The DOI matches its Crossref record; 179 of the 179 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Things rank and gross in nature: A review and synthesis of moral disgust.
Abstract
Much like unpalatable foods, filthy restrooms, and bloody wounds, moral transgressions are often described as "disgusting." This linguistic similarity suggests that there is a link between moral disgust and more rudimentary forms of disgust associated with toxicity and disease. Critics have argued, however, that such references are purely metaphorical, or that moral disgust may be limited to transgressions that remind us of more basic disgust stimuli. Here we review the evidence that moral transgressions do genuinely evoke disgust, even when they do not reference physical disgust stimuli such as unusual sexual behaviors or the violation of purity norms. Moral transgressions presented verbally or visually and those presented as social transactions reliably elicit disgust, as assessed by implicit measures, explicit self-report, and facial behavior. Evoking physical disgust experimentally renders moral judgments more severe, and physical cleansing renders them more permissive or more stringent, depending on the object of the cleansing. Last, individual differences in the tendency to experience disgust toward physical stimuli are associated with variation in moral judgments and morally relevant sociopolitical attitudes. Taken together, these findings converge to support the conclusion that moral transgressions can in fact elicit disgust, suggesting that moral cognition may draw upon a primitive rejection response. We highlight a number of outstanding issues and conclude by describing 3 models of moral disgust, each of which aims to provide an account of the relationship between moral and physical disgust.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
Williams, J. B. W., & First, M. (2013) · Encyclopedia of Social Work · doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780199975839.013.104 · Cited by 109,519
Philosophy in the flesh: the embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought
(1999) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.37-0239 · Cited by 9,866
A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality.
Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.95.2.256 · Cited by 9,745
Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences.
Zajonc, R. B. (1980) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.35.2.151 · Cited by 8,094
The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment.
Haidt, J. (2001) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.108.4.814 · Cited by 8,048
Psychological stress and the coping process
Lazarus, R. S. (1966) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 7,164
Barsalou, L. W. (1999) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x99002149 · Cited by 6,887
How do you feel — now? The anterior insula and human awareness
(Bud) Craig, A. D. (2009) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn2555 · Cited by 6,657 · cited 3×
“…visceral awareness (Critchley et al., 2004), uncertainty (Grinband, Hirsch, & Ferrera, 2006), integrating exteroceptive with interoceptive stimulation (Farb, Segal, & Anderson, 2012), and perceptual decision making (Binder, Liebenthal, Possing, Medler, & Ward, 2004; for a review, see Craig, 2009).”
BackgroundEkman, P., & Friesen, W. V. (2019) · PsycTESTS Dataset · doi:10.1037/t27734-000 · Cited by 6,019
Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes.
Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Malle, B. F. (1994) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.67.4.741 · Cited by 4,954
Cited by
Emotional expressions reconsidered: Challenges to inferring emotion from human facial movements
Barrett, L. F., Adolphs, R., Marsella, S., Martinez, A. M., & Pollak, S. D. (2019) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100619832930 · Cited by 1,748
Murray, D. R., & Schaller, M. (2016) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/bs.aesp.2015.09.002 · Cited by 282
Heerdink, M. W., Koning, L. F., van Doorn, E. A., & van Kleef, G. A. (2019) · Cognition and Emotion · doi:10.1080/02699931.2018.1476324 · Cited by 55
Metadata
- Authors
- Chapman, H. A., & Anderson, A. K.
- Venue
- Psychological Bulletin
- Published
- 2013-03
- Volume
- 139
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 300-327
- ISSN
- 0033-2909 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1455
- OpenAlex
- W2071729581
- Cited by
- 326
- References
- 179
- FWCI
- 13.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Things rank and gross in nature: A review and synthesis of moral disgust. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/a0030964
- The paper
- Chapman, H. A., & Anderson, A. K. (2013). Things rank and gross in nature: A review and synthesis of moral disgust. Psychological Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030964
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.