Advertisement

Current Psychology

, Volume 38, Issue 2, pp 354–366 | Cite as

A Measure to Assess Individual Differences for Disgust Sensitivity: An Italian Version of the Disgust Scale – Revised

  • Marina GiampietroEmail author
  • Simona Ruggi
  • Simona C. S. Caravita
  • Monica Gatti
  • Lucia Colombo
  • Gabriella M. Gilli
Article
  • 178 Downloads

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of the Disgust Scale-Revised (DS-R) in a large community sample in Italy. Participants (845 Italians, aged 20–46; 50.1% women) completed a battery of self-report questionnaires: the DS-R, the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, the Big Five Observer, and the Padua Inventory. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses supported a six-factor dimensionality of the DS-R in the Italian population. The six-factor structure was partially scalar invariant across gender groups. The data provided some evidence of the scale’s reliability for the sample. Correlations of the DS-R score with the assessed personality dimensions were consistent with the disgust literature. The six-factor dimensionality of the Italian version of the DS-R included the Animal reminder factor, which has also been found in other cultures. The second factor, which we named “Contamination by food,” only partially overlapped the Contamination factor of previous samples. The four remaining factors seemed to assess distinct facets of the Core disgust factor. This also emerged in previous studies. For these four, there was only a partial overlap between the Italian and other populations, suggesting the relevance of cultural differences in the assessment of disgust.

Keywords

Disgust Disgust scale-R Italian version Psychometric properties Personality 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. Akaike, H. (1974). A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 19, 716–723. doi: 10.1109/TAC.1974.1100705.
  2. APA. (2010). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct 2010. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  3. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boyar, J. (1964). The construction and partial validation of a scale for the measurement of the fear of death. Ann Arbor: UMI Dissertation Information Service.Google Scholar
  5. Burns, G. L., Keortge, S. G., Formea, G. M., & Sternberger, L. G. (1996). Revision of the Padua Inventory of obsessive compulsive disorder symptoms: Distinctions between worry, obsession and compulsions. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 34, 163–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Borgogni, L. (1994). BFO. Big five Observer, Manuale. Firenze: Organizzazioni Speciali.Google Scholar
  7. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  8. Druschel, B., & Sherman, M. F. (1999). Disgust sensivity as a function of big five and gender. Personality and Individual Differences, 26, 739–748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Eysenck, H.J., & Eysenck, S.B.G. (1975). Eysenck personality questionnaire. San Diego: Educational and Industrial Testing Service.Google Scholar
  10. Foa, E. B., Huppert, J. D., Leiberg, S., Langner, R., Kichic, R., Hajcak, G., & Salkovskis, P. M. (2002). The obsessive-compulsive Inventory: Development and validation of a short version. Psychological Assessment, 14, 485–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. George, D., & Mallery, P. (2000). SPSS for windows step by step. A simple guide and reference 9.0 update, a. Needham Heights, Massachusetts: Pearson Education Company.Google Scholar
  12. Goldberg, L. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American Psychologist, 48, 26–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Haidt, J., McCauley, C. R., & Rozin, P. (1994). Individual differences in sensitivity to disgust: A scale sampling seven domains of disgust elicitors. Personality and Individual Differences, 16, 702–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Haidt, J., McCauley, C., & Rozin, P. (2002). The Disgust Scale, Version 2. Available from: http://www.people.virginia.edu/~jdh6n/disgustscale.html.
  15. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 76–99). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  16. Inbar, Y., Pizarro, D. A., & Bloom, P. (2009). Conservatives are more easily disgusted than liberals. Cognition and Emotion, 23(4), 714–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. de Jong, P. J., & Merckelbach, H. (1998). Blood-injection-injury phobias and fear of spiders: Domain specific individual differences in disgust sensitivity. Personality and Individual Differences, 24, 153–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. de Jong, P. J., van Overveld, M., Weijmar-Schultz, W., Peters, M. L., & Buwalda, F. M. (2009). Disgust and contamination sensitivity in vaginismus and dyspareunia. Archives of School Behavior, 38, 244–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kang, J. I., Kim, S. J., Cho, H. J. J., Hung, K., Lee, S. Y., Lee, E., & An, S. K. (2011). Psychometric analysis of the Korean version of the disgust scale-revised. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 53(5), 648–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kim, J., & Shin, D. A. (1978). A study based on the standardization of the STAI for Korea. New Med J, 21, 69–75.Google Scholar
  21. Kleinknecht, R. A., Kleinknecht, E. E., & Thorndike, R. M. (1997). The role of disgust and fear in blood and injection-related fainting symptoms: A structural equation model. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 135, 1075–1087.Google Scholar
  22. Lee, H. S. (1997). Korean version Eysenck personality questionnaire. Scoul: Hakjisa.Google Scholar
  23. Mancini, F., Gragnani, A., & D’Olimpio, F. (2001). The connection between disgust and obsessions and compulsions in a non-clinical sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 31(7), 1171–1178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Matchett, G., & Davey, G. C. (1991). A test of a disease-avoidance model of animal phobias. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 29, 91–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Melli, G., Chiorri, C., & Smurra, R. (2013). Ulteriore revisione e proprietà psicometriche della versione italiana della Disgust Scale-Revised. Psicoterapia Cognitiva e Comportamentale, 19(1), 63–93.Google Scholar
  26. Min, B., Oh, H., & Lee, J. (2007). Temperament and character Inventory-revised short. Scoul: Maumsarang.Google Scholar
  27. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998-2002). Mplus User’s Guide (Fifth ed.). Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
  28. Olatunj, B. O., Williams, N. L., Lohr, J. M., & Sawchuk, C. N. (2005). The structure of disgust: Domain specificity in relation to contamination ideation and excessive washing. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 43, 1069–1086.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Olatunji, B. O., Sawchuk, C. N., Arrindell, W. A., & Lohr, J. M. (2005). Disgust sensitivity as a mediator of the sex differences in contamination fears. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 713–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Olatunji, B. O., Williams, N. L., Tolin, D. F., Sawchuck, C. N., Abramowitz, J. S., Lohr, J. M., et al. (2007). The disgust scale: Item analysis, factor structure, and suggestions for refinement. Psychological Assessment, 19, 281–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Olatunji, B. O., Haidt, J., McKay, D., David, B. (2008). Core, animal reminder, and contamination disgust: Three kinds of disgust with distinct personality, behavioral, physiological, and clinical correlates. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 1243–1259.Google Scholar
  32. Olatunji, B. O., Moretz, M. W., McKay, D., Bjorklund, F., de Jong, P. J., Haidt, J., Hursti, T. J., Iada, S., Koller, S., Mancini, F., Page, A. C., & Schienle, A. (2009). Confirming the three-factor structure of the disgust scale-revised in eight countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 40, 234–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. van Overveld, M., de Jong, P. J., Peters, M. L., & Schouten, E. (2011). The disgust scale-R: A valid and reliable index to investigate separate disgust domains? Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 325–330.Google Scholar
  34. Pedrabissi, L., & Santinello, M. (1989). Nuova versione italiana dello STAY forma Y. Firenze: Organizzazioni Speciali.Google Scholar
  35. Rozin, P., & Fallon, A. E. (1987). A perspective on disgust. Psychological Review, 94(1), 23–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rozin, P., Haidt, J., & McCauley, C. R. (2000). Disgust. In M. Lewis e J. M. Haviland-Jones, handbook of emotions. 2nd edition (pp. 637-653). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  37. Rozin, P., Haidt, J., & McCauley, C. R. (2009). Disgust: the body and soul emotion in the 21st century. In B. O. Olatunji & D. McKay (Eds.), Disgust and its disorders: theory, assessment, and treatment implications (pp .9–30). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  38. Sanavio, E. (1988). Obsession and compulsions: The Padua Inventory. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 26, 169–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Satorra, A. (2000). Scaled and adjusted restricted tests in multi-sample analysis of moment structures. In R. D. H. Heijmans, D. S. G. Pollock, & A. Satorra (Eds.), Innovations in multivariate statistical analysis. A festschrift for Heinz Neudecker (pp. 233–247). London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Schwarz, G. E. (1978). Estimating the dimension of a model. Annals of Statistics, 6(2), 461–464. doi: 10.1214/aos/1176344136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Snyder, M. (1974). Self-monitoring of expressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30, 526–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Speltini, G., Passini, S., & Morselli, D. (2010). Questioni di pulizia: rappresentazioni e valori. Giornale Italiano di Psicologia, 3, 623–645.Google Scholar
  43. Spielberger, C. D. (1983). STAI-Y: State-trait anxiety Inventory- forma Y. Palo Alto: Mind Garden.Google Scholar
  44. Thordarson, D. S., Radomsky, A. S., Rachman, S., Shafran, R., Sawchuk, C. N., & Hakstian, A. R. (2004). The Vancouver obsessional compulsive Inventory (VOCI). Behaviour Research and Therapy, 42, 1289–1314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Thorpe, S. J., Patel, S. P., & Simonds, L. M. (2003). The relation between disgust sensitivity, anxiety, and obsessions. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 41, 1397–1409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Woody, S. R., & Tolin, D. F. (2002). The relationship between disgust sensitivity and avoidant behavior: Studies of clinical and nonclinical samples. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 16, 543–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Zuckerman, M. (1979). Sensation seeking: Beyond the optimum level of arousal. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  48. Walls, M. M., & Kleinknecht, R. A. (1996). Disgust factors as predictors of blood-injury fear and fainting. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the western psychological Association, San JoseGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marina Giampietro
    • 1
    Email author
  • Simona Ruggi
    • 1
  • Simona C. S. Caravita
    • 1
  • Monica Gatti
    • 1
  • Lucia Colombo
    • 1
  • Gabriella M. Gilli
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyCatholic University of the Sacred HeartMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations