Running head: INTERPERSONAL DISGUST AND INTERGROUP PREJUDICE

Implications Concerning the Relevance of Evolutionary Psychologys Disgust Construct in Evaluating Interpersonal Disgust and Intergroup Prejudice Irena Pawlak Keiser University Dr. Richard Mendelson Evolutionary Psychology June 5, 2013

INTERPERSONAL DISGUST AND INTERGROUP PREJUDICE

Implications Concerning the Relevance of Evolutionary Psychologys Disgust Construct in Evaluating Interpersonal Disgust and Intergroup Prejudice According to evolutionary psychology, emotions regulate human behavior based on particular mechanisms designed to enhance their reproductive fitness (Tooby & Cosmides, 2005). Specifically, it was proposed as a motivating response to avoid potential disease and hazards elicited by perceptual cues, such as deformations to the expected morphology of all species (Kurzban & Neuberg, 2005). While such inputs were designed to induce irrational avoidance as a protective mechanism where limited information selected erred on the side of caution, these were tempered with similar mechanisms designed to elicit empathy in certain cases (Kurzban & Neuberg, 2005). As such, the disgust mechanisms for avoidance as an adaptive design may only be partially responsible for modern avoidance-related intergroup (Kurzban & Neuberg, 2005). Furthermore, while disgust is an affective emotion designed to elicit avoidance to dangerous situations, prejudice appears to be a byproduct of intergroup conflict moderated by collective attitudes rather than individual sentiments (Cummins, 2005; Kurzban & Neuberg, 2005; "Mediator versus moderator variables," 1999). Based on the perceptual factor inherent in the disgust response, its role in prejudice towards outgroup may provide valuable insight in explaining negative outgroup attitudes (Hodson & Costello, 2007). In turn, such studies could aid in the development and promotion of more effective anti-prejudice campaigns (Vorauer, Gagnon, & Sasaki, 2009). Summary In the study, Interpersonal Disgust, Ideological Orientations, and Dehumanization as Predictors of Intergroup Attitudes, Hodson and Costello (2007) attempted to link interpersonal

INTERPERSONAL DISGUST AND INTERGROUP PREJUDICE disgust and prejudice. The rationale underlying this posited relationship was based on recent attempts to operationalize disgust and prejudice as similar concepts invoking avoidance and violation of social norms (O'Connor, 2011). Accordingly, the goal of Hodson and Costellos (2007) study was to evaluate whether interpersonal disgust sensitivity was a reliable indicator of prejudice towards outgroups. Specifically, interpersonal disgust and its association as an irrational fear of personal contamination of both body and reputation was hypothesized to be predictive of negative attitudes towards immigrants (Hodson & Costello, 2007). The available research at the time of the study supported a positive relationship between disgust and prejudice (Hodson & Costello, 2007). The basic assumptions advanced by prior research attributed ideological themes of right wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO) as major factors accounting for prejudice against outgroups (Hodson & Costello, 2007). Right wing authoritarianism is a form of intragroup managing via enforcing social norms through ostracizing and creation of outgroups for violators (Hodson & Costello, 2007). Similarly, SDO is a form of intergroup management designed to enforce the status-quo of the dominant partys social hierarchy through the exclusion of outgroups (Cummins, 2005; Hodson & Costello, 2007). In accordance with previous research on these matters, Hodson and Costello (2007) hypothesized that interpersonal disgust sensitivity and negative intergroup attitudes towards immigrants would be explained by the ideological theories of RWA and SDO coupled with dehumanization. To test their theory, 103 English Canadians were recruited and provided with several scales designed to measure their sensitivity to intergroup disgust, levels of perceived susceptibility to disease, ideological threats, and dehumanization of immigrants (Hodson & Costello, 2007).

INTERPERSONAL DISGUST AND INTERGROUP PREJUDICE According to the path analysis model used to measure the correlations between

measurements (Brannick, 2010), Hodson and Costello (2007) believed that the results confirmed their hypothesis of interpersonal disgust sensitivity as a reliable predictor of prejudice. In particular, Hodson and Costello (2007) expanded prior research findings related to RWA and SDO as partial variances of prejudice by demonstrating that interpersonal disgust sensitivity and degree of prejudice were mediated by RWA, SDO, and dehumanization either directly or indirectly. A novel finding of the study also parsed out the evolutionary adaptation of disgust as a disease avoidance motivator as a possible correlate of prejudice (Hodson & Costello, 2007). Critique The study by Hodson and Costello (2007) provided a innovate approach to explain the rationale behind interpersonal disgust as a potential factor responsible for prejudice against outgroups. For example, Hodson and Costellos (2007) acknowledgement of the lack of studies demonstrating disgust as a causal factor in prejudice outside of evolutionary psychologys construct demonstrated a lack of bias in the creation of their hypothesis. Furthermore, the explicit acknowledgement of the path analysiss theoretical orientation as opposed to a definitive causal model provided a genuine scientific purpose to explain rather than reject the relationship of disgust and prejudice towards outgroups (Brannick, 2010; Hodson & Costello, 2007). These positive attributes, however, were overshadowed by the dismissal of the evolutionary role of disgust as a separate correlate for intergroup avoidance unrelated to ideological cultural designs (Hodson & Costello, 2007). Support of this limitation is evident in the scale used to measure the disease avoidance function of disgust though the Perceived Vulnerability to Disease (PVD) scale (Hodson & Costello, 2007; Kurzban & Neuberg, 2005). The PVD scale is a measure of an individuals perceived vulnerability to potential vehicles of

