The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The theoretical versus the lay meaning of disgust: Implications for emotion research
Abstract
Appraisal research based on participants' self-report of emotional experiences is predicated on the assumption that the academic community and the lay public share comparable meanings of the emotion terms used. However, this can be a risky assumption to make, as in the case of the emotion disgust which appears in common usage to reflect irritation, or anger, as often as repulsion. To examine the theoretical versus the lay meaning of disgust, 140 undergraduates were asked to recall a time when they felt either angry, disgust, disgusted, revulsion, or grossed out. Analysis of event recall responses and emotional experience measures suggests that the common understanding of the word disgust reflects a combination of the conceptual meanings of disgust and anger whereas the slang term grossed out more closely captures the theoretical construct of disgust. Implications of these findings for emotion research based on self-report are discussed.
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
Lazarus, R. S. (1991) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780195069945.001.0001 · Cited by 12,691
Emotion knowledge: further exploration of a prototype approach
Shaver, P., Schwartz, J., Kirson, D., & O'Connor, C. (1987) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.6.1061 · Cited by 3,072
Cited by
Disgust as a disease-avoidance mechanism.
Oaten, M., Stevenson, R. J., & Case, T. I. (2009) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0014823 · Cited by 1,120
Disgust: evolved function and structure
Tybur, J. M., Lieberman, D., Kurzban, R., & DeScioli, P. (2013) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/a0030778 · Cited by 810
In bad taste: evidence for the oral origins of moral disgust
Chapman, H. A., Kim, D. A., Susskind, J. M., & Anderson, A. K. (2009) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1165565 · Cited by 691
The moral emotions: A social–functionalist account of anger, disgust, and contempt.
Hutcherson, C. A., & Gross, J. J. (2011) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0022408 · Cited by 609
Social media and the formation of organizational reputation
Etter, M., Ravasi, D., & Colleoni, E. (2019) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2014.0280 · Cited by 428
Metadata
- Authors
- Nabi, R. L.
- Venue
- Cognition & Emotion
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2002-08
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 695-703
- ISSN
- 0269-9931 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-0600
- OpenAlex
- W2011498519
- Cited by
- 317
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 3.78
- 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: The theoretical versus the lay meaning of disgust: Implications for emotion research. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/02699930143000437
- The paper
- Nabi, R. L. (2002). The theoretical versus the lay meaning of disgust: Implications for emotion research. Cognition & Emotion. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930143000437
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.