Is disgust more resistant to extinction than fear? A meta-analytic review of laboratory paradigms.

Disgust can be acquired via evaluative conditioning; a process by which a neutral stimulus (conditioned stimulus; CS) comes to be evaluated as disgusting due to its pairing with an inherently disgusting stimulus (unconditioned stimulus; US). Research has shown that conditioned disgust responses are resistant to extinction which may have implications for disorders (i.e., contamination-based obsessive-compulsive disorder, specific phobias, and post-traumatic stress disorder) in which heightened disgust has been implicated. Importantly, extinction is the primary mechanism by which exposure therapies are thought to achieve symptom reduction for these disorders. Exposure therapies were originally modeled on fear extinction, whereas disgust extinction was largely overlooked until recently. Accordingly, differences in the degree to which learned disgust and fear can be attenuated via extinction learning remains unclear. The present investigation was a meta-analysis directly comparing the degree of extinction of conditioned disgust (n = 14) and conditioned fear (n = 14) in laboratory paradigms. Extinction was operationalized as the standardized mean difference (SMD) in evaluative ratings between the CS+ (the CS paired with the US) and CS- (the unpaired CS) after extinction training. Results of a subgroup analysis indicated that disgust (SMD = 0.52) was significantly more resistant to extinction than fear (SMD = 0.37). Additionally, a series of meta-regression analyses indicated that extinction was not influenced by important study characteristics (e.g., sex, age, number of conditioning and extinction trials). The findings suggest that extinction-based approaches may be less effective at attenuating learned disgust and research is needed to better optimize treatments for disgust-related disorders.