Hostname: page-component-797576ffbb-5676f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2023-12-09T12:31:41.642Z Has data issue: false Feature Flags: { "corePageComponentGetUserInfoFromSharedSession": true, "coreDisableEcommerce": false, "useRatesEcommerce": true } hasContentIssue false

Developmental antecedents of cleansing effects: Evidence against domain-generality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 February 2021

Emily Gerdin
Department of Psychology, Yale University, New Haven,
Shruthi Venkatesh
Psychology Department, University of North Carolina at Greensboro (UNCG), Greensboro, jmdejes2@uncg.edu
Joshua Rottman
Franklin & Marshall College, Lancaster, PA17604-3003.;
Jasmine M. DeJesus
Psychology Department, University of North Carolina at Greensboro (UNCG), Greensboro, jmdejes2@uncg.edu


Lee and Schwarz propose grounded procedures of separation as a domain-general mechanism underlying cleansing effects. One strong test of domain generality is to investigate the ontogenetic origins of a process. Here, we argue that the developmental evidence provides weak support for a domain-general grounded procedures account. Instead, it is likely that distinct separation procedures develop uniquely for different content domains.

Open Peer Commentary
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)


Blacker, K. A., & LoBue, V. (2016). Behavioral avoidance of contagion in childhood. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 143, 162170.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, S. D., & Harris, G. (2012). Disliked food acting as a contaminant during infancy. A disgust based motivation for rejection. Appetite, 58(2), 535538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeJesus, J. M., Shutts, K., & Kinzler, K. D. (2015). Eww she sneezed! Contamination context affects children's food preferences and consumption. Appetite, 87, 303309.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frazier, B. N., & Gelman, S. A. (2009). Developmental changes in judgments of authentic objects. Cognitive Development, 24(3), 284292.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gelman, S. A., Frazier, B. N., Noles, N. S., Manczak, E. M., & Stilwell, S. M. (2015). How much are Harry Potter's glasses worth? Children's monetary evaluation of authentic objects. Journal of Cognition and Development, 16(1), 97117.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gelman, S. A., Manczak, E. M., Was, A. M., & Noles, N. S. (2016). Children seek historical traces of owned objects. Child Development, 87(1), 239255.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hood, B. M., & Bloom, P. (2008). Children prefer certain individuals over perfect duplicates. Cognition, 106(1), 455462.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Legare, C. H., Wellman, H. M., & Gelman, S. A. (2009). Evidence for an explanation advantage in naïve biological reasoning. Cognitive Psychology, 58(2), 177194.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oaten, M., Stevenson, R. J., Wagland, P., Case, T. I., & Repacholi, B. M. (2014). Parent–child transmission of disgust and hand hygiene: The role of vocalizations, gestures and other parental responses. The Psychological Record, 64(4), 803811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raman, L., & Gelman, S. A. (2008). Do children endorse psychosocial factors in the transmission of illness and disgust? Developmental Psychology, 44(3), 801813.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rottman, J., DeJesus, J. M., & Greenebaum, H. (2019). Developing disgust: Theory, measurement, and application. In LoBue, V., Pérez-Edgar, K. & Buss, K. (Eds.), Handbook of emotional development (pp. 283309). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevenson, R. J., Oaten, M. J., Case, T. I., Repacholi, B. M., & Wagland, P. (2010). Children's response to adult disgust elicitors: Development and acquisition. Developmental Psychology, 46(1), 165177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar