Gruesome details: graphic descriptions and extreme harm differentially elicit horror (vs fear) via increased perceptions of abnormality

Harmful events elicit strong emotions, even when encountered third-hand in news reports. But emotional responses vary, depending on how the harm is described. Taylor and Uchida [(Citation2022). Horror, fear, and moral disgust are differentially elicited by different types of harm. Emotion, 22(2), 346.] found that when headlines describe harm that is extreme or abnormal, people reported greater horror, but when the harm is mild, common, or prospective, fear was greater. This led them to define horror as a response to abnormal harm. However, “abnormal” is a vague concept requiring articulation. To address this gap, repeated-measures experiments investigated two aspects of harm hypothesised to affect perceived abnormality and, consequently, feelings of horror. Participants read headlines describing harm manipulated in a 2 (Severity of Harm: Extreme, Moderate) x 2 (Graphicness of Description: Concrete, Abstract) design. After reading each, participants rated their affective response (horror, fear) and appraisals of the harm (abnormality, graphicness, severity). Analyses indicated that Extreme (vs. Moderate) Harm and Concrete (vs. Abstract) Descriptions increased abnormality, and also increased horror significantly more than fear. Mediation analyses found that the effects of Severity and Graphicness on horror were consistently mediated by abnormality. An alternative hypothesis that arousal mediates the effects found inconsistent support. This indicates that perceived abnormality differentiates the emotion concept of horror from that of fear.