You are what you eat: An empirical investigation of ...

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 71 (2017) 42–48

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jesp

Case Report

You are what you eat: An empirical investigation of the relationship between spicy food and aggressive cognition Rishtee K. Batra a,⁎, Tanuka Ghoshal a, Rajagopal Raghunathan b a b

Department of Marketing, Indian School of Business, Hyderabad, India Department of Marketing, McCombs School of Business, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, USA

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 5 June 2016 Revised 13 January 2017 Accepted 16 January 2017 Available online xxxx Keywords: Aggressive cognition Aggressive intent Spicy food

a b s t r a c t The popular saying “you are what you eat” suggests that people take on the characteristics of the food they eat. Wisdom from ancient texts and practitioners of alternative medicine seem to share the intuition that consuming spicy food may increase aggression. However, this relationship has not been empirically tested. In this research, we posit that those who consume “hot” and “spicy” food may be more prone to thoughts related to aggression. Across three studies, we find evidence for this proposition. Study 1 reveals that those who typically consume spicy food exhibit higher levels of trait aggression. Studies 2 and 3 reveal, respectively, that consumption of, and even mere exposure to spicy food, can semantically activate concepts related to aggression as well as lead to higher levels of perceived aggressive intent in others. Our work contributes to the literature on precursors of aggression, and has substantive implications for several stakeholders, including marketers, parents and policy makers. © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Imagine that you have an upcoming meeting with a confrontational colleague. You need to be at your aggressive best in order to not be run over during the meeting. What type of food do you think would help you best prepare for this meeting? a. Hot & spicy food b. Neither hot & spicy, nor bland & mild food c. Bland & mild food We posed this question to a set of participants (N = 54) and found that people believe that consuming spicy (vs. bland) food would better prepare them for aggression. Whereas 18.5% of the respondents felt that consuming spicy food would enhance aggressiveness, only 5.5% (z = 2.45; p = 0.01) felt this about consuming bland food, with the rest falling in between. These results suggest that people believe that consumption of spicy food promotes aggression. Other anecdotal accounts, too, suggest that consumption of spicy food promotes aggression. The

⁎ Corresponding author at: Department of Marketing, Indian School of Business, Gachibowli, Hyderabad 500032, India. E-mail address: [email protected] (R.K. Batra).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.01.007 0022-1031/© 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Malaysian health ministry, for example, administers a predominantly bland diet to prison inmates to keep their aggression in check. Likewise, practitioners of Asian medicine believe that consuming spicy food promotes aggression by raising acidity and blood pressure (Matthews, 2014; The Star Online, 2013). Given the prevalence of the belief that consuming spicy food increases aggressiveness, a question arises: Does consumption of spicy food promote aggression? Somewhat surprisingly, the relationship between consumption of spicy food and aggressiveness has not yet been put to an empirical test. The present research attempts to bridge this gap by addressing a related, but more basic, question: Do spicy food and aggression share a semantic overlap? For example, will exposure to spicy food prime aggression-related thoughts? Finding that spicy food does share semantic overlap with aggression would provide evidence consistent with the seemingly prevalent belief that spicy food promotes aggression, and thus make an important contribution to the literature. The rest of the paper is structured as follows. We first review relevant research to support our proposition that spicy food and aggression share semantic overlap. We then report results from three studies testing the relationship between spicy food and cognitions related to aggression. We conclude with a discussion of our contribution and limitations.

R.K. Batra et al. / Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 71 (2017) 42–48

2. Effects of spicy food consumption: extant research Findings from at least three streams of research are consistent with the idea that spicy food and aggression may share semantic overlap. First, the literature on embodied cognition (Krishna & Schwarz, 2014; Xu & Labroo, 2014) documents that sensory experiences can shape and, in turn, be shaped by cognitive processes. For example, priming participants with words associated with hot temperature has been found to increase aggressive thoughts and hostile intentions (Dewall & Bushman, 2009). This is because words used to refer to warmer environments (e.g., “hot”) and the sensations associated with being in one (a rise in body temperature) are also those associated with aggressive intent (Dewall & Bushman, 2009; Xu & Labroo, 2014). In a similar vein, because both spicy food and aggressive intent are associated with a common set of words (e.g., “hot”), images (e.g., the color red, which is often the color used to depict violence or blood) and sensations (e.g., increase in body temperature), one may expect that spicy food and aggression share semantic overlap. Second, certain individual difference variables associated with aggression have been found to be associated with a preference for spicy food. Males with higher levels of salivary testosterone—a hormone widely acknowledged to promote aggression— have been found to prefer spicy food (e.g., Bègue et al., 2015; Dabbs & Dabbs, 2000, Mazur & Booth, 1998, Stanton & Schultheiss, 2009). Studies have also found a preference for spicy food among those prone to masochistic behaviors (Rozin, 1990). Since those with higher testosterone levels or otherwise prone to aggression prefer spicier food, it is plausible that, through a process of conditioning, spicy food can come to be associated with aggression in people's minds (Bouton 1994; Stuart, Shimp & Engle, 1987; Lewicki 1986). Finally, spicy foods contain higher levels of capsaicin, an ingredient that has been shown to evoke discomfort, irritation, and even pain (Bègue et al., 2015; Byrnes & Hayes, 2013). Prior research shows that discomfort and pain can evoke aggression (Berkowitz, 1989, 1990, 1993a, b). Thus, it is plausible that the aversive physiological reactions evoked by consuming spicy food can, in turn, trigger aggressive intent (Anderson & Bushman, 2001; Berkowitz, 1993a, b). As such, spicy food can—again through conditioning—come to be associated with aggression in people's minds. In summary, there are at least three distinct mechanisms by which people could have learned to associate spicy food with aggression. We report results from three studies that tested for the possibility of a semantic overlap between spicy food and aggression.