INTERPERSONAL DISGUST AND INTERGROUP PREJUDICE transmissions as opposed to the level of avoidance of actual humans or animals that display

theoretically associated characteristics of pathogenic disease (Hodson & Costello, 2007; Kurzban & Neuberg, 2005). Accordingly, Hodson and Costellos (2007) interpretation of disgust and its corresponding moderator via empathy failed to provide a reasonable justification for dismissing a credible and empirically tested adaptive design (Kurzban & Neuberg, 2005). Another possible limitation of the study is related to the ideological theories tested in Hodson and Costellos (2007) study based on the assumptions of prior research on the subject of interpersonal disgust and intergroup avoidance. The ideological components supported by both RWA and SDO actually appear to be overlapping constructs of artifacts related to resource allocation in evolutionary theory (Cummins, 2005; Hodson & Costello, 2007). Again, these findings appeared to be the result of the scales used to assess the degree of ideological adherence. With respect to RWA, the scale used by Hodson and Costello (2007), despite being a dimensional Likert-scale, was directed more towards moral and obedience rules rather than the intragroup dimension of perceived ability of outgroups to upset the allocation of resources (Kurzban & Neuberg, 2005; Ray, 1985). Similarly, problems have been associated with the construct validity of the SDO in which the underlying purpose of the scale to measure disruptions in social status by outgroups is only somewhat indicative of hierarchy orientation (Xin & Chi, 2010). In fact, the study by Xin and Chi (2010) actually included the same ingroup population of Canadians and discovered that the wording effect led to a skewed bias towards negative outgroup attitudes. When considering the questionable construct validity of the two scales, the evolutionary theory of negative attitudes and prejudice being a by-product and moderator of immigrant/outgroup prejudice appears more likely (Cummins, 2005; "Mediator versus moderator variables," 1999). As Cummins (2005) explained, social status and completion

INTERPERSONAL DISGUST AND INTERGROUP PREJUDICE without adequate policing may be moderated by unchecked attempts to control resources,

including intragroup obedience through coercion. Therefore, the relationship between intergroup disgust and prejudice might be unrelated or biased by collective group pressures to conform to dominant social norms in order to prevent in-group retaliation (Cummins, 2005). Further support for evolutionary psychologys perspective could be inferred from the dehumanizing factor analysis where outgroups were associated with neuroticism and agreeableness which appears contrary to the selected ingroup traits of loyalty and conscientiousness (Hodson & Costello, 2007; Kurzban & Neuberg, 2005). These limitations may actually generalize to a large number of populations being that the scales used seem to lack construct validity for their intended measures (Ray, 1985; Xin & Chi, 2010). A fundamental analysis of the mechanisms involved in disgust may provide a better model for understanding prejudice and aid in the development of more effective anti-racism campaigns (Nesse, 2005). For example, a multi-cultural approach focusing on decreasing intergroup anxiety while maintaining social intragroup norms may foster a more cooperative society (Vorauer et al., 2009). Conclusion The study by Hodson and Costello (2007) was an attempt to demonstrate that interpersonal disgust sensitivity positively predicted prejudice towards immigrants. However, the studys conclusions failed to provide convincing evidence in support of this claim due to serious design flaws (Ray, 1985; Xin & Chi, 2010). Instead, the opposite seems more likely wherein moderation of collective prejudice seems to be a predictor of individual attitudes towards immigrants to remain in good standing with the dominant enforcers of the ingroup (Cummins, 2005; "Mediator versus moderator variables," 1999). As such, the intention to identify potential

INTERPERSONAL DISGUST AND INTERGROUP PREJUDICE mechanisms to explain prejudice was and remains to be an area in which research is needed to combat the negative effects of prejudice and intergroup conflict. Unfortunately, Hobson and Costello (2007) were unsuccessful in their original endeavor. On a positive note, most mistakes cannot be corrected until identified and, therefore, future research may benefit by avoiding the limitations discovered in this study.

INTERPERSONAL DISGUST AND INTERGROUP PREJUDICE References Brannick, M.T. (2010). Path analysis [Website]. Retrieved from Online Lecture Notes Website: http://luna.cas.usf.edu/~mbrannic/files/regression/Pathan.html

Cummins, D. (2005). Dominance, status, and social hierarchies. In D. Buss (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 676-697). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Hodson, G., & Costello, K. (2007). Interpersonal disgust, ideological orientations, and dehumanization as predictors of intergroup attitudes. Psychological Science, 18(8), 691698. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01962.x Kurzban, R., & Neuberg, S. (2005). Managing ingroup and outgroup relationships. In D. Buss (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 653-675). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Mediator versus moderator variables. (1999). Retrieved from http://psych.wisc.edu/henriques/mediator.html Nesse, R. M. (2005). Evolutionary psychology and mental health. In D. Buss (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 903-927). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. O'Connor, B. P. (2011). Social allergens. In L. M. Horowitz & S. Strack (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal psychology: Theory, research, assessment, and therapeutic interventions (pp. 269-280). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Ray, J. J. (1985). Defective validity in the Altemeyer Authoritarianism Scale. Journal of Social Psychology, 125(2), 271-272. Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (2005). Conceptual foundations of evolutionary psychology. In D. Buss (Ed.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology (pp. 7-67). Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley. Vorauer, J. D., Gagnon, A., & Sasaki, S. J. (2009). Salient intergroup ideology and intergroup interaction. Psychological Science, 20(7), 838-845. doi: 10.1111/j.14679280.2009.02369.x Xin, Z., & Chi, L. (2010). Wording effect leads to a controversy over the construct of the social dominance orientation scale. Journal of Psychology, 144(5), 473-488.