When is it Okay? The Role of State and Trait Disgust in Attitudes Towards Abortion Patients Under Different Circumstances

Introduction. A multitude of personal and contextual factors influence people’s attitudes towards abortion access and abortion patients. This study examines the role of state and trait disgust and abortion context as key factors impacting people’s evaluations of abortion patients. Methods. Across two experimental studies (total N  = 415), participants were primed to experience no (Study 1 only), low, or high disgust, followed by one of three abortion stories with differing rationales (medical emergency, socio-economic, family planning). Moderated regressions with covariates examined the predictive effects of abortion context with either state or trait sexual disgust on target judgments. Mediation analyses further probed the effect of trait sexual disgust on abortion attitudes. Results. Although state sexual disgust did not influence attitudes towards the abortion patients, mediation analyses demonstrated that political orientation mediated the link between trait sexual disgust and judgments of target abortion patients and partially mediated the link between trait sexual disgust and general abortion attitudes. Target abortion patients in the medical condition received significantly less blame, more sympathy and warmth, and a higher perceived moral character compared to patients in the socio-economic or family planning conditions, illustrating the interpersonal stigma that certain abortions continue to yield. Conclusion. These studies show the limited effect of disgust beyond that of political orientation on evaluations of abortion patients. Research implications center around the heightened stigmatization of certain abortion contexts and the role of amplifying factors, including political orientation and disgust. Policy Implications. Findings have practical implications for sex educators, counselors, and political organizers.