43

aggressive, short-tempered, easily upset, easily lose my temper, easily irritated, easily angered,” α = 0.89) and, to mask the true purpose of the study, five items unrelated to aggression (considerate, impulsive, dependable, reliable, interesting). Participants rated their agreement with each item on a scale ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 7 (completely agree). Participants also completed the PANAS scale (Watson, Clark & Tellegen, 1988) to assess any potential mood effects. At the end of the survey, participants were asked to guess the true purpose of the studies, which no one was able to. 3.2. Results To assess whether spicy food is associated with aggressive traits, we conducted a linear regression using consumption of spicy food as the predictor, gender and mood-ratings as covariates, and self-reported trait aggression as the dependent variable. Results revealed a significant positive correlation between spicy food and trait aggression (β = 0.30, t(101) = 3.31, p = 0.001; ω2 = 0.19), consistent with our prediction. The only significant covariate was negative mood. Consistent with some prior findings (Berkowitz, 1990), those who reported higher levels of negative mood also reported higher levels of trait aggression (β = 0.36, t(101) = 3.89, p b 0.001). 3.3. Discussion Results from Study 1 suggest that consumption of spicy food may be associated with aggression: participants who reported consuming spicier food also reported higher levels of aggression. To rule out the possibility that those who consume spicy food rate themselves higher on all traits, a follow-up analysis was conducted using the other five “personality traits” (e.g., considerate) as the dependent variable. None of these traits were significantly correlated with the consumption of spicy food (all ts b 0.13, all ps N 0.15). Although Study 1 provides preliminary evidence in support of our central prediction, it suffers from an important limitation. Because preference for spicy food was measured rather than manipulated via random assignment, there is a possibility that a third variable—e.g., sensation-seeking—may underlie both a preference for spicy food and aggressive intent. In addition to this limitation, Study 1 raises the possibility that negative mood may play a significant role in the link between spicy food and aggressive cognitions. Studies 2 and 3 address these issues. 4. Study 2

3. Study 1 The objective of Study 1 was to provide a preliminary test for the association between spicy food and aggression. Toward this objective, we assessed the relationship between people's self-reported consumption of spicy foods and their self-reported aggression levels measured using Forgays et al.'s (1997) trait-aggression scale. 3.1. Method 3.1.1. Participants and procedure Participants (N = 105), who completed the study for a chance to win gift certificates, were told that they would take part in two “unrelated” studies. The real objective of the “first study,” portrayed as an exploration of participants' food consumption habits, was to elicit our independent variable: spiciness of food typically consumed. We did so through the following question: “On a scale of 1 to 100, where 1 = ‘Not at all spicy’ and 100 = ‘Very spicy,’ how spicy is the food that you typically consume?” In Study 2, portrayed as a “personality study,” participants rated themselves on seven items related to aggression using Forgays et al.'s (1997) trait-aggression scale (“I consider myself to be: hot-headed,

Having documented preliminary evidence that spicy food may be associated with aggressive intent, we turned our attention to further exploring this relationship in Study 2. Specifically, the main objective of this study was to assess whether the consumption of more (vs. less) spicy food primes thoughts related to aggression. A secondary objective was to address an important limitation of Study 1, that a “third variable” may underline both preference for spicy food and aggressive intent. Toward these objectives, we randomly assigned participants to consume spicy or non-spicy food, and later measured aggressive cognition. If spicy food is associated with aggressive intent, we should find that aggression-related thoughts are more salient among those assigned to consuming spicy (vs. non-spicy) food. Salience of aggression-related thoughts was assessed through a semantic activation task, described subsequently, as well as by measuring perceived aggressive intent. To measure perceived aggressive intent, we exposed participants (after they had consumed either the spicy or the non-spicy food) to a vignette in which a protagonist behaves in an ambiguously aggressive manner (see Appendix A). Participants were then asked to indicate extent to which the protagonist had exhibited aggressive intent. Past findings reveal that those who perceive higher levels of aggressive intent in others are prone to exhibiting aggressive intent

44


themselves (DeWall, Twenge, Gitter, & Baumeister, 2009; De Castro, Veerman, Koops, Bosch, & Monshouwer, 2002). As such, perceived aggressive intent in others has been used as a proxy measure of participants' own aggressive intent in some past research (e.g., DeWall & Bushman 2009; Xu & Labroo 2014). Thus, finding that those asked to consume the spicy (vs. non-spicy) food perceive higher levels of aggressive intent in others would provide particularly compelling evidence that spicy food and aggression share semantic overlap.

4.1. Method 4.1.1. Participants and procedure Sixty student participants took part in a one-factor experiment (food-type: spicy vs. non-spicy) in which aggressive thoughts and perceptions of aggressive intent in others served as the dependent variables. Participants first provided demographic information and ratings of the brightness and warmth of the experimental room, because past research has found these variables to increase aggressive intent (DeWall & Bushman, 2009; Xu & Labroo, 2014). They were then asked to participate in three “unrelated” studies, beginning with one described as a “taste test,” which constituted the food-type manipulation. Participants either consumed one plain tortilla chip (non-spicy condition) or one tortilla chip with two drops of habanero hot sauce containing capsaicin (spicy condition). After consuming the assigned tortilla chip, participants rated their liking for it using a two-item scale (“These chips taste good,” and “I like the taste of these chips”, α = 0.94), provided their preference for consuming spicy food using a four-item scale (“I like spicy food,” “The spicier food is, the better,” “When my tongue burns from spicy food, I find the sensation thrilling,” and “I eat spicier food than the average person,” α = 0.81) and indicated a general preference regarding foods (“I have very strong likes and dislikes when it comes to food”). Participants also reported how spicy they found the tortilla chip to be (These chips are: “Spicy,” “Fiery,” “Hot,” and “Leaves a burning sensation in my mouth”, α = 0.82). All measures were elicited using a scale ranging from 1 ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 7 (completely agree). Finally, participants' mood was measured using Watson et al.'s (1988) PANAS scale. Participants subsequently completed the “second study,” which was portrayed as a “reading comprehension test” consisting of two parts. The first part was adapted from Gilbert and Hixon's (1991) semantic activation task, also used by other researchers to measure aggressive thoughts (e.g., DeWall & Bushman, 2009) in which participants performed a word-fragment completion test. Participants were given 20 word fragments and were asked to complete each by selecting from one of two options. For ten of the twenty word fragments, both an aggressive and a non-aggressive option were provided (e.g. “HIT” or “HAT” for “H_T”). For the remaining ten word fragments, both options were non-aggressive (e.g. “VASE” and “ROSE” for “_ _SE”). To assess whether the food types activated aggression-related thoughts to a different extent, the number of aggressive options chosen in the relevant word fragments was calculated, with a maximum possible score of 10, and a minimum of 0. The second part of the “reading comprehension test” was designed to elicit our second dependent variable—perceived aggressive intent—using a well-established procedure first developed by Srull and Wyer (1979) and subsequently used by others (Bargh & Pietromonaco, 1982; DeWall & Bushman, 2009; Xu & Labroo, 2014). In this part, participants were asked to read a vignette in which a protagonist (named “Jay”) behaves in an ambiguously aggressive manner. Then, they indicated the extent to which Jay exhibited aggressive intent. This was done using the following three items with which participants indicated their extent of agreement on a scale of ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 7 (completely agree): “Jay” (the protagonist) is “hot-headed,” “short-tempered,” and “aggressive” (α = 0.89). As a confound check, participants also rated Jay on two personality traits somewhat

related to, but conceptually different from, aggression: “assertive” and “impulsive.” At the end of the survey, subjects were asked to guess the true purpose of the study, which no one was able to guess.

4.2. Results 4.2.1. Manipulation check To confirm that the food-type manipulation worked as intended, a one-way ANCOVA was conducted, with perceived spiciness of the chip serving as the dependent variable, serving as the predictor, and gender, room brightness, room temperature, preference for spicy food, general food preferences, liking for stimuli and positive and negative mood serving as covariates. Results confirmed a main effect of food-type, F(1, 50) = 80.66, p b 0.001, η2 = 0.64, such that the chip was rated as significantly spicier in the spicy (Mspicy = 5.02, SD = 1.19) versus non-spicy (Mnon-spicy = 2.12, SD = 0.87) condition. Further, none of the other variables were significant (all ps N 0.20), and the main effect of spiciness was replicated even when the covariates were dropped, F(1,58) = 95.89, p b 0.001, η2 = 0.64.

4.2.2. Dependent measures To test our prediction that consumption of spicy food primes aggressive cognition, a one-way ANCOVA was conducted using spiciness condition as the predictor, the same variables used in the manipulation check as covariates, and semantic activation of aggression-related thoughts as the dependent measure. The results revealed a main effect for food-type (F(1, 50) = 3.36, p = 0.01, η2 = 0.19), in the expected direction; there was a greater activation of aggression-related thoughts among those who consumed the spicy (vs. non-spicy) food (Mspicy = 5.58, SD = 1.88; Mnon-spicy = 3.75, SD = 1.86). None of the covariates were significant and further, the main effect of spicy food remained even when the covariates were not included in the analysis. A second one-way ANCOVA (with the same covariates as the previous analyses) was conducted using a composite measure of perceived aggressive intent in “Jay” as the dependent measure. The analysis revealed a main effect of food-type, F(1, 50) = 13.31, p = 0.001, η2 = 0.32. Consistent with our prediction, those who had consumed the spicy (vs. non-spicy) food-item imputed higher aggressive intent in Jay (Mspicy = 5.45, SD = 0.86; Mnon-spicy = 4.71, SD = 0.98). None of the covariates (including mood) were significant (all ps N 0.20) except for liking for the stimuli.

4.3. Discussion While Study 1 established that those who typically consume spicier food report higher levels of trait aggression, Study 2 demonstrates that the actual consumption of spicy (vs. non-spicy) food primes aggressionrelated thoughts. Unlike Study 1, participants in Study 2 were randomly assigned to spicy (vs. non-spicy) condition, and therefore, this study mitigates the concern that the link between spicy food and aggressive intent is determined by some other (third) variable. Further, unlike Study 1, negative mood did not play a role in this study, thus allaying concerns that mood plays a role in the link between spicy food and aggressive intent. Taken together, findings from studies 1 and 2 provide increasingly convincing evidence that spicy food and aggression share semantic overlap. A question that remains, however, is whether it is necessary for people to consume spicy food (like they did in Study 2) or be reminded of past consumption of spicy food (as was the case in Study 1) for aggression-related thoughts to be primed, or whether mere exposure to stimuli (words or pictures) depicting spicy food is sufficient. We explore this question in the next and final study.


5. Study 3 The main objective of Study 3 was to replicate the link between spicy food and aggressive cognition, but this time with mere exposure to words or pictures of spicy food. It is plausible that, much like how exposure to stimuli associated with aggression (e.g., pictures of weapons, and alcohol) can trigger aggressive behavior (Anderson, Benjamin & Bartholow, 1998; Bartholow & Heinz, 2006), mere exposure to words or pictures of spicy food is sufficient to prime aggression-related thoughts. We wished to explore this possibility because finding that exposure to even words or pictures of spicy food is sufficient to evoke aggression-related cognitions would provide even stronger evidence of a semantic overlap between spicy food and aggression than that documented in the first two studies. A secondary objective of Study 3 was to assess differences in the strength of visual vs. verbal stimuli in priming aggression-related thoughts.1 Toward this objective, we exposed some participants to pictures of spicy food, while others were exposed to words associated with such food. 5.1. Method 5.1.1. Participants and procedure One hundred and eight student participants took part in a two-factor experiment: 2 (prime-content: spicy vs. non-spicy) × 2 (prime-type: visual vs. verbal), in exchange for random drawings for cash prizes. Participants were told that they would take part in three “unrelated” studies. After providing demographic information and evaluations of the brightness and warmth of their surroundings, participants began the “first study,” portrayed as a “food preference study.” In the spicy and nonspicy “visual prime” conditions, participants were shown pictures of seven different types of spicy or non-spicy foods, respectively (see Appendix B), which they assessed on spiciness by responding to the item: “This food is probably spicy” on a scale ranging from ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 7 (completely agree). Subsequently, using the same scales as that used in Study 2, participants indicated their preference for spicy food (α = 0.92) and their general foodpreference. The procedure in the “verbal prime” condition, which was run as a separate wave for logistical reasons, was slightly different. Participants first responded to items that elicited their preference for spicy food, and general food preference. Then, prime-content (spicy vs. nonspicy) was manipulated via a sentence-completion task, adapted from similar tasks used in prior research (e.g., Srull & Wyer, 1979). Specifically, participants were given eighteen incomplete sentences and asked to choose one among three options to complete the sentence. In the nonspicy condition, all three options were unrelated to spiciness whereas, in the spicy condition, one of the options was related to spiciness. For example, in both conditions, participants were asked to complete the sentence, “The cuisine of India is known to be very ________.” The options in the spicy condition were a) spicy, b) similar, and c) small whereas the options in the non-spicy condition were a) tasty, b) similar, and c) small (see Appendix C). Participants in both the visual and verbal prime conditions then completed the “next study”, which was portrayed as a “reading comprehension skills test” consisting of two parts, the semantic activation task and the protagonist evaluation task. 5.2. Results 5.2.1. Manipulation check To check whether the prime-content manipulation in the visual prime condition worked as intended, a one-way (prime-content: spicy vs. non-spicy) ANCOVA was conducted, using perceived spiciness of the food as the dependent variable, and gender, room brightness and 1 Prior findings (e.g., Childers, Houston, & Heckler, 1985; Pham, Meyvis, & Zhou, 2001) suggest that visual (imagery) cues are stronger than verbal ones.

45

temperature, preference for spicy food, general food preferences, and positive and negative affect serving as covariates. A significant main effect of prime-content emerged, confirming that pictures of spicy food were perceived as more spicy than those of non-spicy food F(1, 100) = 243.50, p b 0.001, η2 = 0.71 (Mspicy = 5.49, SD = 0.69, Mnonspicy = 3.29, SD = 0.70). Among the covariates, only gender emerged as significant, F(1100) = 4.84, p = 0.04, η2 = 0.04, revealing that females (vs. males) perceived the food to be more spicy. This may be because higher testosterone levels in men lead to a higher tolerance for spice (Bègue et al., 2015).2 Importantly, excluding the covariates did not change the significance of the manipulation, F(1, 106) = 269.48, p b 0.001, η2 = 0.72, suggesting that it worked as intended.

