The current research tested whether exposure to disgusting images increases moral conviction and whether this happens in the presence of incidental disgust cues versus disgust cues relevant to the target of moralization. Across two studies, we exposed participants to one of the four sets of disgusting versus control images to test the moralization of abortion attitudes: pictures of aborted fetuses, animal abuse, non-harm related disgusting images, harm related disgusting images, or neutral pictures, at either sub- or supraliminal levels of awareness. Moral conviction about abortion increased (compared with control) only for participants exposed to abortion-related images at speeds slow enough to allow conscious awareness. Study 2 replicated this finding, and found that the relationship between attitudinally relevant disgust and moral conviction was mediated by disgust, and not anger or harm appraisals. Findings are discussed in terms of their relevance for intuitionist theories of morality and moral theories that emphasize harm.
ArsenioW. (1988). Children’s conceptions of the situational affective consequences of sociomoral events. Child Development, 59, 1611-1622. doi:10.2307/1130675
3.
ArsenioW.LoverA. (1995). Children’s conceptions of socio-moral affect: Happy victimizers, mixed emotions, and other expectancies. In KillenM.HartD. (Eds.), Morality in everyday life (pp. 87-130). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
4.
AvramovaY. R.InbarY. (2013). Emotion and moral judgment. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 4, 169-178. doi:10.1002/wcs.1216
BarghJ. A.ChenM.BurrowsL. (1996). Automaticity of social behavior: Direct effects of trait construct and stereotype activation on action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 230-244. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.230
7.
BarghJ. A.PietromonacoP. (1982). Automatic information processing and social perception: The influence of trait information presented outside of conscious awareness on impression formation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 437-449. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.43.3.437
8.
BartoszekG.CervoneD. (in press). Toward an implicit measure of emotions: ratings of abstract images reveal distinct emotional states. Cognition and Emotion.
9.
BaumanC. W.SkitkaL. J. (2009). In the mind of the perceiver: Psychological implications of moral conviction. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 50, 339-362. doi:10.1016/S0079-7421(08)00411-8
10.
BorgJ. S.LiebermanD.KiehlK. A. (2008). Infection, incest, and iniquity: Investigating the neural correlates of disgust and morality. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20, 1529-1546. doi:10.1162/jocn.2008.20109
11.
BrandtM. J.WisneskiD. C.SkitkaL. J. (2015). Moralization and the 2012 U.S. presidential election campaign. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 3, 211-237.
12.
ConwayP.GawronskiB. (2013). Deontological and utilitarian inclinations in moral decision making: A process dissociation approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104, 216-235. doi:10.1037/a0031021
13.
EskineK. J.KacinikN. A.PrinzJ. J. (2011). A bad taste in themouth: Gustatory disgust influences moral judgment. Psycho-logical Science, 22, 295-299. doi:10.1177/0956797611398497
14.
FrijdaN. H.MansteadA. S.BemS. (Eds.). (2000). Emotions and beliefs: How feelings influence thoughts. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
15.
GouldD. (2009). Moving politics: Emotions and ACT UP’s fight against AIDS. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
16.
GrayK.YoungL.WaytzA. (2012). Mind perception is the essence of morality. Psychological Inquiry, 23, 101-124. doi:10.1080/1047840X.2012.651387
17.
HaidtJ. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108, 814-834. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.108.4.814
18.
HigginsE. T.RholesW. S.JonesC. R. (1977). Category accessibility and impression formation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 141-154. doi:10.1016/S0022-1031(77)80007-3
19.
HorbergE. J.OveisC.KeltnerD. (2011). Emotions as moral amplifiers: An appraisal tendency approach to the influences of distinct emotions upon moral judgment. Emotion Review, 3, 237-244. doi:10.1177/1754073911402384
20.
HorbergE. J.OveisC.KeltnerD.CohenA. B. (2009). Disgust and the moralization of purity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 963-976. doi:10.1037/a0017423
JasperJ. M. (1997). The art of moral protest: Culture, biography, and creativity in social movements. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
23.
JasperJ. M.PoulsenJ. (1995). Recruiting strangers and friends: Moral shocks and social networks in animal rights and anti-nuclear protests. Social Problems, 42, 493-512. doi:10.2307/3097043
24.
JohnsonD. J.WortmanJ.CheungF.HeinM.LucasR. E.DonnellanM. B.. . . NarrR. K. (2016). The effects of disgust on moral judgments testing moderators. Social Psychological & Personality Science, 7, 640-647. doi:10.1177/1948550616654211
25.
KeltnerD.HorbergE. J.OveisC. (2006). Emotions as moral intuitions. In ForgasJ. P. (Ed.), Affect in social thinking and behavior (pp. 161-175). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
26.
KrosnickJ. A.BoningerD. S.ChuangY. C.BerentM. K.CarnotC. G. (1993). Attitude strength: One construct or many related constructs?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 1132-1151. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.65.6.1132
27.
Kunst-WilsonW. R.ZajoncR. B. (1980). Affective discrimination of stimuli that cannot be recognized. Science, 207, 557-558. doi:10.1126/science.7352271
28.
