Impressions of Deviant Disgust Expressions Are Functionally Specific

the deviation occurred. Targets who failed to show disgust toward disgust-eliciting stimuli ("flat deviants") were judged as less healthy and lower in social status. Conversely, targets who expressed disgust to neutral stimuli ("react deviants") were judged as less open-minded and less cooperative. These impressions tracked inferred behavioral affordances: flat deviants were seen as more likely to engage in pathogen-risky behaviors, whereas react deviants were not. Consistent with these judgments, affective deviants were differentially "punished": flat deviants were rated as less fit and less likely to be recommended for jobs emphasizing health and hygiene, whereas react deviants faced these penalties for jobs emphasizing cooperativeness. Thus, perceivers do not simply condemn emotional norm violations; instead, they draw on expression-environment mismatches to make functionally specific trait judgments and potentially discriminatory decisions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
Published
2026-10-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672261489310
Primary Topic
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Impressions of Deviant Disgust Expressions Are Functionally Specific

Joshua M. Ackerman, Kaelyn Sabree
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
article

Impressions of Deviant Disgust Expressions Are Functionally Specific

Joshua M. Ackerman, Kaelyn Sabree
article en

Abstract

the deviation occurred. Targets who failed to show disgust toward disgust-eliciting stimuli ("flat deviants") were judged as less healthy and lower in social status. Conversely, targets who expressed disgust to neutral stimuli ("react deviants") were judged as less open-minded and less cooperative. These impressions tracked inferred behavioral affordances: flat deviants were seen as more likely to engage in pathogen-risky behaviors, whereas react deviants were not. Consistent with these judgments, affective deviants were differentially "punished": flat deviants were rated as less fit and less likely to be recommended for jobs emphasizing health and hygiene, whereas react deviants faced these penalties for jobs emphasizing cooperativeness. Thus, perceivers do not simply condemn emotional norm violations; instead, they draw on expression-environment mismatches to make functionally specific trait judgments and potentially discriminatory decisions.

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
University of Michigan (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.