5.2.2. Dependent measures We first conducted a 2 (prime-content: spicy, non-spicy) × 2 (prime-type: visual, verbal) ANCOVA, with semantic activation of aggressive thoughts as the dependent variable, and the same set of variables used in the manipulation check serving as covariates. A main effect of prime-content emerged, F(1167) = 42.43, p b 0.001, η2 = 0.18, confirming that activation of aggression-related thoughts was greater in the “spicy” vs. “non-spicy” condition (Mspicy = 5.52, SD = 1.94 vs. Mnon-spicy = 3.43, SD = 1.99). Further, a 2-way interaction between prime-content and prime-type emerged, F(1167) = 5.27, p = 0.02; η2 = 0.05. Follow up analyses revealed that, although the simple effect of prime-content was significant in both the visual condition, F(1, 167) = 53.77, p b 0.001, η2 = 0.23 (Mspicy = 5.75, SD = 1.81 vs. Mnon-spicy = 3.00, SD = 1.88) and the verbal condition, F(1, 167) = 4.54, p = 0.03, η2 = 0.03 (Mspicy = 5.14, SD = 2.13 vs. Mnon-spicy = 4.03, SD = 2.01), it was more pronounced in the former. The results were unchanged when the covariates were dropped from the analysis. A second analysis—a two-way ANCOVA with a composite measure of perceived aggressive intent in Jay (α = 0.87) serving as the dependent variable, and the same set of variables as that used in the previous analysis serving as covariates—conceptually replicated these results. There was a main effect of prime-content, F(1167) = 49.49, p b 0.001, η2 = 0.21, confirming that participants imputed higher aggressive intent in Jay in the “spicy” vs. “non-spicy” condition (Mspicy = 5.65, SD = 0.89 vs. Mnon-spicy = 4.52, SD = 1.02). Further, a 2-way interaction between prime-content and prime-type emerged, F(1167) = 24.19, p b 0.001, η2 = 0.14. Follow up analyses revealed that the simple effect of prime-content was significant only in the visual condition, F(1, 167) = 49.49, p b 0.001, η2 = 0.34 (Mspicy = 5.97, SD = 0.69 vs. Mnonspicy = 4.30, SD = 1.11) and not in the verbal condition, F(1, 178) = 1.41, p = 0.24, η2 = 0.01 (Mspicy = 5.13, SD = 0.93 vs. Mnon-spicy = 4.83, SD = 0.84). Finally, neither the prime-type, F(1167) = 1.41, p = 0.24, η2 = 0.01, nor the covariates were significant (all ps N 0.50). Again, the results remained unchanged when all covariates were dropped.

5.3. Discussion Findings from Study 3 are noteworthy for two main reasons. First, they reveal that aggressive cognitions can be activated even without actual consumption of food. This suggests that the link between spicy food and aggressive cognition is strong enough to be activated upon mere exposure to stimuli depicting spicy food. Second, they reveal that the link between exposure to spicy food and aggressive cognition is more pronounced for visual versus verbal primes, thus conceptually replicating some earlier findings which show that visual stimuli evoke stronger associations than do words (Pham, Meyvis & Zhou 2001).

2 Gender neither played a significant role in the previous two studies, nor impacted the dependent measures in Study 3.

46


6. General discussion “Katv-amla-lavanaty-usna-tiksna-ruksa-vidahinah/ahara rajasasyesta duhkha-sokamaya-pradah.” [Foods that are too bitter, too sour, salty, hot, pungent, dry and burning are dear to those in the mode of passion. Such foods cause pain, distress, misery and disease]. -The Bhagavad Gita (17:9). The idea that the taste-properties of the food we consume can alter our behavioral tendencies appears to not just be prevalent (as mentioned in the beginning of the paper), but also old, as reflected in the quote from The Bhagvad Gita, an ancient Indian text dating back to 3000 BCE. As discussed, extant research proffers several mechanisms via which spicy food might be hypothesized to be conceptually linked with aggression - however, this relationship had hitherto not been empirically tested. The objective in this research was to test the link between spicy food and aggressive cognition, to assess whether spicy food and aggression share a semantic overlap. Across three studies, we found two noteworthy findings. First, the link between spicy food and aggressive cognition appears quite robust. In Study 1, we found evidence of an association between self-reported predilection for spicy food and trait-aggression. In Study 2, we found that the consumption of spicy food leads to more aggressive thoughts and greater perceived aggressive intent in others. And finally, in Study 3, we found that even mere exposure to visual or verbal stimuli may be sufficient to increase aggressive cognitions. Second, although mere exposure to spicy food is sufficient to evoke aggressive cognition, visual (vs. verbal) stimuli appear more potent—a finding that is in line with some prior research. 6.1. Theoretical and practical implications Given the potentially destructive effects of aggression for society (Berkowitz, 2014), it is important to gain an understanding of factors that enhance aggressive intent. This research adds to a large body of work exploring the precursors of aggressiveness (Meier, Robinson & Wilkowski 2006; Bartholow & Heinz, 2006; Chandler & Schwarz, 2009). Other researchers have found that environmental cues such as pictures of weapons, violent media and hot temperatures impact aggressive behavior in adults (Anderson 1989, DeWall & Bushman 2009; Anderson & Bushman, 2002a, b; Anderson et al., 1998; Berkowitz & LePage 1967). We add to this literature by documenting the role that a hitherto unexplored factor—the spiciness of food—can play. As previous researchers (e.g., Sherman & Flaxman, 2001; Sherman & Hash, 2001) have noted, there is an adaptive reason why spicy food is popular in certain countries (e.g., Thailand, Mexico, and India). The hotter climate in these countries translates to a greater number of foodborne microbes and adding spice helps kill these microbes, making the food safer. Over time, this adaptive reason for making food spicier evolved into a cultural preference for consuming spicy food in such countries (Sherman & Billing, 1999). Our findings suggest some interesting questions that could be explored in future research such as, whether the incidents of altercations or heated debates is greater in countries or households that consume spicier (vs. less spicy) food. In a related vein, it would be interesting to explore whether customers more likely to engage in aggressive behaviors (e.g., lodge complaints, spread negative word of mouth, or offer lower tips) in contexts (e.g., restaurants), that serve more (vs. less) spicy food. Interesting implications emerge for regulating children's behaviors too. Parents could presumably find it easier to discipline children by lowering the spiciness of their food. Likewise, teachers may find it easier to regulate students' behaviors by controlling the levels of spice served in the cafeterias. 6.2. Limitations and concluding thoughts Although our studies collectively provide strong evidence that consumption of, or exposure to, spicy food evokes aggression-related

thoughts, it is not without limitations. The first limitation concerns the generalizability of the results; all of our studies were conducted using participants from a single country: India. It would be interesting for future research to test our central prediction in other countries and cultures. However, if anything, our results were collected in a conservative context as past researchers (Byrnes & Hayes, 2013) speculate that the relationship between spice consumption and various personality traits should be negligible in cultures where the food is predominantly spicy due to cultural norms, such as in India. In support of this, we conducted a pilot study to test for preexisting associations between different stimuli and aggressive behavior. 69 student subjects (35 female) were asked their opinion (1 = “Strongly Disagree”; 7 = “Strongly Agree”) on the following statements: “I believe that eating spicy food (consuming alcohol/watching violent movies/hot climates) can cause aggressive behavior.” Belief that eating spicy food causes aggressive behavior (M = 3.65, SD = 1.78) was significantly less strong than that of consuming alcohol (M = 4.97, SD = 1.88), t(68) = 4.42, p b 0.001, η2 = 0.34; hot climates (M = 4.57, SD = 1.59), t(68) = 3.19, p b 0.001, η2 = 0.26, and watching violent movies (M = 4.19, SD = 1.64, t(68) = 1.85, p = 0.032, η2 = 0.16). This suggests that the link between spicy food and aggression may not be as strong as the other associations studied in the literature, particularly in a culture that is predisposed to spicy food. Therefore, the fact that we still observe a significant relationship between spice consumption and aggressive cognition is noteworthy, and we speculate that this relationship could be stronger in other cultures where the inherent preference for spiciness is not as high. A second limitation concerns the design of Study 3. Ideally, the two factors in the study—prime-content (spicy, non-spicy) and prime-type (visual, verbal) would have been fully crossed. Instead, due to the lack of a sufficiently large subject-pool, we manipulated type of prime across two separate waves of unique participants from the same population. Because our work is the first to investigate the link between spicy food and aggressive cognition, it would be important to replicate our results. Future research should also build on our results to assess the robustness of our findings. For example, direct operationalizations of aggressive behavior could be tested, such as increased (decreased) propensity to engage in aggressive (prosocial) behavior. Or, other operationalizations of aggressive intent could be used, such as the amount of painfully hot sauce that participants pour out for a future participant (see McGregor et al., 1998) after having consumed spicy food themselves. Finally, it could be interesting to examine whether, controlling for other factors, there is a correlation between spiciness of cuisine and levels of aggression in different countries.

Appendix A. Ambiguous description of target person adapted from Srull and Wyer (1979) I ran into my old friend Jay the other day, and I decided to go over and visit him. Soon after I arrived at Jay's house, a salesman knocked at the door, but Jay refused to let him enter. He also told me that he was refusing to pay his rent until the landlord repaints his apartment. We talked for a while, had lunch, and then went out for a ride in my car. We used my car because Jay's car had broken down that morning. Jay told the mechanic that he would have to go somewhere else if he couldn't fix his car that same day. We went to the park for about an hour and then stopped at a grocery store. I was a little preoccupied at the store with my own shopping, but Jay bought a few items, and then I heard him demand his money back from the cashier. I couldn't find what I was looking for, so we left and walked a few blocks to another store. The Red Cross had set up a stand by the door and asked us to donate blood. Jay lied and said he could not give blood. It was getting kind of late, so I took Jay to pick up his car at repair shop and we agreed to meet again another day.


