Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Sep 23;16(9):e0257726.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0257726. eCollection 2021.

Specificity of spiders among fear- and disgust-eliciting arthropods: Spiders are special, but phobics not so much

Eva Landová  1   2 , Markéta Janovcová  1   2 , Iveta Štolhoferová  1   2 , Silvie Rádlová  1 , Petra Frýdlová  2 , Kristýna Sedláčková  1 , Daniel Frynta  1   2
Affiliations

Specificity of spiders among fear- and disgust-eliciting arthropods: Spiders are special, but phobics not so much

Eva Landová et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

To investigate a specificity of spiders as a prototypical fear- and disgust-eliciting stimuli, we conducted an online experiment. The respondents rated images of 25 spiders, 12 non-spider chelicerates, and 10 other arthropods on a fear and disgust 7-point scale. The evaluation of 968 Central European respondents confirmed the specificity of spiders among fear- and disgust-eliciting arthropods and supported the notion of spiders as a cognitive category. We delineated this category as covering extant spider species as well as some other chelicerates bearing a physical resemblance to spiders, mainly whip spiders and camel spiders. We suggested calling this category the spider-like cognitive category. We discussed evolutionary roots of the spider-like category and concluded that its roots should be sought in fear, with disgust being secondary of the two emotions. We suggested other chelicerates, e.g., scorpions, might have been important in formation and fixation of the spider-like category. Further, we investigated an effect of respondent's sensitivity to a specific fear of spiders on evaluation of the stimuli. We found that suspected phobic respondents were in their rating nearly identical to those with only high fear of spiders and similar to those with only moderate fear of spiders. We concluded that results based on healthy respondents with elevated fear should also be considered relevant for arachnophobia research.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1
Illustrational pictures showing the variability of the presented spider stimuli (however very similar but real photos depicting the species were presented as the real stimuli): Aptostichus miwok (A), Falconina gracilis (B), Pholcus phalangioides (C), Myrmaplata plataleoides (D), Maratus speciosus (E), and Micrathena schreibersi (F). Authors: A-B, D-F–MVDr. Pavel Procházka; C–David Short.
Fig 2
Fig 2. The difference between the mean fear score and mean disgust score for each examined stimulus.
Notice that the vast majority of spider stimuli have higher mean fear score than disgust score (yellow bars, right side of the figure) while the vast majority of other chelicerates and other arthropods have higher mean disgust score than fear score (brown bars, left side of the figure).
Fig 3
Fig 3
Cluster trees based on fear (A) and disgust (B) scores. In both cases, spiders and spider-like chelicerates form a clearly separate cluster from the rest of the stimuli, i.e., myriapods, crustaceans, insects, and the rest of chelicerates (including the scorpion and tick). Spider cluster further splits into three subclusters: robust hairy spiders, spider-like chelicerates, and gracile spiders.
Fig 4
Fig 4
Results of the RDA analysis for fear (A) and disgust (B) scores. Spider stimuli are in yellow, other chelicerates in green, and other arthropods in blue; grey circles stand for respondents. Blue arrows represent variables entered the analysis (“Attitude” for the attitude toward spiders; “Emotions” for the first rated emotion).
Fig 5
Fig 5. Means and standard error bars of factor scores as extracted from FA for each SPQ category of respondents.
In both fear (A) and disgust (B), Factor 1 roughly corresponds to fear/disgust of gracile spiders and spider-like chelicerates, Factor 2 to fear/disgust of other arthropods, Factor 3 to fear/disgust of hairy robust spiders, and Factor 4 to disgust of crabs.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. New J, Cosmides L, Tooby J. Category-specific attention for animals reflects ancestral priorities, not expertise. PNAS. 2007; 104(42), 16598–16603. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0703913104 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Öhman A, Flykt A, Esteves F. Emotion drives attention: detecting the snake in the grass. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2001. a; 130(3), 466. doi: 10.1037//0096-3445.130.3.466 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Blanchette I. Snakes, spiders, guns, and syringes: How specific are evolutionary constraints on the detection of threatening stimuli?. Q J Exp Psycho. 2006; 59(8), 1484–1504. 10.1080/02724980543000204 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Yorzinski JL, Penkunas MJ, Platt ML, Coss RG. Dangerous animals capture and maintain attention in humans. Evolutionary Psychology. 2014; 12(3). 10.1177/147470491401200304 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Fox E, Lester V, Russo R, Bowles RJ, Pichler A, Dutton K. Facial expressions of emotion: Are angry faces detected more efficiently?. Cogn Emot. 2000; 14(1), 61–92. doi: 10.1080/026999300378996 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Grants and funding

This project has been supported by the Czech Scientific Foundation (GAČR), project No. 19-07164S, awarded to EL. https://www.gacr.cz/en/ The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.