Cited by 842Psychology of Moral and Emotional JudgmentEvolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorEmotions and Moral Behavior

Evidence that disgust evolved to protect from risk of disease

Open access
Curtis, Val, Aunger, Robert, Rabie, Tamer·2004·Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences

Abstract

Disgust is a powerful human emotion that has been little studied until recently. Current theories do not coherently explain the purpose of disgust, nor why a wide range of stimuli can provoke a similar emotional response. Over 40 000 individuals completed a web-based survey using photo stimuli. Images of objects holding a potential disease threat were reported as significantly more disgusting than similar images with little or no disease relevance. This pattern of response was found across all regions of the world. Females reported higher disgust sensitivity than males; there was a constant decline in disgust sensitivity over the life course; and the bodily fluids of strangers were found more disgusting than those of close relatives. These data provide evidence that the human disgust emotion may be an evolved response to objects in the environment that represent threats of infectious disease.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rsbl.2003.0144

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Sharing a person's bodily fluids becomes more disgusting as that person becomes less familiar because strangers are more likely to carry novel pathogens and present a greater disease threat to a naïve immune system.

    “sharing a person's bodily fluids becomes more disgusting as that person becomes less familiar because strangers are more likely to carry novel pathogens and hence present a greater disease threat to a naïve immune system”

    From Disgusting Bodies, Disgusting Religion: The Biology of Tantra (2011) · cites this paper as Curtis et al. 2004

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Rozin, P., Haidt, J. & McCauley, C. 1993 Disgust. In Handbook of emotions (ed. M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland), pp. 575-594. New York: Guilford Press.
  2. Rozin, P., Haidt, J. & McCauley, C. 2000 Disgust. In Handbook of emotions , 2nd edn (ed. M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland), pp. 637-653. New York: Guilford Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Curtis, V., Aunger, R., & Rabie, T.
Affiliations
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
Corresponding author
Curtis, Val
Venue
Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences
Published
2004-05-07
Volume
271
Issue
suppl_4
Pages
S131-3
ISSN
  • 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
  • 0962-8452
  • 1471-2954
OpenAlex
W2080838132
Cited by
842
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 42 · 2024: 65 · 2023: 61 · 2022: 64 · 2021: 78 · 2020: 45 · 2019: 50 · 2018: 50 · 2017: 46 · 2016: 47 · 2015: 47 · 2014: 50 · 2013: 35 · 2012: 28
FWCI
4.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
World Bank Group
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Emotions and Moral Behavior
Keywords
disgust, infectious diseases, disease threat, disgust sensitivity, sex differences, life course, biological fluids, close relatives, cross-cultural comparison
MeSH terms
Age Factors, Anxiety, Attitude, Data Collection, Disease, Biological Evolution, Fear, Female, Humans, Male, Sex Factors, Wounds and Injuries, Internet

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