47

Appendix B. Visual priming task; Study 3. Sample spicy prime content

Sample non-spicy prime content

Appendix C. Verbal priming task; Study 3. Spicy prime content

Non-spicy prime content

The sun is very ________ (HOT/RED/SQUARE) Basketball is a type of __________ (STOVE/SPORT/ANGER) A comet is a big ball of __________ (FIRE/BOIL/WOOD) Don't touch the iron, it will __________ you (SQUEEZE/BURN/VAPOR) People often decorate sofas with _______ (MATCHES/CUSHIONS/PIZZA) Pillows are usually soft to __________ (HEAR/SMELL/TOUCH) The wind will blow out the candle's __________ (FLAME/SLEEP/DESIGN) Please take the food out of the __________ (OVEN/LADDER/TV) The cuisine of India is known to be __________ (SPICY/SMALL/SIMILAR) The chocolate melted in the __________ (HEAT/TABLE/PEN) The egg is __________ in the water (BOILING/SWIMMING/DANCING) Singapore is located close to the __________ (EQUATOR/SOUTH POLE/DESERT) Some people like to __________ their food (FRY/SLEEP/STRONG) It is a bright and __________ morning (CLOUDY/RAINY/SUNNY) America is a __________ (COUNTRY/SONG/MOVIE) When it rains it is usually __________ (DRY/HUMID/FULL) Brazil is a __________ climate (TROPICAL/RED/SMALL) A matchstick can be used to __________ a stove (IGNITE/FIX/CLOSE)

Basketball is a type of __________ (JOB/SPORT/SONG) The sport football is also sometimes known as __________ (SOCCER/TENNIS/RUGBY) People often decorate sofas with _______ (MATCHES/CUSHIONS/PIZZA) Pillows are usually soft to __________ (HEAR/SMELL/TOUCH) The wind is __________ (COLD/WET/HIGH) Please take the chips out of the __________ (BAG/LADDER/TV) The cuisine of India is known to be __________ (TASTY/SMALL/SIMILAR) The chocolate has a gold __________ (WRAPPER/SMELL/TASTE) I like to eat _________ eggs (SCRAMBLED/SWIMMING/DANCING) Singapore is located close to __________ (BRAZIL/MALAYSIA/GERMANY) Some people like to ______ milk (DRINK/SMELL/WATCH) It is a __________ morning (CLOUDY/STRONG/CONFUSED) America is a __________ (COUNTRY/SONG/MOVIE) The national language of Brazil is __________ (PORTUGUESE/ENGLISH/SPANISH) Kids usually do not like to eat _________ (CANDY/VEGETABLES/ICE CREAM)

References Anderson, C. A. (1989). Temperature and aggression: Ubiquitous effects of heat on occurrence of human violence. Psychological Bulletin, 106(1), 74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ 0033-2909.106.1.74 Anderson, C. A., Benjamin, A. J., & Bartholow, B. D. (1998). Does the gun pull the trigger? Automatic priming effects of weapon pictures and weapon names. Psychological Science, 9(4), 308–314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00061 Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2001). Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal, and prosocial behavior: A meta-analytic review of the scientific literature. Psychological Science, 12(5), 353–359. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00366 Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2002a). The effects of media violence on society. Science, 295(5564), 2377–2379. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1070765 Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2002b). Human aggression. Psychology, 53(1), 27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135231 Bargh, J. A., & Pietromonaco, P. (1982). Automatic information processing and social perception: The influence of trait information presented outside of conscious awareness on impression formation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(3), 437. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.43.3.437 Bartholow, B. D., & Heinz, A. (2006). Alcohol and aggression without consumption alcohol cues, aggressive thoughts, and hostile perception bias. Psychological Science, 17(1), 30–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01661.x Bègue, L., Bricout, V., Boudesseul, J., Shankland, R., & Duke, A. A. (2015). Some like it hot: Testosterone predicts laboratory eating behavior of spicy food. Physiology & Behavior, 139, 375–377. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2014.11.061 Berkowitz, L. (1989). Frustration-aggression hypothesis: Examination and reformulation. Psychological Bulletin, 106(1), 59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909. 106.1.59

