancestral and modern threats and their adaptation to pandemic challenges. Ancestral threats are not always more powerful stimuli than adequate threats of the modern type, but they function specifically. Thus, snakes and heights as fear-inducing ancestral threats form separate factors in a multivariate analysis, whereas all ancestral disgust stimuli group together. The threat of a pandemic forms a specific category and people process it emotionally and cognitively. These insights contribute to our understanding of human psychology and behavior in an ever-changing world.

show abstract

“…Also, our use of convenience sampling presumably led to some self-selection in the constitution of samples. Using a repeated measures design could reduce the potential confounding effects of individual variation, as demonstrated in a recent study on disgust during the COVID pandemic (Schwambergová et al 2023). While we are con dent in the broad pattern of our results, we also note that these practical constraints may have had some in uence on the observed results.…”

Section: Predictive Potential Of Emotions and Sociodemographics On Be...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond biophobia: positive appraisal of bats among German residents during the COVID-19 pandemic - with consequences for conservation intentions

Straka,

Coleman,

Macdonald

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bats are often considered to be objects of biophobia, the tendency to respond with a negative emotion, such as fear or disgust, even more so during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, existing studies have rarely compared both positive and negative emotions towards bats, leading to a potential negativity bias. This is crucial as emotions are important in human behavior, in relation to bats, for instance, in bat conservation-related actions. In two online surveys conducted among German residents, we aimed to i) assess both positive and negative emotions toward bats, ii) examine emotional shifts during the pandemic, and iii) explore how emotions, along with socio-demographics, predict intentions for bat conservation actions. The first survey was undertaken ten months after the official declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic (December 2020 - January 2021), when bats gained societal attention due to speculation about the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the second twelve months later (January 2022). Overall, respondents held higher positive emotions than negative ones towards bats in both surveys, with no significant emotional shift observed. Positive emotions positively correlated with intentions for bat conservation actions, while negative emotions did not show such a connection. Although our findings might be context-specific to the German or European population due to EU legislation protecting bats and their habitats, they highlight the nuanced and complicated emotions that can be associated with certain species. Understanding these emotions can guide targeted conservation strategies and public outreach. Our results caution against overly generalizing biophobia discussions in conservation.

show abstract

Pandemic elevates sensitivity to moral disgust but not pathogen disgust

Cited by 5 publications

References 49 publications

Immoral, infectious, or both? How disgust sensitivity predicts judgments of violations against COVID‐19 mitigation actions

Immoral, infectious, or both? How disgust sensitivity predicts judgments of violations against COVID‐19 mitigation actions

Human emotional evaluation of ancestral and modern threats: fear, disgust, and anger

Beyond biophobia: positive appraisal of bats among German residents during the COVID-19 pandemic - with consequences for conservation intentions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About