Agenda

Pathogen-Related Disgust, led by Marta Maslej

Emotions as Evolved Responses

  • Emotions are complex, and evolved to help humans respond to various everyday situations.
  • Emotions influence attention, perception, physiology, cognition, and behaviour. They also motivate changes that increase the likelihood of survival and reproduction.
  • Fear is one of the most spoken about emotions as a response to potential threats (e.g., predators in the wild). Historically, physiological responses such as heightened awareness, widened eyes, and increased heart rate enhanced survival chances by preparing the body for quick action. 


Charles Darwin’s Perspective on Disgust

  • Darwin highlighted the emotion of disgust as a reaction to the sense of taste or vivid imagination of revolting stimuli. 
  • Disgust evolved as a response to recurrent threats of pathogen transmission as pathogens require contact in various ways to infect a host. 
  • Initially, disgust evolved from toxin-based food rejection, instinticually serving to prevent tissue damage, illness, and death. This instinct now encompasses a broader range of pathogen avoidance, not limited to food.


Pathogen Entry and Exit Mechanisms

  • Disgust aids in determining when it’s safe to engage in necessary activities. Recognizing and steering clear of others’ biological exit points is a key disgust function. However, complete avoidance of all potential pathogens is impractical; we must eat and reproduce. 
  • Skin-to-skin contact and lesions are common pathways for pathogen entry, often involving reactions such as pus, blood, etc.
  • Pathogens can also induce behaviours such as itching to enhance their transmission.
  • They often exit the body through feces or bodily fluids, utilizing the body’s natural processes.


Cross-Cultural Elements of Disgust

  • Common objects of disgust across cultures include feces, urine, toilets, sweat, blood, and maggots. 
  • Certain cultural taboos (e.g., alcohol, nudity) also evoke disgust, potentially linked to infection risks in animals and moral-related disgust. 


The Process of Disgust

  1. Perceptual Monitoring

      2. Integration and Modulation 

  • Levels of disgust can vary depending on factors like kinship or situational urgency. These subtle variations in responses can translate to impacting patient care.
  • Ex: Mothers’ response to their own baby’s diapers as less disgusting compared to others (Case et al., 2006).

      3. Output of Response

  • Individuals may experience both psychological and physiological responses to disgust. It engages the cognitive process for information gathering and memory information, aiding in future avoidance.  
  • Ex: Exposure to disease-related cues can prime the immune system for a heightened response, as demonstrated in a study contrasting reactions to images of disease vs. non-disease threats such as guns (Schaller et al., 2010). 


Linking Disgust to Clinical Bias (Makhanova et al., 2023)

  • Makhanova et al., 2023 aim to expand on the understanding of how pathogen disgust influences interpersonal bias among healthcare professionals.
  • 317 individuals were involved in the study, including 210 clinicians and 107 control subjects.
  • Participants were assessed for their sensitivity to pathogen disgust. Participants read a passage about fictional immigrants, referred to as “Kranee,” and then provided their ratings based on this reading.
  • The study found that clinicians who had a higher sensitivity to pathogen disgust rated the “Kranee” immigrants as less likable and more unclean. Notably, this did not extend to increased feelings of hostility.
  • The study suggests that disgust sensitivity is a trait tendency. Individuals with a higher disgust sensitivity show a lower tolerance for people who are different. 

Moral-Related Disgust, led by Laura Sikstrom

  • Moral disgust motivates changes in social norms and personal interactions.
  • This can be especially seen in densely populated urban settings like public transportation systems.
  • Everyday actions, such as eating, grooming, or phone usage on public transit, for example, are framed as socially appropriate or inappropriate, highlighting the influence of cultural and societal contexts.


‘Weird Toronto’: A Snapshot of Urban Anomalies

  • ‘Weird Toronto’ is a Facebook group that captures unusual occurrences and behaviours in the city. Various incidents posted in the group illustrate breaches in moral and social norms. 
  • The group employs humour to navigate sensitive or uncomfortable topics, balancing between a coping tool and the risk of unintentionally endorsing stigma or shame.
  • Often times, posts conflate mental illness with other elements such as bodily fluids, highlighting societal biases and misconceptions. These public representations bring to light the ethical concerns surrounding mental health, highlighting societal biases and misconceptions. 


Mary Douglas’ Insights on Dirt and Social Order

  • Mary Douglas introduced the idea that ‘dirt’ is essentially “matter out of place.” This concept reveals that societal perceptions of what is considered ‘dirty’ or ‘clean’ vary across different cultures and historical periods.
  • Douglas’ observations were influenced by observations of the sanitation challenges in 19th-century London. Difficulties in urban development and public health highlighted how specific environmental and contextual factors influence societal norms around waste and cleanliness.
  • For example, soil can be seen as ‘dirty’ when in a home, but not in a garden.
  • Douglas’ insights extend to broader classifications within societies, as illustrated in her book, “Purity and Danger.” One example discussed is the dietary aversion to pigs in certain cultures, attributed to their distinct physiology and the concept of being ‘matter out of place.’ 
  • This reflects a broader tendency in human societies to classify and categorize, often leading to specific societal and cultural norms and taboos. 

Taboos & Moral Disgust

  • Encountering extreme behaviours like incest, child abuse, and bestiality provides a vivid lens into the moral fabric of society. These behaviours are seen as taboos,  highlighting their role in defining the limits of acceptable behaviour.
  • Mary Douglas’ observation in 1966, that taboos operate to control threats to social boundaries, is particularly relevant in this context. Taboo acts are not merely violations of legal or ethical standards; they represent a deep transgression of the collective moral conscience of society.
  • When confronted with these taboos in a clinical setting, workers such as police officers or healthcare staff, can express varying degrees of emotions. The complexity of these reactions is often compounded by additional factors, such as the mental health status of the perpetrator. For example, an act of violence committed due to delirium or psychosis might evoke a different response than one perpetrated by someone perceived as morally responsible. 
  • Incidents such as these can have a deep impact and lasting impression these moral transgressions have. It can hinder the workers’ ability to think critically about the situation at times as well.


The DASA Tool

  • The Dynamic Appraisal of Situational Aggression (DASA) is a tool used to assess how norm violations can potentially lead to aggression.
  • The DASA plays a crucial role in identifying behaviours that may be perceived as intrusive or inappropriate in social contexts (e.g., sitting too close to someone, touching someone without consent, or engaging in intense staring).
  • When perceived as violations of established social norms, these actions can provoke a range of emotions, notably disgust.
  • These reactions, however, are more intricate than a mere response to the act; they also encompass a reaction to the perception of the individual committing the act.
  • The DASA serves as a lens to view what is conventionally accepted in the ED and how deviations from these norms can be perceived as problematic.
  • Certain attributes, such as gender and physical height, can play a crucial role in how behaviours are perceived and dealt with. For example, the reaction to an intrusive woman might differ based on the gender of the person perceiving the action. 
  • To understand the broader implications of the DASA, we must look at the multifaceted nature of human behaviour, societal norms, and emotional responses.


Team Presenter(s)Presentation Slides
Laura Sikstrom

Marta Maslej


  • No labels