Berkowitz, L. (1990). On the formation and regulation of anger and aggression: A cognitive-neoassociationistic analysis. American Psychologist, 45(4), 494. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1037/0003-066X.45.4.494 Berkowitz, L. (1993a). Aggression: Its causes, consequences, and control. McGraw-Hill Book Company. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2337(1994)20:6b464::AID-AB2480200608N 3.0.CO;2-9. Berkowitz, L. (1993b). Pain and aggression: Some findings and implications. Motivation and Emotion, 17(3), 277–293. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00992223 Berkowitz, L. (2014). Towards a general theory of anger and emotional aggression: Implications. Perspectives on Anger and Emotion: Advances in Social Cognition, 6, 1–46. Berkowitz, L., & LePage, A. (1967). Weapons as aggression-eliciting stimuli. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 7(21), 202. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0025008 Bouton, M. E. (1994). Context, ambiguity, and classical conditioning. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 3(2), 49–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3223(02)01546-9 Byrnes, N. K., & Hayes, J. E. (2013). Personality factors predict spicy food liking and intake. Food Quality and Preference, 28(1), 213–221. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual. 2012.09.008 Chandler, J., & Schwarz, N. (2009). How extending your middle finger affects your perception of others: Learned movements influence concept accessibility. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(1), 123–128. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2008.06.012 Childers, T. L., Houston, M. J., & Heckler, S. E. (1985). Measurement of individual differences in visual versus verbal information processing. Journal of Consumer Research, 125–134. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/208501 Dabbs, J. M., & Dabbs, M. G. (2000). Heroes, rogues, and lovers: Testosterone and behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill. De Castro, B. O., Veerman, J. W., Koops, W., Bosch, J. D., & Monshouwer, H. J. (2002). Hostile attribution of intent and aggressive behavior: A meta-analysis. Child Development, 73(3), 916–934. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00447 DeWall, C. N., & Bushman, B. J. (2009). Hot under the collar in a lukewarm environment: Words associated with hot temperature increase aggressive thoughts and hostile

48


perceptions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(4), 1045–1047. http://dx. doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.05.003 DeWall, C. N., Twenge, J. M., Gitter, S. A., & Baumeister, R. F. (2009). It's the thought that counts: The role of hostile cognition in shaping aggressive responses to social exclusion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(1), 45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ a0013196 Forgays, D. G., Forgays, D. K., & Spielberger, C. D. (1997). Factor structure of the state-trait anger expression inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 69(3), 497–507. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa6903_5 Gilbert, D. T., & Hixon, J. G. (1991). The trouble of thinking: Activation and application of stereotypic beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(4), 509. http://dx. doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.60.4.509 Krishna, A., & Schwarz, N. (2014). Sensory marketing, embodiment, and grounded cognition: A review and introduction. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 24(2), 159–168. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2013.12.006 Lewicki, P. (1986). Processing information about covariations that cannot be articulated. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 12(January), 135–146. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.12.1.135 Matthews, J. (2014). “Can aggression be related to food?” Nourishing hope, food and nutrition for ADHD, autism and healthy children: (January 28, 2014). Retrieved from http://nourishinghope.com/can-aggression-be-related-to-food/. Mazur, A., & Booth, A. (1998). Testosterone and dominance in men. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21(03), 353–363. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X98001228 McGregor, H. A., Lieberman, J. D., Greenberg, J., Solomon, S., Arndt, J., Simon, L., & Pyszczynski, T. (1998). Terror management and aggression: Evidence that mortality salience motivates aggression against worldview-threatening others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(3), 590. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514. 74.3.590 Meier, B. P., Robinson, M. D., & Wilkowski, B. M. (2006). Turning the other cheek: Agreeableness and the regulation of aggression-related primes. Psychological Science, 17(2), 136–142. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01676.x Pham, M. T., Meyvis, T., & Zhou, R. (2001). Beyond the obvious: Chronic vividness of imagery and the use of information in decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 84(2), 226–253. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/obhd.2000.2924

Rozin, P. (1990). Getting to like the burn of chili pepper: Biological, psychological and cultural perspectives. In B. G. Green, J. R. Mason, & M. R. Kare (Eds.), Chemical Senses, volume 2: Irritation (pp. 231–269). New York: Marcel Dekker. Sherman, P. W., & Billing, J. (1999). Darwinian gastronomy: Why we use spices. Spices taste good because they are good for us. BioScience, 49(6), 453–463. http://dx.doi. org/10.2307/1313553 Sherman, P. W., & Flaxman, S. M. (2001). Protecting ourselves from food. American Scientist, 89(2), 142–151. http://dx.doi.org/10.1511/2001.2.142 Sherman, P. W., & Hash, G. A. (2001). Why vegetable recipes are not very spicy. Evolution and Human Behavior, 22(3), 147–163. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S10905138(00)00068-4 Srull, T. K., & Wyer, R. S., Jr. (1979). The role of category accessibility in the interpretation of information about persons: Some determinants and implications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1660–1667. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/00223514.37.10.1660 Stanton, S. J., & Schultheiss, O. C. (2009). The hormonal correlates of implicit power motivation. Journal of Research in Personality, 43(5), 942–949. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.jrp.2009.04.001 Stuart, E. W., Shimp, T. A., & Engle, R. W. (1987). Classical conditioning of consumer attitudes: Four experiments in an advertising context. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(3), 334–349. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/209117 The Star Online (2013). Spicy food can trigger aggression. 25 August 2013. Sunday. Retrieved from http://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2013/08/25/spicy-food-cantrigger-aggression/. Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063–1070. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063 Xu, A. J., & Labroo, A. A. (2014). Incandescent affect: Turning on the hot emotional system with bright light. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 24(2), 207–221. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jcps.2013.12.007