Research Paper on "Morality and Disgust"

Quoted Instructions for "Morality and Disgust" Assignment:

The Abstract (no more than 120 words), Introduction (450 words), Method & Results (450 words-together; NOT each) Discussion (450 words) and provide TWO additional references. The total word count (excluding the abstract and references) should not be more than 1350 words. NB Make sure you attach any working to your assignment (ie., t-test working).

We used a questionnaire designed to investigate the link between disgust and morality.

Our study was designed to clarify wether there is a link between disgust and moral stimuli that do not involve physical disgust elicitors.

- our moral stimuli were photos of pairs of people (target along side matched control) who were expected to differ in their perceived moral purity.

- we obtained moral ratings from a separate group of participants to check that the photos did differ in perceived moral purity.

- Our primary dependent variable was an indirect measure of disgust. ( which one would you prefer to share a toothbrush with?)

Hypothesis

Firstly we expected the stimulus photos to vary in the degree to which they would be judged as moral.

-it is difficult to be more specific about this because the moral judgement rating were used to select the high moral set and the low moral set of stimuli.

-as such, it is difficult to develop an hypothesis about it. So the validation of the stimuli might be reported in just the method and results sections without an accompanying hypothesis about it.

The main hypothesis is that disgust towards moral individuals will less than disgust towards individuals who are perceived as less moral.

Participants

We had 2 sets of participants

Partipants who completed moral ratings

Male: 27

female: 82

total= 109

participants who completed toothbrush preference judgments:

male; 35

female: 76

total= 111

Materials

The study contained many questionnaires and scales; the only materials relevant to our study were:

1. A set of 22 pairs of photos (ie 44 photos in total)

- 11 pairs were of men, 11 of women.

- one photo in each pair depicted a target person with some moral relevance eg nun, doctor, politician etc..

- each target person was matched to a photo of an individual of similar age and appearance, but with no obvious moral relevance.

2. A moral rating on a 7-point Likert scale:

Moral

1 strongly disagree

2 disagree

3 somewhat disagree

4 neither agree nor disagree

5 somewhat agree

6 agree

7 strongly agree

3. preference ratings of the pairs of people ( an indirect measure of disgust) eg which one would you predre to share a toothbrush with? a doctor or yoga instructor?

Procedure

Respondents completed the anonymous online questionnaires in class i about 30 mins using a computer

The instruction were:

- work through the questions at a steady pace. You should answer the questions by giving the first response that comes to mind.

-answer all questions honestly.

-the questionnaires are completely anonymous and must be completed privately.

Demographic information was provided first and participants were randomly allocated to either:

a) complete the moral ratings of the 44 photos of people. These 44 photos were presented one at a time in random order.

OR

b) complete the toothbrush preference ratings of 22 matched pairs of people. These matched pairs were presented in random order.

Results for moral ratings

- mean moral ratings were calculated for each of the 44 photos.

-the (top 5) highest rated photos were retained as were the (bottom 5) lowest rated photos.

-top 5 set of retained photos were of female doctor, male doctor, nurse, teacher and a nun

-the bottom 5 set of retained photos were of, male politician, female politician, care sales man, male real estate agent and female real estate agent.

Calculate wether the overall mean moral rating for the (top 5) highest rated photos is significantly different from the overall mean moral rating for the (bottom 5) lowest rated photos.

Results for toothbrush preference ratings

Overall toothbrush preference ratings for the top 5 moral photos and bottom 5 moral photos were calculated

-a mean rating above .5 indicates a preference for the target photos

- a mean rating below .5 indicates a preference of the matched control photos.

Calculate wether the overall mean toothbrush preference rating for the top 5 photos is significantly different from the overall mean toothbrush preference rating for the bottom 5 moral photos.

I will upload the results.

- Again, you plug the numbers into the equation and look at the t-table

- Express the results in words and include the statistic :

eg., t ( put the degrees of freedom in here) = ?, p <.5 or p>.05

Attach T-test working at the end of report.

Discussion

Interpret the results

-first were the hypothesis supported? ie link the hypothesis to the results

Does your data support the theories and research findings of others? ie related your results to the research you reviewed in the introduction

-are your results consistent with a strict disease-avoidance account of disgust? or are they consistent with a more abstract/ideational account of disgust, which encompasses non-disease related elicitors?

Criticisms

-note any weaknesses in the design that limit interpretation of the results

-entertain other explanation of the results

-distinguish between major flaws and minor flaws

-describe why the flaws were a problem

Future research:

- what would you do next to resolve ambiguities or answer questions raised by the present study

Brief concluding paragraph/ sentence.

Additional Information- Disgust (background)

-Revulsion at the prospect of oral incorporation of or intimacy with any offensive object

-Develops from distaste after about 3-6years of age.

- young children will handle faeces, or drink from a glass in which a sterilised cockroach has been dipped

- cognitive development must be advanced enough to demonstrate an appreciation of contamination before

disgust can emerge

9 domains of disgust elicitors

1. food eg drinking spoiled milk

2. animals eg rats, maggots

3. Body products eg vomit

4. sexual behaviour eg women who has sex with her father

5. body envelope violation eg gore and deformity

6. contact with death eg touching a corpse

7. poor hygiene eg drinking from another persons glass

8. interpersonal contamination eg disease

9. moral eg hypocrites

-So one dominant perspective suggests that disgust originated as a rejection response to bad tastes, and then transformed into an abstract and ideational emotion eg moral disgust

Disgust and Disease avoidance

The other main approach sees disgust only as an evolved disease- avoidance mechanism.

- we have evolved multiple biological defenses in the arms race agains parasitic attackers eg immune system

-Images of objects depicting potential disease risk are more disgusting than almost identical objects with no relevance ( Curtis et al, 2004)

- For every modern infectious disease, one or more disgust elicitors is involved.

Disgust and Morality

- Almost all of the domains of disgust elicitors involve a substantial risk of infection

-however moral elicitors do not seem to fit well with the disease avoidance account

- well, is there a link between disgust and moral judgement?

- if we think someone is morally bad, do we also feel disgust?

-Many studies claim a link exists between moral elicitors and disgust confound the moral elicitors they use with aspects of basic disgust elicitors eg murder is an immoral act and people often report feeling disgust towards the muderer.

- This has been a common problem for much of the research on moral disgust

-However there has been recent research showing that immoral thoughts increased preference for cleanliness(Zhong & Liljenquist, 2006)

- study 1: recalling unethical vs ethical deed ( threat to moral purity)

produced increased accessibility of cleansing concepts

S_ _ P (soap/step)

W_ _ H (wash/ wish)

SH_ _ ER (shower/shaker)

- study 2: copying out an ethical vs unethical story increased self-report preference for cleansing products

- study 3: recalling an unethical vs ethical deed increased actual selection of an antiseptic wipe ( over a pencil)

-so there is some evidence to suggest that there is a link between physical cleansing and moral purity

- but is ther a direct link between moral stimuli and disgust like there is for disease- relevant stimuli?

References

you should use Curtis et al, 2004 and Zhong & Liljenquist, 2006 and must include atleast 2 more relevant references other than the two given.

*****