New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Ick Factor Is High Hurdle for Recycled Drinking Water

Recycled wastewater can be cleaner than bottled water, but people still avoid drinking it because of their disgust over its past condition.

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Would you drink water that had once been flushed down a toilet? After it’s been cleaned, that is. The climate is warming, and the population of drought-prone states like California continues to grow. So recycling wastewater into drinking water may become a necessity. But:

“People are grossed out by recycled water, because it as was once wastewater—you know, the stuff that goes down your kitchen drains, your showers, your toilets. And even though it’s cleaned up to a standard that is identical, if not better, than commercially bottled water, the key barrier to recycled water acceptance is people’s disgust regarding it.”

University of California, Riverside, psychologist Daniel Harmon. In a recent set of experiments, Harmon and his colleague Mary Gauvain learned just how difficult it can be for people to get over their disgust at the thought of drinking recycled water.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


“Our study was aimed at investigating whether the media messages that we see—you know, commercials or brief Internet videos; these pro-environmental messages—whether they actually work. Whether they can get people to accept recycled water and consume recycled water.”

In one experiment, the researchers had some participants watch a short video promoting water conservation. And in another experiment, they added a video explaining why recycled water might trigger disgust, even though all contaminants have been removed.And neither video had a strong effect on people’s willingness to drink recycled water or to sign a petition supporting the practice.

“The messages did sort of make people more positively predisposed to recycled water, but it was not enough to get them to actually use recycled water more. It didn’t actually translate to behaviors.”

In fact, viewing the video that directly addressed recycled water’s “ick” factor was no more persuasive than the water conservation video alone. Perhaps because dispassionate reason and logic only go so far. 

“Disgust is such a powerful core reaction. It’s such a powerful emotion that simply giving more information is not going to really be effective because disgust is not really a rational response.”

The study appears in the journal Basic and Applied Social Psychology. [Daniel Harmon and Mary Gauvain, Influence of Internet-based messages and personal motivations on water-use decisions]

Harmon says it’s probably going to take a lot more than just brief Internet messaging to get people to embrace recycled water. For example, it might help to see members of their community drinking water that’s gone, as it’s called, from “toilet to tap,” with no ill effects.  

“We think that these kind of more direct campaigns for acceptance are necessary to get people to get over that hump—to take that first sip, so to speak.”

Cheers!

—Susanne Bard

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

Susanne Bard is a science writer and multimedia producer based on the West Coast. She has created content for Scientific American, Science magazine, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, as well as for museums and zoos.

More by Susanne Bard

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe