Background Arachnophobia is among the most common specific phobias, yet validated tools for assessing spider fear remain limited in Chinese-speaking populations despite China’s large population, rapid urbanisation, and increasing human–nature interactions. Establishing culturally adapted and psychometrically robust measures is therefore important for cross-cultural research and for understanding how demographic factors and nature connectedness relate to spider fear in Chinese contexts. Methods The Spider Questionnaire (SPQ) and Fear of Spiders Questionnaire (FSQ) were administered to 1,430 Chinese participants aged 18–51 years, recruited between August and September 2022. Psychometric evaluation involved parallel analysis, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, assessments of internal consistency, and construct validity testing. Various SPQ versions (SPQ-31, SPQ-15, SPQ-12, and modified forms) and FSQ versions were compared to identify the optimal instrument for measuring arachnophobia within this cultural context. Associations between spider fear, other animal fears, nature connectedness, and demographic variables were also examined. Results The unidimensional SPQ-12 demonstrated the best model fit and excellent reliability and validity among tested scales. Spider fear correlated positively with fear of snakes and other harmless animals and negatively with nature connectedness. Consistent with prior findings in Western countries, higher arachnophobia levels were observed among females and younger participants. Conclusions The SPQ-12 is a culturally validated and psychometrically sound tool for assessing spider fear in Chinese populations. Findings support an evolutionary basis for spider fear and highlight urbanisation’s potential role in weakening human–nature connections globally.

Fear and disgust are distinct negative emotions adults feel towards animals, yet little is known about when they emerge and diverge during childhood. We asked 344 children aged 3–15 years to rank two sets of 34 animal images, one eliciting fear, the other eliciting disgust. Both emotions were already structured by age 3 and broadly adult-like, yet followed contrasting developmental paths. Fear rankings shifted with age: the spider rose from 10th (3–5 years) to 1st (13–15 years) but only 7th in adults, while the crab fell, and several small but visibly armed invertebrates were judged more frightening by children than adults. Disgust rankings, dominated by parasites, larvae, lice, and worm-like invertebrates, were remarkably stable from preschool onward (child–adult correlations 0.94–0.98). Animal characteristics explained 72–81% of variance in fear ranks but only 44–55% in disgust ranks; respondent characteristics explained just 8.8% and 1.8%. This developmental double dissociation between crab and spider reveals a perceptual layer tuned to weapon-like cues, progressively recalibrated by knowledge of real danger. Contrary to the view of fear as biologically prepared and disgust as culturally shaped, it is animal disgust, not fear, that is more deeply and uniformly prepared from early childhood.

Human fear systems evolved to rapidly detect and respond to ancestral dangers such as snakes and heights. However, cultural and technological change has introduced novel threats, including firearms and infectious diseases. This study compared subjective fear responses to these ancestral versus modern threats to examine how evolutionary predispositions and cultural learning shape emotional evaluation. A total of 235 participants ranked 60 photographic stimuli—snakes, heights, guns, pandemic-related scenes, and neutral controls—according to perceived fear and completed questionnaires assessing specific phobias and attitudes toward guns and diseases. Cluster and factor analyses confirmed that snakes form a distinct, psychologically coherent category, while modern threats divided into meaningful subcategories: directly versus non-directly threatening guns and pandemic cues related to hospitals versus masks and sneezing. Friedman and post-hoc tests revealed that directly threatening guns elicited the strongest fear, followed closely by snakes and hospital scenes; mask and sneezing cues and heights provoked weaker responses. Redundancy analysis showed that individual fear traits (especially snake fear and gun anxiety) significantly modulated ratings, with women reporting higher fear across categories. The findings demonstrate that snakes remain privileged fear stimuli consistent with evolutionary preparedness, but modern hazards—particularly those implying imminent danger—can evoke equally intense fear. Thus, human threat evaluation reflects an interplay between innate fear modules tuned to ancestral dangers and flexible, culturally acquired mechanisms for novel risks. These results underscore the adaptive plasticity of human defensive systems in responding to both phylogenetic and ontogenetic threats.

IntroductionThreats to our survival are often posed by the environment in which humans have evolved or live today. Animal and human ancestors developed complex physiological and behavioral response systems to cope with two types of threats: immediate physical harm from predators or conspecifics, triggering fear, and the risk of infections from parasites and pathogens leading to the evolution of the behavioral immune system (BIS) with disgust as the key emotion. Here we ask whether the BIS has adapted to protect us from pandemic risks or poisoning by modern toxic substances.MethodsWe have developed a survey comprised of 60 vignettes describing threats evoking fear and disgust belonging to one of the three main categories of threats: (1) ancestral, (2) modern, and (3) pandemic of airborne disease. Each vignette was evaluated on a 7-point Likert scale based on fear, disgust, and anger. Respondents also completed an assessment battery.ResultsThe results show that the strongest fear is triggered by modern threats (electricity, car accidents), while the highest disgust is evoked by ancient threats (body waste products, worms). Disgust does not respond to modern threat stimuli such as toxic substances or radioactivity as these evoke mainly fear and anger. A discriminant factor analysis classified nine out of 10 pandemic disgust vignettes into the ancestral disgust category, convincingly assigning the pandemic disgust threats to the ancestral type. Gender, age, and type of education were significant moderators of emotional responses across all threat categories.DiscussionOur study reveals that while fear is more context-dependent, particularly triggered by modern threats, disgust operates on an evolutionarily hardwired basis, making it less effective against contemporary risks. Furthermore, disgust experienced during a pandemic outbreak is more closely aligned with ancestral disgust-related threats tapping into evolutionary ancient survival circuits of the BIS. However, as disgust declines with age, the brain must adaptatively shift the emotional processing from disgust to fear to protect older adults from contamination risks. Finally, our study reveals that pandemic fear is better predicted by specific behaviors rather than general anxiety, suggesting a need for new assessments.

Disgust is a fundamental emotion that evolved to protect organisms from pathogens and toxins, shaping behaviours critical for survival. This study explores how ancestral, modern, and pandemic-related threat represented by visual stimuli elicit disgust. Specifically, our goal was to validate the categorisation of disgusting stimuli, evaluate the intensity of emotional responses, and determine the contribution of individual differences. A sample of 262 participants from diverse educational and professional backgrounds ranked 60 visual stimuli, including ancestral (spoiled food, bugs), modern (toxic substances, radioactivity), and pandemic-related (sneezing, masks, and hospitals) categories, on perceived disgust (pictures of leaves were used as controls). They also completed assessments of pathogen, core, and moral disgust, along with pandemic-related behaviours and stress. Results revealed distinct clusters of disgust stimuli, with spoiled food evoking the strongest repulsion, while modern threats, such as pollution and radioactivity, elicited weaker disgust. Pandemic-related stimuli formed a unique, but heterogeneous category, with visible infection cues (e.g. sneezing) triggering stronger disgust than abstract cues like masks or hospital environments. The findings highlight the evolutionary roots of disgust and its adaptation to modern contexts. They underscore the need to consider cultural, individual, and situational factors in public health strategies and interventions targeting hygiene and disease prevention behaviours.

IntroductionAnimal and human ancestors developed complex physiological and behavioral response systems to cope with two types of threats: immediate physical harm from predators or conspecifics, triggering fear, and the risk of infections from parasites and pathogens leading to the evolution of the behavioral immune system with disgust as the key emotion. Integration of the evolutionary concepts of the fear module and behavioral immune systems has been infrequent, despite the significant survival advantages of disgust in various contexts. Studies comparing attention to ancestral and modern threats accompanied by fear have yielded ambiguous results and what qualifies as salient modern disgusting stimuli remains unclear. We do not know whether disgust or the behavioral immune system, as inherent aspects of human psychology, have adapted to safeguard us from pandemic risks or poisoning by modern toxic substances.MethodsTo test these effects, we have developed a survey comprised of 60 short vignettes describing threats evoking fear and disgust belonging to one of the three main categories of threats: (1) ancestral (phylogenetic), (2) modern (ontogenetic), and (3) pandemics of airborne disease. Each vignette was evaluated on a 7-point Likert scale based on fear, disgust, and anger. In total, 660 respondents completed the survey. The data were analysed using a factor analysis and general linear model with the respondent as a random factor.ResultsThe results show that the strongest fear is triggered by modern threats (electricity, car accidents), while the highest disgust is evoked by ancient threats (body waste products, worms, etc.). Interestingly, disgust does not respond to modern threat stimuli such as toxic substances or radioactivity as these evoke mainly fear and anger. Finally, a distinct response pattern was found for pandemic threats, in which both fear (e.g., of disease and death) and disgust (e.g., of used face masks) are employed.DiscussionOur study offers valuable insights into the emotional responses to ancestral and modern threats and their adaptation to pandemic challenges. Ancestral threats are not always more powerful stimuli than adequate threats of the modern type, but they function specifically. Thus, snakes and heights as fear-inducing ancestral threats form separate factors in a multivariate analysis, whereas all ancestral disgust stimuli group together. The threat of a pandemic forms a specific category and people process it emotionally and cognitively. These insights contribute to our understanding of human psychology and behavior in an ever-changing world.

Throughout human evolutionary history, snakes have been associated with danger and threat. Research has shown that snakes are prioritized by our attentional system, despite many of us rarely encountering them in our daily lives. We conducted two high-powered, pre-registered experiments (total N = 224) manipulating target prevalence to understand this heightened prioritization of threatening targets. Target prevalence refers to the proportion of trials wherein a target is presented; reductions in prevalence consistently reduce the likelihood that targets will be found. We reasoned that snake targets in visual search should experience weaker effects of low target prevalence compared to non-threatening targets (rabbits) because they should be prioritized by searchers despite appearing rarely. In both experiments, we found evidence of classic prevalence effects but (contrasting prior work) we also found that search for threatening targets was slower and less accurate than for nonthreatening targets. This surprising result is possibly due to methodological issues common in prior studies, including comparatively smaller sample sizes, fewer trials, and a tendency to exclusively examine conditions of relatively high prevalence. Our findings call into question accounts of threat prioritization and suggest that prior attention findings may be constrained to a narrow range of circumstances.

IntroductionThe administration of questionnaires presents an easy way of obtaining important knowledge about phobic patients. However, it is not well known how these subjective measurements correspond to the patient’s objective condition. Our study aimed to compare scores on questionnaires and image evaluation to the objective measurements of the behavioral approach test (BAT) and the neurophysiological effect of spiders extracted from fMRI measurements. The objective was to explore how reliably subjective statements about spiders and physiological and behavioral parameters discriminate between phobics and non-phobics, and what are the best predictors of overall brain activation.MethodsBased on a clinical interview, 165 subjects were assigned to either a “phobic” or low-fear “control” group. Finally, 30 arachnophobic and 32 healthy control subjects (with low fear of spiders) participated in this study. They completed several questionnaires (SPQ, SNAQ, DS-R) and underwent a behavioral approach test (BAT) with a live tarantula. Then, they were measured in fMRI while watching blocks of pictures including spiders and snakes. Finally, the respondents rated all the visual stimuli according to perceived fear. We proposed the Spider Fear Index (SFI) as a value characterizing the level of spider fear, computed based on the fMRI measurements. We then treated this variable as the “neurophysiological effect of spiders” and examined its contribution to the respondents’ fear ratings of the stimuli seen during the fMRI using the redundancy analysis (RDA).ResultsThe results for fear ranks revealed that the SFI, SNAQ, DS-R, and SPQ scores had a significant effect, while BAT and SPQ scores loaded in the same direction of the first multivariate axis. The SFI was strongly correlated with both SPQ and BAT scores in the pooled sample of arachnophobic and healthy control subjects.DiscussionBoth SPQ and BAT scores have a high informative value about the subject’s fear of spiders and together with subjective emotional evaluation of picture stimuli can be reliable predictors of spider phobia. These parameters provide easy and non-expensive but reliable measurement wherever more expensive devices such as magnetic resonance are not available. However, SFI still reflects individual variability within the phobic group, identifying individuals with higher brain activation, which may relate to more severe phobic reactions or other sources of fMRI signal variability.

Abstract Spiders evoke significant fear and disgust in many people; such a complex response has been formed throughout human evolution. However, most spiders do not present a serious threat, so the evolutionary explanation is controversial. We suggest that other chelicerates, e.g., scorpions, might have been important in the formation and fixation of the spider-like category. In this eye-tracking study, we checked for some aspects of the attentional, behavioral, and emotional response to the spider, scorpion, snake, and crab stimuli used as task-irrelevant distractors. Results showed that spider-fearful participants were selectively distracted by spiders, but also by crabs which were not consciously rated as fear-eliciting. We hypothesize that spider-fearful participants might have mistaken crabs for spiders based on their shared physical characteristics. Contrary, participants with no fear of spiders were distracted the most by snakes and scorpions. No difference between snake and scorpion distractors was found supporting the notion that scorpions are also prioritized, evolutionary relevant stimuli. We conclude that scorpions are evolutionary fear-relevant stimuli, however, the generalization between scorpions and spiders was not supported in spider-fearful participants. This result might be important for a better understanding of the evolution of spider phobia.

Abstract Worldwide, urbanization has created completely novel environments, which bring many conveniences but carry several drawbacks too. One of the most important disadvantages is that most people living in cities lose contact with nature including interaction with animals. Current evidence shows that countries with lower levels of urbanization also have a lower prevalence of animal fears and phobias. Here, we sought to test whether nature relatedness (NR) and residence size serve as protective factors to the most common animal fears and phobias (i.e. that of snakes and spiders). We used the NR Scale to measure the individuals' subjective connection with nature. Participants (N = 1,071, aged 18–65 years) were also asked to complete the Snake and Spider Questionnaire (SNAQ and SPQ, respectively) and to rate pictures of snakes and spiders according to valence, arousal and dominance. To explore complex relationships between various explanatory and response variables, we employed a generalized linear model, redundancy analysis and structural equation modelling. Results show that snake and spider fear is strongly associated with the NR total score. Participants scoring higher on the SNAQ and SPQ also evaluate snake and spider images more negatively, are more aroused by the stimuli but feel less dominant over them. Moreover, subjects with higher snake or spider fear scored lower on the NR scale, especially its two subscales, Experience and Perspective. Results demonstrate that the more people feel connected to nature, the less they are affected by animal fears or phobias. We believe this study presents an important implication for both conservationist endeavours and therapeutic interventions. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

Background Although tiny in size and mostly harmless, spiders evoke exceptional fear in a significant part of the population and arachnophobia is one of the most common anxiety disorders with prevalence 2.7–6.1%. Two standard measures have been widely used to reliably assess the emotional and cognitive component of spider fear, the Spider Questionnaire (SPQ) and Spider Phobia Beliefs Questionnaire (SBQ). We aimed to develop and validate their Czech translations, describe distribution of spider fear in the Czech population, and analyse its association with disgust propensity and other sociodemographic characteristics. Methods In Phase 1, we developed Czech translations of both questionnaires using a back-translation procedure and then tested their psychometric properties against their English versions in a counterbalanced experimental design using the Mann-Whitney U test and two-sided t-test. In Phase 2, we analysed scores on the Czech SPQ and SBQ on a larger sample. We evaluated the effects of age, gender, level of education, biology background, and association with the assessments of snake fear (i.e. the Snake Questionnaire, SNAQ) and disgust propensity (i.e. the Disgust Scale-Revised, DS-R) using a Spearman correlation, redundancy analysis, and general linear models. Results We have demonstrated that the Czech SPQ and SBQ are equivalent to their originals and show excellent test-retest reliability (SPQ: 0.93; SBQ: 0.87–0.90). In total, 398 (10.3%) out of 3863 subjects reached the cut-off point for potential spider phobia. In addition, SPQ and SBQ scores were highly correlated (0.73–0.79), significantly more than with the SNAQ (0.21–0.32) or the DS-R (0.36–0.40). Two multivariate statistical methods revealed a significant association between the gender, age, level of education, biology background, or disgust propensity and the SPQ scores. Conclusion The Czech SPQ and SBQ may produce reliable and valid assessments of spider fear, but they must be further psychometrically tested considering the limitation of this study before wider use. We corroborate previous findings that fear of spiders is significantly associated with sociodemographic variables, such as gender, age, or education, as well as with the individual level of disgust propensity.

Background: Although tiny in size and mostly harmless, spiders evoke exceptional fear in a significant part of the population and arachnophobia belongs to one of the most common anxiety disorders with prevalence 2.7-6.1%. Two standardized psychometrics have been widely used to reliably assess the emotional and cognitive component of spider fear, the Spider Questionnaire (SPQ) and Spider Phobia Beliefs Questionnaire (SBQ). Methods: In Study 1, we developed a Czech translation of both scales using a back-translation procedure and then tested their psychometric properties against their English versions in a counterbalanced experimental design using the Mann-Whitney U test and two-sided t-test. In Study 2, we then analysed scores on the Czech SPQ and SBQ on a much larger sample. We also checked for the effect of various personal characteristics (age, gender, level of education, biology background) and other assessments of snake fear (SNAQ) and disgust propensity (DS-R) using a Spearmann correlation, redundancy analysis, and general linear models. Results: In Study 1, we have demonstrated that the Czech SPQ and SBQ are equivalent to their originals and show excellent test-retest reliability (SPQ: 0.928; SBQ: 0.873-0.903). In Study 2, 10.3% of 3 863 subjects in total reached the cut-off point for potential spider phobia. Furthermore, SPQ and SBQ scores were highly correlated (0.727-.0787), significantly more than with the SNAQ (0.208-0.324), which is evidence of the scales’ validity. Two multivariate statistical methods revealed a significant effect of gender, age, level of education, biology background, and disgust propensity on the SPQ scores. Conclusion: In conclusion, our study provides a strong support to the hypothesis that fear of spiders is driven by their disgusting properties as spiders were often associated with decimating epidemics of plague and other diseases that were repeatedly ravaging Europe from the Middle Ages.

Background: Fear acquisition of certain stimuli, such as snakes, is thought to be rapid, resistant to extinction, and easily transferable onto other similar objects. It has been hypothesized that due to increased survival chances, preparedness to instantly acquire fear towards evolutionary threats has been hardwired into neural pathways of the primate brain. Here, we compare participants’ fear of snakes according to experience; from those who often deal with snakes and even suffer snakebites to those unfamiliar with snakes. Methods: The Snake Questionnaire-12 (SNAQ-12) and Specific Phobia Questionnaire (SPQ) were administered to three groups of participants with a different level of experience with snakes and snakebites: 1) snake experts, 2) firefighters, and 3) college students. Results: This study shows that individuals more experienced with snakes demonstrate lower fear. Moreover, participants who have suffered a snakebite (either venomous or not) score lower on fear of snakes (SNAQ-12), but not of all other potentially phobic stimuli (SPQ). Conclusions: Our results suggest that a harmless benign exposure might immunize people to highly biologically prepared fears of evolutionary threats, such as snakes.

Animal phobias are one of the most prevalent mental disorders. We analysed how fear and disgust, two emotions involved in their onset and maintenance, are elicited by common phobic animals. In an online survey, the subjects rated 25 animal images according to elicited fear and disgust. Additionally, they completed four psychometrics, the Fear Survey Schedule II (FSS), Disgust Scale – Revised (DS-R), Snake Questionnaire (SNAQ), and Spider Questionnaire (SPQ). Based on a redundancy analysis, fear and disgust image ratings could be described by two axes, one reflecting a general negative perception of animals associated with higher FSS and DS-R scores and the second one describing a specific aversion to snakes and spiders associated with higher SNAQ and SPQ scores. The animals can be separated into five distinct clusters: (1) non-slimy invertebrates; (2) snakes; (3) mice, rats, and bats; (4) human endo- and exoparasites (intestinal helminths and louse); and (5) farm/pet animals. However, only snakes, spiders, and parasites evoke intense fear and disgust in the non-clinical population. In conclusion, rating animal images according to fear and disgust can be an alternative and reliable method to standard scales. Moreover, tendencies to overgeneralize irrational fears onto other harmless species from the same category can be used for quick animal phobia detection.

Snake and spider phobia are one of the most prevalent anxiety disorders, yet quick and reliable measures are rather scarce. Recently, attempts have been made to shorten two widespread measures of snake and spider fear, the Snake Questionnaire (SNAQ) and Spider Questionnaire (SPQ). The new 12-item scales demonstrate very good psychometric qualities in terms of internal consistency and discriminatory power. Using the same approach on a bigger sample from another cultural background, we aimed to verify psychometric properties of the short scales. In total, 2 644 Czechs completed the SNAQ, 1 816 of which also completed the SPQ. The item response theory revealed that nine and seven items on the shorter SNAQ and SPQ, respectively, were identical with the Hungarian study. The 12-item scales show excellent reliability (α = 0.84 and 0.91) and highly correlate with scores on the full versions (r = 0.81 and 0.89) as well as with fear and disgust ratings of snake and spider images. Thus, despite slight discrepancies in the selected items, we confirm that the shorter SNAQ and SPQ keep considerable diagnostic strengths and can be used in the clinical practice as reliable, easy-to- administer, and fast screening tools for snake and spider phobia.

Snakes have been important ambush predators of both primates and human hunter-gatherers throughout their co-evolutionary history. Viperid snakes in particular are responsible for most fatal venomous snakebites worldwide and thus represent a strong selective pressure. They elicit intense fear in humans and are easily recognizable thanks to their distinctive morphotype. In this study, we measured skin resistance (SR) and heart rate (HR) in human subjects exposed to snake pictures eliciting either high fear (10 venomous viperid species) or disgust (10 nonvenomous fossorial species). Venomous snakes subjectively evaluated as frightening trigger a stronger physiological response (higher SR amplitude) than repulsive non-venomous snakes. However, stimuli presented in a block (more intense stimulation) do not trigger a stronger emotional response compared to sequentially presented stimuli (less intense stimulation). There are significant interindividual differences as subjects with high fear of snakes confronted with images of viperid snakes show stronger, longer-lasting, and more frequent changes in SR and higher HR compared to low-fear subjects. Thus, we show that humans demonstrate a remarkable ability to discriminate between dangerous viperids and harmless fossorial snakes, which is also reflected in distinct autonomous body responses.