Impressions of Deviant Disgust Expressions Are Functionally Specific

How do people perceive those who violate emotional expression norms? Across four studies, impressions of people displaying disgust "inappropriately" depended on how the deviation occurred. Targets who failed to show disgust toward disgust-eliciting stimuli ("flat deviants") were judged as less healthy and lower in social status. Conversely, targets who expressed disgust to neutral stimuli ("react deviants") were judged as less open-minded and less cooperative. These impressions tracked inferred behavioral affordances: flat deviants were seen as more likely to engage in pathogen-risky behaviors, whereas react deviants were not. Consistent with these judgments, affective deviants were differentially "punished": flat deviants were rated as less fit and less likely to be recommended for jobs emphasizing health and hygiene, whereas react deviants faced these penalties for jobs emphasizing cooperativeness. Thus, perceivers do not simply condemn emotional norm violations; instead, they draw on expression-environment mismatches to make functionally specific trait judgments and potentially discriminatory decisions.