LandyJ. F.GoodwinG. P. (2015). Does incidental disgust amplify moral judgment? A meta-analytic review of experimental evidence. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10, 518-536. doi:10.1177/1745691615583128
29.
LavineH.HuffJ. W.WagnerS. H.SweeneyD. (1998). The moderating influence of attitude strength on the susceptibility to context effects in attitude surveys. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 359-373. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.2.359
30.
LiuB. S.DittoP. H. (2013). What dilemma? Moral evaluation shapes factual belief. Social Psychological & Personality Science.4, 316-323. doi:10.1177/1948550612456045
31.
LoweB. M. (2006). Emerging moral vocabularies: The creation and establishment of new forms of moral and ethical meanings. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
32.
MarzillierS. L.DaveyG. C. L. (2004). The emotional profiling of disgust-eliciting stimuli: Evidence for primary and complex disgusts. Cognition and Emotion, 18, 313-336. doi:10.1080/02699930341000130
33.
MayerN. D.TormalaZ. L. (2010). “Think” versus “feel” framing effects in persuasion. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 443-454. doi:10.1177/0146167210362981
34.
MikelsJ. A.FredricksonB. L.LarkinG. R.LindbergC. M.MaglioS. J.Reuter-LorenzP. A. (2005). Emotional category data on images from the International Affective Picture System. Behavior Research Methods, 37, 626-630. doi:10.3758/BF03192732
35.
MillerL. C.MurphyR.BussA. H. (1981). Consciousness of body: Private and public. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 397-406. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.41.2.397
36.
NeubergS. L. (1988). Behavioral implications of information presented outside of conscious awareness: The effect of subliminal presentation of trait information on behavior in the Prisoner’s Dilemma Game. Social Cognition, 6, 207-230. doi:10.1521/soco.1988.6.3.207
37.
OlejnikS.AlginaJ. (2000). Measures of effect size for comparative studies: Applications, interpretations, and limitations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 241-286. doi:10.1006/ceps.2000.1040
38.
PinkerS.(2008, January13). The moral instinct. The New York Times. Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/
39.
PizarroD.InbarY.HelionC. (2011). On disgust and moral judgment. Emotion Review, 3, 267-268. doi:10.1177/1754073911402394
40.
PomerantzE. M.ChaikenS.TordesillasR. S. (1995). Attitude strength and resistance processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 408-419. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.69.3.408
41.
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879-891. doi:10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
42.
RoyzmanE.AtanasovP.LandyJ. F.ParksA.GeptyA. (2014). CAD or MAD? Anger (not disgust) as the predominant response to pathogen-free violations of the divinity code. Emotion, 14, 892-907. doi:10.1037/a0036829
43.
RozinP.LoweryL.ImadaS.HaidtJ. (1999). The CAD triad hypothesis: A mapping between three moral emotions (contempt, anger, disgust) and three moral codes (community, autonomy, divinity). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 574-586. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.76.4.574
44.
RozinP.MarkwithM.StoessC. (1997). Moralization and becoming a vegetarian: The transformation of preferences into values and the recruitment of disgust. Psychological Science, 8, 67-73. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997.tb00685.x
45.
RozinP.SinghL. (1999). The moralization of cigarette smoking in the United States. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 8, 321-337. doi:10.1207/s15327663jcp0803_07
46.
RyanT. J. (2014). Reconsidering moral issues in politics. The Journal of Politics, 76, 380-397. doi:10.1017/S0022381613001357
47.
SalernoJ. M.Peter-HageneC. L. (2013). The interactive effect of anger and disgust in moral outrage and judgments. Psychological Science, 24, 2069-2078. doi:10.1177/0956797613486988.
48.
SchnallS.HaidtJ.CloreG. L.JordanA. H. (2008). Disgust as embodied moral judgment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 8, 1096-1109. doi:10.1177/0146167208317771
49.
SchnallS.HaidtJ.CloreG. L.JordanA. H. (2015). Landy and Goodwin (2015) confirmed most of our findings then drew the wrong conclusions. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10, 537-538. doi:10.1177/1745691615589078
50.
SimpsonJ.CarterS.AnthonyS. H.OvertonP. G. (2006). Is disgust a homogeneous emotion?Motivation and Emotion, 30, 31-41. doi:10.1007/s11031-006-9005-1
51.
SkitkaL. J. (2014). The psychological foundations of moral conviction. In WrightJ.SarkissianH. (Eds.), Advances in experimental moral psychology (pp. 148-166). New York, NY: Bloomsbury Academic Press.
52.
SkitkaL. J.BaumanC. W.SargisE. G. (2005). Moral conviction: Another contributor to attitude strength or something more?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 895-917. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.88.6.895
53.
SkitkaL. J.WisneskiD. C. (2011). Moral conviction and emotion. Emotion Review, 3, 328-330. doi:10.1177/1754073911402374
54.
SnowD. A.SouleS. A. (2010). A primer on social movements. New York, NY: W.W. Norton.
55.
VisserP. S.BizerG. Y.KrosnickJ. A. (2006). Exploring the latent structure of strength-related attitude attributes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 1-67. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(06)38001-X
56.
WheatleyT.HaidtJ. (2005). Hypnotic disgust makes moral judgments more severe. Psychological Science, 16, 780-784. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01614.x
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
