{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03116883116883117, 'fraction_numerical': 0.012121212121212121, 'mean_word_length': 5.116402116402116, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Deconstructing disgust as the emotion of violations of body and soul.

Through the evolutionary process of preadaptation, disgust was coopted to serve as the guardian not just of one's body but also of one's soul-or so it has been theorized. On this theory, elicitors include health-related threats and nonhealth-related degrading acts, which together form a pancultural domain of morality. A prediction from this theory was examined here in four samples: 96 English-speaking Americans, 96 Malayalam-speaking Indians, 136 Japanese-speaking Japanese, and 194 Arabic-speaking Egyptians. Participants read health and nonhealth threat stories (derived from prior studies) and were asked to judge how immoral the action was, what word describes the emotion elicited by the story, and what facial expression conveys that emotion. Even though health threats elicited disgust, they were seen as barely immoral if at all. In contrast, nonhealth events were immoral but elicited anger more than disgust. Emotional reactions to heath and nonhealth threats did not indicate that they are the same emotion. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).