In this Modern Wisdom episode, Colton Scrivner explores why humans are drawn to morbid subjects like death, violence, and dangerous individuals. He explains how morbid curiosity serves as an evolutionary mechanism that allows people to learn about threats from a safe distance, similar to how animals in nature observe predators. The discussion covers four main domains of morbid curiosity: violence, dangerous individuals, bodily harm, and the supernatural.
Scrivner presents research findings that challenge common assumptions about what drives morbid curiosity, noting that it correlates more with traits like rebelliousness and general curiosity rather than empathy or disgust sensitivity. The episode examines how different demographics engage with morbid content, from gender-specific interests to age-related patterns, and explores how horror and true crime media tap into these natural inclinations.
Sign up for Shortform to access the whole episode summary along with additional materials like counterarguments and context.
Morbid curiosity serves as an innate drive that allows humans to learn about threats safely. Scrivner explains that this behavior parallels what we see in nature, such as when gazelles observe predators from a safe distance instead of immediately fleeing. Humans have evolved to satisfy this curiosity through stories and media rather than direct encounters with danger.
Scrivner identifies four main domains of morbid curiosity: violence, dangerous individuals, bodily harm, and the supernatural. These domains encompass various human fascinations, from watching physical conflicts to understanding the minds of violent offenders. He suggests that this curiosity serves an evolutionary benefit by allowing people to gather crucial survival information without experiencing direct risks.
Contrary to popular belief, Scrivner's research shows that morbid curiosity isn't predicted by traits like empathy levels or disgust sensitivity. Instead, it correlates more strongly with traits like psychopathic rebelliousness and general curiosity. Gender differences are notable: men tend to be more interested in violence, while women often focus more on understanding dangerous individuals' psychology. Additionally, younger people typically show higher levels of morbid curiosity, which tends to decline with age.
Horror and true crime media tap into morbid curiosity by featuring vulnerable heroes facing formidable foes. Scrivner and Williamson discuss how filmmakers exploit cognitive biases to enhance emotional impact, such as the "monster enters left" technique, which takes advantage of our natural rightward attention drift. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Scrivner found that people who enjoyed horror and true crime showed better psychological resilience, suggesting these media might serve as coping mechanisms for real-world fears.
1-Page Summary
The concept of morbid curiosity is examined as both an instinctual behavior and an unexpected area of fascination for many who study its psychological underpinnings.
Scrivner points out that morbid curiosity is an innate drive that affords a safer way to learn about dangers.
Morbid curiosity parallels behaviors observed in non-human animals, such as gazelles, which sometimes observe predators like cheetahs rather than fleeing immediately. This behavior is particularly noted in adolescent gazelles, those in large groups, or those farther away from the cheetah. The gazelles do this to conserve energy, as it would not be resource-efficient for them to run away every time they see a predator.
Humans have evolved to satisfy this curiosity in a risk-free manner via stories or media, rather than through direct and potentially dangerous encounters. Scrivner suggests that evolution has fostered curiosity, especially when we are not in immediate danger, as a means of learning about potential threats without getting injured. This behavior embodies the push and pull between the instinct to avoid danger and the need to gain knowledge from a safe distance to better prepare for future threats.
Scrivner discusses his own professional development, showing that fascination with morbid topics can arise later in life, even among those who followed completely different academic paths initially.
Colton Scrivner reveals that bef ...
The Nature and Origins of Morbid Curiosity
Colton Scrivner delves into the various aspects of morbid curiosity, exploring the different domains and their underlying psychological roots, suggesting that humans are inherently drawn to learn about threats and dangers from a safe distance.
Scrivner categorizes morbid curiosity into four domains that encompass a wide range of human fascinations with the macabre.
Violence, as the first domain of morbid curiosity, is seen in Scrivner’s example of cats exhibiting predatory or prey behavior even when paralyzed in sleep. This suggests an innate interest in physical conflict. Games that children play, and the propensity for people to watch regulated or unregulated violent confrontations, like UFC matches or street fights, also reflect this domain.
Scrivner touches upon the fascination with dangerous individuals, like the interest women show in true crime stories or notorious criminals like Ted Bundy. This appeal might stem from a desire to understand the motivations of those who commit acts of violence, especially those types of violence that women are statistically more likely to encounter.
The third domain Scrivner discusses is the interest in bodily harm and injuries. He posits that understanding injuries is crucial for gauging the level of threat in one's surroundings as well as for medical reasons.
The final domain revolves around the unknown and potentially hazardous, such as the supernatural. Despite not believing in ghosts, Scrivner acknowledges the allure of the supernatural, which can be linked to the uncertainty and danger associated with things that are not fully understood, like encountering someone suspicious in real life or questioning the nature of zombies.
The Different Manifestations and Domains of Morbid Curiosity
Colton Scrivner's research delves deep into the phenomenon of morbid curiosity, parsing out its connections with empathy, disgust, and personality traits as well as how it varies across gender and age.
Scrivner discusses a study he conducted regarding the relationship between empathy levels and interest in horror films, finding no connection between empathy levels in horror fans or those who dislike horror. Horror fans were often rated as less empathetic and compassionate based on their favored genre, which contradicted Scrivner's findings – that enjoyment of horror may arise because of the viewer's empathy, not in spite of it.
Furthermore, Scrivner distinguishes that in rare cases, such as with cold serial killers like Jeffrey Dahmer, the interest in violent content might stem from a place of vicarious experience of violent urges—not empathy but as a learning mechanism.
Scrivner's research refutes the assumption that disgust sensitivity is strongly correlated with morbid curiosity, particularly toward bodily injuries. While it plays a role, disgust sensitivity only explained about 10% of the variance in morbid curiosity. Scrivner found that people are generally more curious about non-infectious injuries and can handle reading about certain morbid topics where their own imagination controls the graphic details.
Psychopathy, specifically the rebelliousness subcomponent, was one of the most substantial predictors of morbid curiosity.
Scrivner also found that general curiosity was positively correlated with morbid curiosity, albeit the correlation was small. This supports the notion that a generally curious individual might also be drawn to learn about threats and dangers.
The Psychology and Individual Differences in Morbid Curiosity
Media experts Scrivner and Williamson discuss the role of morbid curiosity in driving the popularity of horror and true crime genres and how techniques like "monster enters left" exploit cognitive biases to elicit strong emotional reactions.
In contemporary media, morbid curiosity not only sustains but propels the popularity of certain genres such as horror and true crime.
Scrivner defines the horror genre's key elements as films often featuring a potent antagonist and a vulnerable protagonist. This combination creates unique scenarios where underdog protagonists struggle to survive against formidable foes, which is believed to attract individuals with high levels of morbid curiosity.
Scrivner also highlights that true crime stories allow audiences to indirectly learn about the precursors to dangerous events and escape tactics. Williamson and Scrivner reason that an individual’s fascination with true crime could reconcile with an intense fear of real-world threats, like COVID-19, providing a risk-free way of exploring these fears. During the pandemic, Scrivner’s study suggested that individuals more interested in true crime and horror may have better coping mechanisms, feeling less anxious and exhibiting more psychological resilience than those less drawn to such content.
Zombies play a significant role in media by tapping into multiple domains of morbid curiosity.
While Scrivner does not directly label zombies as multifaceted curiosities within the transcript, their frequent inclusion in the context of horror suggests their role in engaging morbid curiosity. Zombies are described as fascinatingly dangerous supernatural threats, not only because of their human-like appearance and violent tendencies but also because they blur the lines between life and death.
Filmmakers leverage cognitive biases to increase the emotional impact of horror scenes by using certain techniques.
Examples and Effects of Morbid Curiosity in Media
Download the Shortform Chrome extension for your browser