There is evidence that inducing feelings of disgust increases the severity of moral judgments, but the size of this association has been questioned by a recent meta-analysis. Based on prior research and theory, we tested whether the effects of disgust on moral judgments might be moderated by sensitivity to bodily states (Studies 1 and 2) and the accessibility of mood (Study 2) in two large samples (total N = 1,412). We did not find that disgust directly increased the severity of moral judgments nor did we find evidence that these moderators influenced the effect of disgust. Thus, the current studies do not support large effects for induced disgust and for two presumed moderators of these effects.
BodenhausenG. V.SheppardL. A.KramerG. P. (1994). Negative affect and social judgment: The differential impact of anger and sadness. European Journal of Social Psychology, 24, 45–62.
2.
CameronC. D.PayneB. K.DorisJ. M. (2013). Morality in high definition: Emotion differentiation calibrates the influence of incidental disgust on moral judgments. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 719–725.
3.
ChapmanH. A.AndersonA. K. (2013). Things rank and gross in nature: A review and synthesis of moral disgust. Psychological Bulletin, 139, 300.
4.
CurtisV.AungerR.RabieT. (2004). Evidence that disgust evolved to protect from risk of disease. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B: Biological Sciences, 271, S131–S133.
5.
CurtisV.BiranA. (2001). Dirt, disgust, and disease. Is hygiene in our genes?Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 44, 17–31.
6.
EskineK. J.KacinikN. A.PrinzJ. J. (2011). A bad taste in the mouth: Gustatory disgust influences moral judgment. Psychological Science, 22, 295–299.
7.
EtzA.VandekerckhoveJ. (2016). A Bayesian perspective on the reproducibility project: Psychology. PloS ONE, 11, e0149794.
8.
FitzsimonsG. J. (2008). Editorial: Death to dichotomizing. Journal of Consumer Research, 35, 5–8.
9.
HaidtJ. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108, 814–834.
10.
HoetingJ. A.MadiganD.RafteryA. E.VolinskyC. T. (1999). Bayesian model averaging: A tutorial. Statistical Science, 14, 382–401.
11.
HorbergE. J.OveisC.KeltnerD.CohenA. B. (2009). Disgust and the moralization of purity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 963–976.
12.
IrwinJ. R.McClellandG. H. (2003). Negative consequences of dichotomizing continuous predictor variables. Journal of Marketing Research, 40, 366–371.
13.
JASP Team. (2016). JASP (Version 0.7.0.0) [Computer software]. Retrieved fromhttps://jasp-stats.org/
14.
KohlbergL. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive-developmental approach to socialization. In GoslinD. A. (Ed.), Handbook of socialisation theory and research (pp. 347–480). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
15.
LandyJ. F.GoodwinG. P. (2015a). Does incidental disgust amplify moral judgment? A meta-analytic review of experimental evidence. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10, 518–536.
16.
LandyJ. F.GoodwinG. P. (2015b). Our conclusions were tentative, but appropriate: A reply to Schnall et al. (2015). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10, 518–536.
17.
MacCallumR. C.ZhangS.PreacherK. J.RuckerD. D. (2002). On the practice of dichotomization of quantitative variables. Psychological Methods, 7, 19–40.
18.
MillerL. C.MurphyR.BussA. H. (1981). Consciousness of body: Private and public. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 397–406.
19.
OatenM.StevensonR. J.CaseT. I. (2009). Disgust as a disease-avoidance mechanism. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 303–321.
20.
OngH. H.Mullette-GillmanO. A.KwokK.LimJ. (2014). Moral judgment modulation by disgust is bi-directionally moderated by individual sensitivity. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 194.
21.
RouderJ. N.MoreyR. D.VerhagenJ.SwagmanA. R.WagenmakersE-J. (in press). Bayesian analysis of factorial designs. Psychological Methods.
22.
SchnallS. (2014). Clean data: Statistical artifacts wash out replication efforts. Social Psychology, 45, 315–317.
23.
SchnallS.HaidtJ.CloreG. L.JordanA. H. (2008). Disgust as embodied moral judgment. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 1096–1109.
24.
SchnallS.HaidtJ.CloreG. L.JordanA. H. (2015). Landy and Goodwin confirmed most of our findings then drew the wrong conclusions. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10, 537–538.
25.
SchwarzN.CloreG. L. (1983). Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well-being: Informative and directive functions of affective states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 513.
SimonsohnU.NelsonL. D.SimmonsJ. P. (2014). P-curve: A key to the file-drawer. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 534.
28.
SimontonU. (2015). Small telescopes: Detectability and the evaluation of replication results. Psychological Science, 26, 559–569.
29.
StrackF.SchwarzN.GschneidingerE. (1985). Happiness and reminiscing: The role of time perspective, affect, and mode of thinking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 1460.
30.
TurielE. (1983). The development of social knowledge: Morality and convention. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
31.
TyburJ. M.LiebermanD.KurzbanR.DeScioliP. (2013). Disgust: Evolved function and structure. Psychological Review, 120, 65–84.
32.
UgazioG.LammC.SingerT. (2012). The role of emotions for moral judgments depends on the type of emotion and moral scenario. Emotion, 12, 579.
33.
WheatleyT.HaidtJ. (2005). Hypnotic disgust makes moral judgments more severe. Psychological Science, 16, 780–784.
34.
WinterichK. P.MittalV.MoralesA. C. (2014). Protect thyself: How affective self-protection increases self-interested, unethical behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 125, 151–161.
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.
