Morally Repugnant

A recent study in the journal Science shows that we display the same facial reaction to moral wrongs as we do to bad tastes or smells. Karen Hopkin reports

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!

[The following is an exact transcript of this podcast.]

“Well, that just leaves a bad taste in my mouth.”

It’s a phrase you’ve likely used at one time or other. And chances are you were talking about something you found morally offputting, as opposed to, say, curdled milk.

Scientists from the University of Toronto say that our reactions to immorality and sour milk may be more similar than we think, because both elicit the same sort of grimace of disgust.

The scientists recorded the facial expressions of subjects who were asked to sip some awful-tasting beverages; brews that were really bitter, salty, or sour. And the drinkers pulled some pretty awful faces, with noses wrinkling and lips curling in disgust. They also made very similar faces when they were shown some yucky photos: pictures of dog poop or dirty toilets.

Finally, the subjects played a game in which they were treated unfairly: say, given only one dollar while a partner got nine dollars. In addition to looking peeved, they also trotted out those sneers of disgust. Findings published in the February 27th issue of Science.

The scientists conclude that our aversion to bad behavior and to bad food may have evolved from a primitive defense mechanism that nowadays protects us from both insult and injury.

—Karen Hopkin


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.


60-Second Science is a daily podcast. Subscribe to this Podcast:

RSS | iTunes

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe