Conditioned Disgust Research Articles

The effect of disgust conditioning and disgust sensitivity on appraisals of moral transgressions

A growing body of research suggests that the experience of disgust increases the severity of moral judgments. In addition, individual difference variables such as Disgust Sensitivity (DS) are associated with differential appraisals of moral transgressions. However, the influence of combined trait and state levels of disgust on judgments of such transgressions has not been fully explored. The present study examined how trait level DS, and state level disgust, induced via evaluative conditioning (EC), affect judgments of moral transgressions. Participants ( n = 61) were exposed to a differential EC paradigm where a neutral word (part) was paired with disgusting images (CS+). Participants then provided disgust and morality ratings of moral transgressions that either contained the conditioned word (‘part’) or a neutral word that was not conditioned with disgust (‘some’). Transgressions containing the conditioned disgust elicitor ‘part’ were evaluated as more disgusting, but not more morally wrong than those containing ‘some’. This greater perceived disgust for transgressions containing ‘part’ versus ‘some’ was significantly predicted by disgust conditionability, but not by disgust sensitivity. The implications of these findings to better understand the role of disgust in moral decision-making are discussed.

A comparison between taste avoidance and conditioned disgust reactions induced by ethanol and lithium chloride in preweanling rats

Adult rats display taste avoidance and disgust reactions when stimulated with gustatory stimuli previously paired with aversive agents such as lithium chloride (LiCl). By the second postnatal week of life, preweanling rats also display specific behaviors in response to a tastant conditioned stimulus (CS) that predicts LiCl-induced malaise. The present study compared conditioned disgust reactions induced by LiCl or ethanol (EtOH) in preweanling rats. In Experiment 1 we determined doses of ethanol and LiCl that exert similar levels of conditioned taste avoidance. After having equated drug dosage in terms of conditioned taste avoidance, 13-day-old rats were given a single pairing of a novel taste (saccharin) and either LiCl or ethanol (2.5 g/kg; Experiment 2). Saccharin intake and emission of disgust reactions were assessed 24 and 48 hr after training. Pups given paired presentations of saccharin and the aversive agents (ethanol or LiCl) consumed less saccharin during the first testing day than controls. These pups also showed more aversive behavioral reactions to the gustatory CS than controls. Specifically, increased amounts of grooming, general activity, head shaking, and wall climbing as well as reduced mouthing were observed in response to the CS. Conditioned aversive reactions but not taste avoidance were still evident on the second testing day. In conclusion, a taste CS paired with postabsorptive effects of EtOH and LiCl elicited a similar pattern of conditioned rejection reactions in preweanling rats. These results suggest that similar mechanisms may be underlying CTAs induced by LiCl and a relatively high EtOH dose.

Latent inhibition of conditioned disgust reactions in rats

The present experiments, using the latent inhibition (LI) paradigm, evaluated the effect of nonreinforced exposure to saccharin on the acquisition of an LiCl-induced saccharin aversion as measured by conditioned disgust reactions in the taste reactivity test and conditioned taste avoidance in a consumption test. When rats were preexposed to saccharin by bottle exposure (Experiments 1 and 3), LI was evidenced only by conditioned taste avoidance (bottle testing), but not by conditioned disgust reactions (intraoral [IO] testing). On the other hand, when rats were preexposed to saccharin by IO infusion (Experiments 2 and 3), LI was evidenced only by conditioned disgust reactions, but not by conditioned taste avoidance. Experiment 4 showed that LI of conditioned disgust reactions does not appear to be affected by a context shift from preexposure to testing phases. These results show that the expression of LI of both conditioned taste avoidance and conditioned disgust reactions depends critically on a common method of flavor exposure during preexposure and testing.

Conditioned nausea in rats: Assessment by conditioned disgust reactions, rather than conditioned taste avoidance.

The terms conditioned taste avoidance and conditioned taste aversion are often used interchangeably in the literature; however, considerable evidence indicates that they may represent different processes. Conditioned taste avoidance is measured by the amount that a rat drinks in a consumption test that includes both appetitive phases and consummatory phases of responding. However, conditioned taste aversion is more directly assessed using the taste reactivity (TR) test that includes only the consummatory phase of responding. Rats display a conditioned taste aversion as conditioned disgust reactions (gapes, chin rubs, and paw treads) during an intraoral infusion of a nausea-paired flavored solution. Only treatments that produce nausea produce conditioned disgust reactions, but even rewarding drugs produce conditioned taste avoidance. Furthermore, treatments that alleviate nausea prevent the establishment and the expression of conditioned disgust reactions, but they do not necessarily modify conditioned taste avoidance. Considerable evidence exists indicating that these two measures can be independent of one another. The potential of a compound to produce conditioned disgust reactions is a reflection of its nausea-inducing properties. Taste avoidance may be motivated by conditioned fear rather than conditioned nausea, but conditioned disgust is motivated by conditioned nausea.

Domperidone interferes with conditioned disgust reactions but not taste avoidance evoked by a LiCl‐paired taste in infant rats

Rats exhibit taste avoidance and conditioned disgust reactions when stimulated with a tastant paired with lithium chloride (LiCl). Lithium-mediated activation of chemoreceptor nuclei at the brainstem appears to determine the acquisition of conditioned taste aversion (CTA) in adult rodents. Domperidone (DOM), an anti-emetic drug that does not cross the blood-brain barrier, was employed to analyze mechanisms underlying LiCl-mediated CTA in infant rats. On postnatal day 13 animals were given DOM followed by a pairing between intraoral saccharin and LiCl. Saccharin consumption at testing was lower in lithium-treated pups than in controls. DOM did not interfere with this LiCl-mediated taste avoidance but significantly decreased LiCl-mediated disgust reactions (head-shaking and wall climbing). Activation of the emetic system of the brainstem does not seem necessary for the acquisition of LiCl-mediated conditioned taste avoidance. Yet, these centers seem to be involved in the palatability shift resulting from taste-LiCl pairings. These results indicate an early dissociation between conditioned disgust reactions and conditioned taste avoidance.

Differential effects of neurotoxin-induced lesions of the basolateral amygdala and central nucleus of the amygdala on lithium-induced conditioned disgust reactions and conditioned taste avoidance

When rats are intraorally exposed to saccharin solution that has previously been paired with lithium chloride (LiCl), they display Pavlovian conditioned disgust reactions. When exposed to LiCl-paired saccharin solution by bottle, they display suppressed instrumental approach to the bottle resulting in suppressed consumption. The present experiments demonstrated that while neither neurotoxin-induced lesions of the basolateral amygdala (BLA) nor the central nucleus of the amygdala (CeA) attenuated the display of Pavlovian conditioned disgust reactions, lesions of the BLA (but not the CeA) attenuated instrumental conditioned avoidance of the taste. The results are discussed in light of current models of the role of the amygdala in aversive learning.