Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The “ick” Factor Matters: Disgust Prospectively Predicts Avoidance in Chemotherapy Patients

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Annals of Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

Background

Chemotherapy can be physically and psychologically demanding. Avoidance and withdrawal are common among patients coping with these demands.

Purpose

This report compares established emotional predictors of avoidance during chemotherapy (embarrassment; distress) with an emotion (disgust) that has been unstudied in this context.

Methods

This report outlines secondary analyses of an RCT where 68 cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy were randomized to mindfulness or relaxation interventions. Self-reported baseline disgust (DS-R), embarrassment (SES-SF), and distress (Distress Thermometer) were used to prospectively predict multiple classes of avoidance post-intervention and at 3 months follow-up. Measures assessed social avoidance, cognitive and emotional avoidance (IES Avoidance), as well as information seeking and treatment adherence (General Adherence Scale).

Results

Repeated-measures ANOVAs evaluated possible longitudinal changes in disgust and forward entry regression models contrasted the ability of the affective variables to predict avoidance. Although disgust did not change over time or vary between groups, greater disgust predicted greater social, cognitive, and emotional avoidance, as well as greater information seeking. Social avoidance was predicted by trait embarrassment and distress predicted non-adherence.

Conclusions

This report represents the first investigation of disgust’s ability to prospectively predict avoidance in people undergoing chemotherapy. Compared to embarrassment and distress, disgust was a more consistent predictor across avoidance domains and its predictive ability was evident across a longer period of time. Findings highlight disgust’s role as an indicator of likely avoidance in this health context. Early identification of cancer patients at risk of deleterious avoidance may enable timely interventions and has important clinical implications (ACTRN12613000238774).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Eakin EG, Strycker LA. Awareness and barriers to use of cancer support and information resources by HMO patients with breast, prostate, or colon cancer: Patient and provider perspectives. Psychooncology. 2001; 10: 103-113.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Henry DH, Viswanathan HN, Elkin EP, et al. Symptoms and treatment burden associated with cancer treatment: Results from a cross-sectional national survey in the U.S. Support Care Cancer. 2008; 16: 791-801.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Luoma M-L, Hakamies-Blomqvist L. The meaning of quality of life in patients being treated for advanced breast cancer: A qualitative study. Psychooncology. 2004; 13: 729-739.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ristvedt SL, Trinkaus KM. Psychological factors related to delay in consultation for cancer symptoms. Psychooncology. 2005; 14: 339-350.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Manne S, Badr H, Zaider T, Nelson C, Kissane D. Cancer-related communication, relationship intimacy, and psychological distress among couples coping with localized prostate cancer. J Cancer Surviv. 2010; 4: 74-85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ferrante JM, Chen P-H, Kim S. The effect of patient navigation on time to diagnosis, anxiety, and satisfaction in urban minority women with abnormal mammograms: A randomized controlled trial. J Urban Health. 2008; 85: 114-124.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hohneker J, Shah-Mehta S, Brandt PS. Perspectives on adherence and persistence with oral medications for cancer treatment. J Oncol Pract. 2011; 7: 65-67.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Waldron RP, Donovan IA, Drumm J, Mottram SN, Tedman S. Emergency presentation and mortality from colorectal cancer in the elderly. Br J Surg. 1986; 73: 214-216.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lohrisch C, Paltiel C, Gelmon K, et al. Impact on survival of time from definitive surgery to initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006; 24: 4888-4894.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kondryn HJ, Edmondson CL, Hill J, Eden TOB. Treatment non-adherence in teenage and young adult patients with cancer. Lancet Oncol. 2011; 12: 100-108.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ionescu MV, Carey F, Tait IS, Steele RJC. Socioeconomic status and stage at presentation of colorectal cancer. Lancet. 1998; 352: 1439-1439.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. James TM, Greiner KA, Ellerbeck EF, et al. Disparities in colorectal cancer screening: A guideline-based analysis of adherence. Ethn Dis. 2006; 16: 228-233.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Consedine NS, Krivoshekova YS, Harris CR. Bodily embarrassment and judgment concern as separable factors in the measurement of medical embarrassment: Psychometric development and links to treatment-seeking outcomes. Br J Health Psychol. 2007; 12: 439-462.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Consedine NS, Ladwig I, Reddig MK, Broadbent EA. The many faeces of colorectal cancer screening embarrassment: Preliminary psychometric development and links to screening outcome. Br J Health Psychol. 2011; 16(3): 559-79.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Consedine NS, Magai C, Krivoshekova YS, Ryzewicz L, Neugut AI. Fear, anxiety, worry, and breast cancer screening behavior: A critical review. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2004; 13: 501-510.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Consedine NS, Adjei BA, Ramirez PM, McKiernan J. An object lesson: Differences in source determine the relations that trait anxiety, prostate cancer worry, and fear of screening hold with prostate screening frequency. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2008; 17: 1631-1639.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hay JL, Buckley TR, Ostroff JS. The role of cancer worry in cancer screening: A theoretical and empirical review of the literature. Psycho-Oncology. 2005; 14: 517-534.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Consedine NS, Moscowitz JT. The role of discrete emotions in health outcomes: A critical review. Appl Prev Psychol. 2007; 12: 59-75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Davey GCL, Bond N. Using controlled comparisons in disgust psychopathology research: The case of disgust, hypochondriasis and health anxiety. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2006; 37: 4-15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Consedine NS. The health-promoting and health-damaging effects of emotions: The view from developmental functionalism. In: Lewis M, Haviland-Jones J, Barrett LF, eds. Handbook of emotions. New York: Guilford; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Ekman P, Friesen WV, Ellsworth PCE. Emotion in the human face. New York: Pergamon Press; 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Curtis V, Aunger R, Rabie T. Evidence that disgust evolved to protect from risk of disease. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B Biol Sci. 2004; 271: S131-S133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Verwoerd J, de Jong PJ, Wessel I, van Hout WJ. “If I feel disgusted, I must be getting ill”: Emotional reasoning in the context of contamination fear. Behav Res Ther. 2013; 51: 122-127.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Vogt J, Lozo L, Koster EHW, De Houwer J. On the role of goal relevance in emotional attention: Disgust evokes early attention to cleanliness. Cogn Emot. 2011; 25: 466-477.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Reynolds LM, McCambridge SA, Bissett IP, Consedine NS. Trait and state disgust: An experimental investigation of disgust and avoidance in colorectal cancer decision scenarios. Health Psychol. 2014; 33: 1495-1506.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Deacon B, Olatunji BO. Specificity of disgust sensitivity in the prediction of behavioral avoidance in contamination fear. Behav Res Ther. 2007; 45: 2110-2120.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. McCambridge SA, Consedine NS. For whom the bell tolls: Experimentally-manipulated disgust and embarrassment cause sexual health avoidance among some people. Emotion. 2014; 14: 407-415.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Reynolds LM, Consedine NS, Pizarro DA, Bissett IP. Disgust and behavioral avoidance in colorectal cancer screening and treatment: A systematic review and research agenda. Cancer Nurs. 2013; 36: 122-130.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Chapple A, Ziebland S, Hewitson P, McPherson A. What affects the uptake of screening for bowel cancer using a faecal occult blood test (FOBt): A qualitative study. Soc Sci Med. 2008; 66: 2425-2435.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Worthley DL, Cole SR, Esterman A, et al. Screening for colorectal cancer by faecal occult blood test: Why people choose to refuse. Intern Med J. 2006; 36: 607-610.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Carey CL, Harris LM. The origins of blood-injection fear/phobia in cancer patients undergoing intravenous chemotherapy. Behav Chang. 2005; 22: 212-219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Harris LM, Jones MK, Carey CL. Characteristics of blood-injection-injury fears in people receiving intravenous chemotherapy. Curr Psychol. 2009; 28: 124-132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Rosman S. Cancer and stigma: Experience of patients with chemotherapy-induced alopecia. Patient Educ Couns. 2004; 52: 333-339.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. van Overveld M, de Jong PJ, Peters ML. The Disgust Propensity and Sensitivity Scale—Revised: Its predictive value for avoidance behavior. Personal Individ Differ. 2010; 49: 706-711.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Smith DM, Loewenstein G, Rozin P, Sherriff RL, Ubel PA. Sensitivity to disgust, stigma, and adjustment to life with a colostomy. J Res Pers. 2007; 41: 787-803.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Reynolds LM, Bissett IP, Consedine NS. Predicting the patients who will struggle with anal incontinence: Sensitivity to disgust matters. Colorectal Dis. 2014; 17: 73-80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Curtis V, de Barra M, Aunger R. Disgust as an adaptive system for disease avoidance behaviour. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 2011; 366: 389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Fessler DMT, Eng SJ, Navarrete CD. Elevated disgust sensitivity in the first trimester of pregnancy: Evidence supporting prophylaxis the compensatory hypothesis. Evol Hum Behav. 2005; 26: 344-351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Fessler DMT, Navarrete CD. Domain-specific variation in disgust sensitivity across the menstrual cycle. Evol Hum Behav. 2003; 24: 406-417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Kollei I, Brunhoeber S, Rauh E, de Zwaan M, Martin A. Body image, emotions and thought control strategies in body dysmorphic disorder compared to eating disorders and healthy controls. J Psychosom Res. 2012; 72: 321-327.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Crawford J, Dale DC, Lyman GH. Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. Cancer. 2004; 100: 228-237.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Reynolds LM, Bissett IP, Porter D, Consedine NS. How a brief mindfulness-based intervention compares to relaxation in a preliminary randomized controlled trial among chemotherapy patients. Mindfulness. in review.

  43. Chang VT, Hwang SS, Feuerman M, Kasimis BS, Thaler HT. The Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale Short Form (MSAS‐SF). Cancer. 2000; 89: 1162-1171.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Larouche S, Edgar L. The measure of distress: A practical thermometer for outpatient screening. Oncol Exch. 2004; 3: 34-39.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Kelly KM, Jones WH. Assessment of dispositional embarrassability. Anxiety Stress Coping. 1997; 10: 307-333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. van Overveld M, de Jong P, Peters ML, Schouten E. The Disgust Scale-R: A valid and reliable index to investigate separate disgust domains? Personal Individ Differ. 2011; 51: 325-330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Olatunji BO, Moretz MW, McKay D, et al. Confirming the three-factor structure of the Disgust-Scale—Revised in eight countries. J Cross-Cult Psychol. 2009; 40: 234-254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Weiss D. The impact of event scale: Revised. In J.P. Wilson and CS Tang, eds. Cross-cultural Assessment of Psychological Trauma and PTSD. New York: Springer; 2007:219-238.

  49. Thewes B, Meiser B, Hickie IB. Psychometric properties of the Impact of Event Scale amongst women at increased risk for hereditary breast cancer. Psychooncology. 2001; 10: 459-468.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. DiMatteo MR, Hays RD, Gritz ER, et al. Patient adherence to cancer control regimens: Scale development and initial validation. Psychol Assess. 1993; 5: 102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Prokop P, Fančovičová J. Self-protection versus disease avoidance. J Individ Differ. 2013; 34: 15-23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Rozin P. Hedonic “adaptation”: Specific habituation to disgust/death elicitors as a result of dissecting a cadaver. Judgment Decis Making. 2008; 3: 191-194.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Neziroglu F, Hickey M, McKay D. Psychophysiological and self-report components of disgust in body dysmorphic disorder: The effects of repeated exposure. Int J Cogn Ther. 2010; 3: 40-51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Neuberg SL, Kenrick DT, Schaller M. Human threat management systems: Self-protection and disease avoidance. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2011; 35: 1042-1051.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Schaller M, Murray DR. Pathogens, personality, and culture: Disease prevalence predicts worldwide variability in sociosexuality, extraversion, and openness to experience. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2008; 95: 212-221.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Reynolds LM, Lin Y-S, Zhou E, Consedine NS. Does a brief state mindfulness induction moderate disgust-driven social avoidance and decision-making? An experimental investigation. J Beh Med. 2014, Published online 28 June.

