Cited by 154Psychology of Moral and Emotional JudgmentNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesOlfactory and Sensory Function Studies

Disgust sensitivity predicts the insula and pallidal response to pictures of disgusting foods.

Calder, Andrew J., Beaver, John D., Davis, Matt H., Van Ditzhuijzen, Jenneke, Keane, Jill, Lawrence, Andrew D.·2007·European Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

The anterior insula has been implicated in coding disgust from facial, pictorial and olfactory cues, and in the experience of this emotion. Personality research has shown considerable variation in individuals' trait propensity to experience disgust ('disgust sensitivity'). Our study explored the neural expression of this trait, and demonstrates that individual variation in disgust sensitivity is significantly correlated with participants' ventroanterior insular response to viewing pictures of disgusting, but not appetizing or bland, foods. Similar correlations were also seen in the pallidum and orofacial regions of motor and somatosensory cortices. Our results also accord with comparative research showing an anterior to posterior gradient in the rat pallidum reflecting increased 'liking' of foods [Smith, K. S. and Berridge, K. C. (2005) J. Neurosci., 25, 849-8637].

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2007.05604.x

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Human neuroimaging studies of disgust have often implicated the insula in cortex and subcortical striatal circuitry, which can include the nucleus accumbens.

    “Human neuroimaging studies of disgust have often implicated the insula in cortex and subcortical striatal circuitry (which can include the nucleus accumbens) (Calder et al., 2007; Chapman and Anderson, 2012).”

    From Evolving Concepts of Emotion and Motivation (2018) · cites this paper as Calder et al., 2007

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Calder, A. J., Beaver, J. D., Davis, M. H., Van Ditzhuijzen, J., Keane, J., & Lawrence, A. D.
Affiliations
MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit (GB)
Venue
European Journal of Neuroscience
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-06
Volume
25
Issue
11
Pages
3422-3428
ISSN
  • 0953-816X (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-9568
OpenAlex
W1953281406
Cited by
154
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 16
FWCI
4.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Cambridge
  • Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Olfactory and Sensory Function Studies
Keywords
disgust sensitivity, anterior insula, globus pallidus, food disgust, individual differences, neural correlates of emotion, somatosensory cortex, food liking
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain Mapping, Emotions, Female, Food, Globus Pallidus, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Oxygen, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Photic Stimulation, Temporal Lobe

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