Disgust and distaste – Differential mechanisms for the rejection of plant- and animal-source foods

People may reject foods due to distaste (an affective reaction to undesirable sensory properties) or disgust (an emotive response to the idea of what a food represents). Disgust can further be classified into sub-types: core, animal-reminder, and moral disgust, all of which could influence food rejection. Prior research suggests different rejection mechanisms for plant and animal foods. We tested this in an online study in a meat-rejecting sample (mostly vegetarians, n = 252), and a meat-accepting sample (omnivores, n = 57). Participants rated foods they rejected for consumption on criteria related to distaste (e.g. objection to taste), general disgust (e.g. contamination potential of the food), and specific disgust sub-types. Ratings across these criteria created unique response profiles for commonly disliked vegetables, meats, universal disgust elicitors, and accepted food (control). Visual inspection of response profiles, correlations, and a multidimensional scaling analysis all revealed that plant foods were rejected based on distaste, whereas rejection responses to palatable meat closely matched responses to human meat, faeces, and dog meat (disgust elicitors), both rejected based on disgust. Inspecting disgust response profiles suggested that core disgust was the primary disgust type, with animal-reminder and moral disgust sometimes experienced in addition. This study confirms differential rejection mechanisms for plant-based foods (rejected via distaste) and meat (core disgust). This suggests different evolutionary strategies humans had to adapt to cope with plant toxins detectable through distaste and pathogens found in meat not detectable by taste. Such adaptations could be leveraged in future interventions to reduce meat consumption or increase vegetable intake.