Landy and Goodwin (2015) Confirmed Most of Our Findings Then Drew the Wrong Conclusions

Schnall, Simone; Haidt, Jonathan; Clore, Gerald L.; Jordan, Alexander

doi:10.1177/1745691615589078

Cited by 47 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, when combining the fully and partially suspicious groups in our linear mixed-effects regression models, we found that the bitter versus water effect was larger in the predicted direction among naive participants than among fully or partially suspicious participants. This result is in line with the idea that induced disgust has a stronger effect on individuals who are unaware of a link between the taste of the drink and the moral judgments (Schnall et al, 2015). Contrary to this idea, however, knowledge of the hypothesis did not moderate the bitter versus sweet effect.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

“…Several studies have shown that experimental manipulations of disgust can amplify moral judgments (e.g., Harlé & Sanfey, 2010;Moretti & Pellegrino, 2010;Schnall et al, 2008aSchnall et al, , 2008bVan Dillen, Wal, & Bos, 2012;Wheatley & Haidt, 2005). Although more recent research has cast some doubt on the existence of this relationship, some studies have proposed that the effect might be more robust for a specific type of manipulation: gustatory and olfactory disgust inductions (see Landy & Goodwin, 2015a, also see 2015b; Schnall et al, 2015). As this notion was largely based on one low-powered study with a particularly large effect size, we were interested in obtaining an accurate estimate of its effect size by conducting a high-powered meta-analysis of 11 preregistered direct replication studies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous studies had revealed a similar link between sensory disgust induced by other means, such as olfactory stimulation (Schnall et al, 2008b), and judgments of moral wrongness. Moreover, since Eskine and colleagues' (2011) study, empirical and conceptual work has grown around the idea that inducing perceptions of gustatory disgust is an especially effective way of increasing the severity with which people make moral judgments (Hellmann, Thoben, & Echterhoff, 2013;Schnall, Haidt, Clore, & Jordan, 2015).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Reexamining the effect of gustatory disgust on moral judgment: A multi-lab direct replication of Eskine, Kacinik, and Prinz (2011)

Ghelfi¹,

Christopherson²,

Urry

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Eskine, Kacinik, and Prinz’s (2011) influential experiment demonstrated that gustatory disgust triggers a heightened sense of moral wrongness. We report a large-scale multi-site direct replication of this study conducted by participants in the Collaborative Replications and Education Project. Participants in each sample were randomly assigned to one of three beverage conditions: bitter/disgusting, control, or sweet. Then, participants made a series of judgments indicating the moral wrongness of the behavior depicted in each of six vignettes. In the original study (N = 57), drinking the bitter beverage led to higher ratings of moral wrongness than drinking the control and sweet beverages; a beverage contrast was significant among conservative (N = 19) but not liberal (N = 25) participants. In this report, random effects meta-analyses across all participants (N = 1,137 in k = 11 studies), conservative participants (N = 142, k = 5), and liberal participants (N = 635, k = 9) revealed standardized effect sizes that were smaller than reported in the original study. Some were in the opposite of the predicted direction, all had 95% confidence intervals containing zero, and most were smaller than the effect size the original authors could meaningfully detect. In linear mixed-effects regressions, drinking the bitter beverage led to higher ratings of moral wrongness than drinking the control beverage but not the sweet beverage. Bayes Factor tests reveal greater relative support for the null hypothesis. The overall pattern provides little to no support for the theory that physical disgust via taste perception harshens judgments of moral wrongness.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reexamining the effect of gustatory disgust on moral judgment: A multi-lab direct replication of Eskine, Kacinik, and Prinz (2011)

Ghelfi¹,

Christopherson²,

Urry

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More generally, results from these studies add to the growing debate about the implications of disgust for various domains of social cognition. There have been several recent debates questioning the extent to which and under what conditions disgust sensitivity and pathogen threat manipulations are linked with moral judgments (see 2015a;Land & Goodwin, 2015b;Makhanova et al, 2018;Schnall et al, 2015), specific political attitudes (Ji et al, 2019), and political ideology (Shook et al, 2015;Tybur et al, 2015). Understanding whether, how, when, and why disgust and pathogen threat are connected with moral and political cognition will be aided by the availability data from preregistered studies or registered reports regardless of whether null hypotheses are rejected.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Testing the effects of pathogen threat and sexual strategies on political ideology

Shook

Oosterhoff

2020

Polit. life sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Disgust has been consistently associated with greater political conservatism. Two explanations have been proposed for this link. According to a pathogen threat model, disgust serves a pathogen-avoidance function, encouraging more conservative ideology, whereas a sexual strategies model suggests that this link is explained by variability in short-term versus long-term mating goals. In two preregistered studies using a college student and community sample (total N = 1,950), we examined whether experimentally manipulating pathogen threat and mate availability produced differences in political ideology and whether these differences were explained by disgust and sociosexual attitudes. Across both studies, we did not find evidence that manipulating pathogen threat or mate availability resulted in change in political ideology. In Study 1, manipulating mate availability was indirectly associated with greater political conservativism through stronger sociosexual attitudes that favor monogamy. These findings failed to replicate in Study 2. Implications for theory and future research are discussed.

show abstract

“…Other studies show that incidentally experienced disgust makes moral judgment of unrelated norm violations more severe (e.g., Eskine, Kacinik, & Prinz, 2011 ; Horberg, Oveis, Keltner, & Cohen, 2009 ; Schnall, Haidt, Clore, & Jordan, 2008 ; Wheatley & Haidt, 2005 ). However, various studies failed to show that disgust influences moral judgment ( David & Olatunji, 2011 ; Johnson et al, 2016 ; Ugazio, Lamm, & Singer, 2012 ; see Landy & Goodwin, 2015 , for a meta-analysis; see also Schnall, Haidt, Clore, & Jordan, 2015 ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

So Gross and Yet so Far Away

Dijke

Houwelingen

Cremer

et al. 2017

Social Psychological and Personality Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People morally evaluate norm violations that occur at various distances from the self (e.g., a corrupt politician vs. a cheating spouse). Yet, distance is rarely studied as a moderator of moral judgment processes. We focus on the influence of disgust on moral judgments, as evidence here has remained inconclusive. Based on feelings as information theory and the notion that disgust evolved as a pathogen avoidance mechanism, we argue that disgust influences moral judgment of psychologically distant (vs. near) norm violations. Studies 1 and 3 show that trait disgust sensitivity (but not trait anger and fear) more strongly predicts moral judgment of distant than near violations. Studies 2 and 4 show that incidental disgust affects moral judgment of distant (vs. near) violations and that the moderating role of distance is mediated by involvement of others (vs. the self) in the evaluator’s conceptualization of the violation.

show abstract

Landy and Goodwin (2015) Confirmed Most of Our Findings Then Drew the Wrong Conclusions

Cited by 47 publications

References 19 publications

Reexamining the effect of gustatory disgust on moral judgment: A multi-lab direct replication of Eskine, Kacinik, and Prinz (2011)

Reexamining the effect of gustatory disgust on moral judgment: A multi-lab direct replication of Eskine, Kacinik, and Prinz (2011)

Testing the effects of pathogen threat and sexual strategies on political ideology

So Gross and Yet so Far Away

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About