Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Anger, disgust, and presumption of harm as reactions to taboo-breaking behaviors.

By Roberto Gutierrez and Roger Giner-Sorolla


Three experiments investigated the relationship between the presumption of harm in harm-free violations of creatural norms (taboos) and the moral emotions of anger and disgust. Experiment 1 showed that participants made a presumption of harm to others from taboo violations even in conditions described as harmless and not involving other people; this presumption was predicted by anger and not disgust. Experiment 2 manipulated taboo violation and included a cognitive load task to clarify the post-hoc nature of presumption of harm. Experiment 3 was similar but more accurately measured presumed harm. In Experiments 2 and 3, only without load was symbolic harm presumed, indicating its post-hoc function to justify moral anger, which was not affected by load. In general, manipulations of harmfulness to others predicted moral anger better than moral disgust, while manipulations of taboo predicted disgust better. The presumption of harm was found on measures of symbolic rather than actual harm when a choice existed. These studies clarify our understanding of the relationship between emotions and their justification when people consider victimless, offensive acts

Topics: BF
Publisher: American Psychological Association
Year: 2007
DOI identifier: 10.1037/e633942013-956
OAI identifier:

Suggested articles


  1. (2003). 22). Santorum Angers Gay Rights Groups. The Washington Post,
  2. (2004). 31). Cannibal who cooked victim in garlic is cleared of murder.
  3. (2004). 5). The case for cannibalism. [Electronic version].
  4. (1987). A perspective on disgust. doi
  5. (1993). Affect, culture, and morality, or is it wrong to eat your dog. doi
  6. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. doi
  7. (1996). Appraisal determinants of emotions: Constructing a more accurate and comprehensive theory. doi
  8. (2001). Appraisal theory: Overview, assumptions, varieties, controversies. In
  9. (1999). Appraisal Theory. In doi
  10. (2000). Culpable control and the psychology of blame. doi
  11. (1998). Data analysis in social psychology. In doi
  12. (2005). Different emotional reactions to different groups: A sociofunctional threat-based approach to "prejudice." doi
  13. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. doi
  14. (2007). Emotion and prejudice: Appraisal tendencies and specific emotions toward outgroups. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, doi
  15. (2005). Establishing a causal chain: Why experiments are often more effective than mediational analyses in examining psychological processes. doi
  16. (2003). Evolved disease-avoidance processes and contemporary anti- social behavior: Prejudicial attitudes and avoidance of people with physical disabilities.
  17. (1994). Fuzzy concepts in a fuzzy hierarchy: Varieties of anger. doi
  18. (2002). Gender gaps in public opinion about lesbians and gay men. doi
  19. (1999). Handbook of cognition and emotion doi
  20. (2005). Hypnotically induced disgust makes moral judgments more severe. doi
  21. (2001). I am not an animal: Mortality salience, disgust, and the denial of human creatureliness.
  22. (1994). Individual differences in sensitivity to disgust: a scale sampling 7 domains of disgust elicitors. doi
  23. (2000). Intergroup emotions: Explaining offensive action tendencies in an intergroup context. doi
  24. love, and neuroticism: Why is sex such a problem? doi
  25. (2004). Moral dumbfounding: When intuition finds no reason. doi
  26. (2007). Moral emotions and moral behavior. doi
  27. (1986). Operation of the laws of sympathetic magic in disgust and other domains. doi
  28. (1985). Patterns of cognitive appraisal in emotion. doi
  29. (1999). Rage and reason: The psychology of the intuitive prosecutor. doi
  30. (2001). Relational meaning and discrete emotions. In
  31. (2001). Sexual morality: The cultures and emotions of conservatives and liberals. doi
  32. (1997). The "big three" of morality (autonomy, community, divinity) and the 'big three" explanations of suffering.
  33. (2003). The appraisal basis of anger: Specificity, necessity and sufficiency of components. doi
  34. (1999). The CAD triad hypothesis: A mapping between three moral emotions (contempt, anger, disgust) and three moral codes (community, autonomy, divinity). doi
  35. (1988). The cognitive structure of emotions. doi
  36. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. doi
  37. (2004). The emotional profiling of disgust-eliciting stimuli: Evidence for primary and complex disgusts. doi
  38. (1986). The emotions. Cambridge: doi
  39. (1922). The golden bough: A study in magic and religion (abridged edition). doi
  40. (2003). The moral emotions. In doi
  41. (1981). The philosophy of moral development: moral stages and the idea of justice.
  42. (2002). The theoretical versus the lay meaning of disgust: Implications for emotion research. doi
  43. (1997). The wisdom of repugnance.
  44. (2005). When Sex Equals AIDS: Symbolic Stigma and Heterosexual Adults' Inaccurate Beliefs about Sexual Transmission of AIDS. doi
  45. (2000). Why people stigmatize: Toward a biocultural framework. In
  46. (1993). You can’t not believe everything you read. doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.