↓ Skip to main content

Moral judgment modulation by disgust is bi-directionally moderated by individual sensitivity

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
15 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Moral judgment modulation by disgust is bi-directionally moderated by individual sensitivity
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, March 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00194
Pubmed ID
Authors

How Hwee Ong, O’Dhaniel A. Mullette-Gillman, Kenneth Kwok, Julian Lim

Abstract

Modern theories of moral judgment predict that both conscious reasoning and unconscious emotional influences affect the way people decide about right and wrong. In a series of experiments, we tested the effect of subliminal and conscious priming of disgust facial expressions on moral dilemmas. "Trolley-car"-type scenarios were used, with subjects rating how acceptable they found the utilitarian course of action to be. On average, subliminal priming of disgust facial expressions resulted in higher rates of utilitarian judgments compared to neutral facial expressions. Further, in replication, we found that individual change in moral acceptability ratings due to disgust priming was modulated by individual sensitivity to disgust, revealing a bi-directional function. Our second replication extended this result to show that the function held for both subliminally and consciously presented stimuli. Combined across these experiments, we show a reliable bi-directional function, with presentation of disgust expression primes to individuals with higher disgust sensitivity resulting in more utilitarian judgments (i.e., number-based) and presentations to individuals with lower sensitivity resulting in more deontological judgments (i.e., rules-based). Our results may reconcile previous conflicting reports of disgust modulation of moral judgment by modeling how individual sensitivity to disgust determines the direction and degree of this effect.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
Singapore 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 74 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 22%
Student > Bachelor 14 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 16%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 13 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 39 51%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 5%
Neuroscience 4 5%
Philosophy 4 5%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 13 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 September 2023.
All research outputs
#3,276,329
of 25,582,611 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#6,263
of 34,665 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,610
of 236,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#47
of 151 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,582,611 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,665 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 236,284 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 151 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.