  57. Peng M, Chang L, Zhou R. Physiological and behavioral responses to strangers compared to friends as a source of disgust. Evol Hum Behav. 2013; 34: 94-98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Rozin P, Haidt J. The domains of disgust and their origins: Contrasting biological and cultural evolutionary accounts. Trends Cogn Sci. 2013; 17: 367-368.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Haidt J, Rozin P, McCauley C, Imada S. Body, psyche, and culture: The relationship between disgust and morality. Psychol Dev Soc J. 1997; 9: 107-131.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Vachon M. Psychosocial distress and coping after cancer treatment: How clinicians can assess distress and which interventions are appropriate—what we know and what we don’t. Cancer Nurs. 2006; 29: 26-31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Keltner D, Buswell BN. Embarrassment: Its distinct form and appeasement functions. Psychol Bull. 1997; 122: 250-270.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Donovan KA, Grassi L, McGinty HL, Jacobsen PB. Validation of the Distress Thermometer worldwide: State of the science. Psychooncology. 2014; 23:241-250.

  63. Ell KO, Mantell JE, Hamovitch MB, Nishimoto RH. Social support, sense of control, and coping among patients with breast, lung, or colorectal cancer. J Psychosoc Oncol. 1989; 7: 63-89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Sapp AL, Trentham-Dietz A, Newcomb PA, et al. Social networks and quality of life among female long-term colorectal cancer survivors. Cancer. 2003; 98: 1749-1758.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Sultan S, Fisher DA, Voils CI, et al. Impact of functional support on health-related quality of life in patients with colorectal cancer. Cancer. 2004; 101: 2737-2743.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Hamilton WD. The genetical evolution of social behaviour. I. J Theor Biol. 1964; 7: 1-16.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Martin R, Davis GM, Baron RS, Suls J, Blanchard EB. Specificity in social support: Perceptions of helpful and unhelpful provider behaviors among irritable bowel syndrome, headache, and cancer patients. Health Psychol. 1994; 13.

  68. Dakof GA, Taylor SE. Victims’ perceptions of social support: What is helpful from whom? J Pers Soc Psychol. 1990; 58: 80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Reynolds LM, McCambridge SA, Consedine NS. The revolting self: Perspectives on the psychological, social, and clinical implications of self-directed disgust. In: Powell PA, Overton PG, Simpson J, eds. The revolting self: Perspectives on the psychological and clinical implications of self-directed disgust. London: Karnac Books; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Kabat-Zinn J. Full catastrophe living: Using the wisdom of your body and mind to face stress, pain, and illness. New York: Delta; 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Reynolds LM, Consedine NS, McCambridge SA. Mindfulness and disgust in colorectal cancer scenarios: Non-judging and non-reacting components predict avoidance when it makes sense. Mindfulness. 2014; 5: 442-452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Ljótsson B, Andréewitch S, Hedman E, et al. Exposure and mindfulness based therapy for irritable bowel syndrome—An open pilot study. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2010; 41: 185-190.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychological Medicine, The University of Auckland, Private bag 92019, Victoria Street West, Auckland, 1142, New Zealand

    Lisa M. Reynolds PhD & Nathan S. Consedine PhD

  2. Department of Surgery, The University of Auckland, Private bag 92019, Victoria Street West, Auckland, 1142, New Zealand

    Ian P. Bissett MBChB, FRACS, MD

  3. Auckland Regional Cancer and Blood Service, Auckland, New Zealand

    David Porter MBChB, FRACP, MD

Authors
  1. Lisa M. Reynolds PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ian P. Bissett MBChB, FRACS, MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David Porter MBChB, FRACP, MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Nathan S. Consedine PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lisa M. Reynolds PhD.

Ethics declarations

Authors’ Statement of Conflict of Interest and Adherence to Ethical Standards

Authors Reynolds, Bissett, Porter, and Consedine declare that they have no conflict of interest. All procedures, including the informed consent process, were conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000.

Funding

This research was supported by a grant from the Oakley Mental Health Research Foundation.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Reynolds, L.M., Bissett, I.P., Porter, D. et al. The “ick” Factor Matters: Disgust Prospectively Predicts Avoidance in Chemotherapy Patients. ann. behav. med. 50, 935–945 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-016-9820-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-016-9820-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation