Modern Wisdom #984: Colton Scrivner – Why We’re Drawn to Death, Crime, & Danger

Date: August 23, 2025
Host: Chris Williamson
Guest: Colton Scrivner (Researcher, expert on morbid curiosity)

Overview

In this riveting episode, Chris Williamson explores the psychology of “morbid curiosity” with Colton Scrivner, a leading researcher in the field. The conversation delves into why humans are fascinated by violence, danger, death, and true crime, examining the roots and roles of this dark aspect of curiosity. Together, they discuss evolutionary explanations, personality differences, genre distinctions like horror, societal implications, and what our collective appetites for macabre content say about us.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

Colton’s Path to Morbid Curiosity

• Academic Journey: Colton describes shifting from archaeology and anthropology into psychology during his grad studies after being drawn to human paradoxes—such as why violence is shunned in everyday life but celebrated in certain contexts (e.g., the Roman Coliseum).
  • “There are certain circumstances where violence is okay, and not only okay, but maybe even revered...” (Colton, 01:03)
• Initial Questions: Scrivner highlights the puzzle of why people scare themselves for fun (e.g., horror movies), and notes a lack of psychological research on why people are drawn to their own fear.
  • “You find something really interesting that everyone understands at an intuitive level, but nobody is studying. And so I kind of got into it that way.” (Colton, 02:35)

The Paradox of Enjoying Danger

• Societal Contradictions: Chris points out that most people avoid real violence, but are drawn to media representations—true crime, UFC, crash footage.
• Control and Distance: Scrivner explains that the key is the context and the degree of safety and control. People enjoy simulated danger when it’s clearly bounded and under their control (e.g. a horror film, not a real street fight).
  • “It’s like candy for our minds, right? Like, are you telling me we can reap the benefits of this without having any of the costs?” (Colton, 05:38)

Evolutionary and Adaptive Roots

• Threat Simulation: Colton posits that morbid curiosity is an evolutionary tool for threat learning, allowing us to gain knowledge about dangers without directly experiencing harm, much like predator inspection in animals.
  • “Humans can tell a story about something that could happen or something that did happen…we can gain the learning benefits of predator inspection without actually being in any danger.” (Colton, 04:36)
• Dreams as Simulations: He extends this to dreaming, suggesting dreams serve as threat-rehearsal, referencing cross-cultural anthropological studies.
  • “Dreaming itself is a pretty high investment activity… one of the most influential and empirically backed theories… is that it’s really good at rehearsing threats when you’re offline.” (Colton, 18:05)
• Curiosity as Counterweight: Evolution imbues us with curiosity to offset the natural tendency to avoid danger, maximizing learning when risk is minimized.

Domains of Morbid Curiosity

Colton’s research identifies four main domains:

1. Violence — Witnessing acts of violence.
2. People Who Commit Violence — True crime, exploring criminals’ minds.
3. Body Violations — Interest in injuries or mutilation (often separated into infectious vs. non-infectious).
4. The Supernatural/Paranormal — Curiosity about threats we don’t fully understand, like ghosts or aliens.

“There seems to be at least four different kinds of domains of morbid curiosity... what the paranormal domain is really tapping into is an interest in things that are dangerous that we don’t fully understand.”
(Colton, 08:07–11:39)

• Common Thread: The thread connecting all four domains is “threat”—how it operates, how to detect it, and how to mitigate it.
  • “It’s threat itself, right? It’s what could possibly harm me, and what do I know about it—or, more importantly, what do I not know about it?” (Colton, 12:50)

Individual Differences

• Personality Correlates:
  • Subclinical psychopathy (especially rebelliousness) shows the strongest correlation with morbid curiosity.
  • General curiosity is only a weak predictor.
• Demographics:
  • Age: Younger people score higher in morbid curiosity; matches animal models showing adolescents are most exploratory.
  • Gender: Small differences overall; men are more interested in violence, women more in understanding dangerous people. Interest in body violations and supernatural is similar.
  • Disgust Sensitivity: Has only a small/moderate (and often specific) negative correlation, particularly with infectious injuries.
• Notable Study: During COVID-19, people with high morbid curiosity showed more resilience and lower depression/anxiety, possibly due to feeling mentally prepared for scenarios of danger.
  • “[They] were reporting a greater level of psychological resilience...feeling optimistic about the future, experiencing, you know, lower levels of anxiety...” (Colton, 34:07)

Gender, Attraction, and True Crime

• Why Some Women Are Drawn to Serial Killers:
  • It’s partly about the ability to “safely” learn about dangerous individuals.
  • Research shows morbidly curious women are more likely to express behavioral interest (e.g., swiping right) on men with dark triad traits, but aren’t necessarily attracted in an emotional or romantic sense.
  • “You were morbidly curious, you were behaviorally interested in these guys, but you didn’t necessarily feel warm and cozy around them...” (Colton, 38:58)

Content Preferences: Gender Differences

• True Crime vs. “War Stories”:
  • True crime leans heavily female; “war stories” and violent sports lean male.
  • Each aligns with historically and evolutionarily relevant dangers for each gender.
  • “Historically, what kind of violence is a man likely to encounter? ...for women, [danger] is most relevant in close personal relationships.” (Colton, 41:14)

Fiction, Horror, and the Cinematic Psychology

• Definition of Horror:
  • Horror features a highly vulnerable protagonist against a formidable antagonist (unique among genres).
  • “In horror movies … you have a really powerful bad guy … and you have a very vulnerable protagonist.” (Colton, 50:53)
• Zombie Movies:
  • Popular because they tap all four domains of morbid curiosity.
  • “They’re like walking body violations … they tap into all four domains.” (Colton, 54:01)
• Monster Enters Left Trope:
  • Chris introduces the filmmaking tactic that shocks most often come from the left side of the screen due to our scanning bias, leading to greater impact—a field ripe for research.
  • “Sudden movement or emergence on the left side of the screen can be more startling because it taps into the right hemisphere...” (Chris, 58:14)

Empathy, Desensitization, and Social Concerns

• Are Horror Fans Less Empathetic?
  • Empirically, no—horror fans have average empathy levels; enjoyment is often tied to empathy for the victim.
  • Public perceptions, however, are that they’re less compassionate.
  • “People rated horror fans as less empathetic … People have this intuition that you should have lower empathy if you enjoy these kinds of things. But empirically… it’s not true.” (Colton, 63:12)
• Exposure and Desensitization:
  • No firm evidence that more exposure to fictional violence reduces empathy or increases real-life violence, though true developmental/longitudinal data are lacking.

Notable Quotes and Memorable Moments

• Why humans indulge safe threat-learning:
  “There’s two ways to learn about fighting, right? You can learn about it in the ring or you can learn about it on the ring side. One of them is a little safer than the other…” (Colton, 15:11)

• On gender-specific attraction to ‘bad boys’:
  “A dangerous person is only dangerous to you if they don’t like you. If a dangerous person likes you, then they become a huge asset to you…” (Colton, 39:40)

• Zombie movies’ unique appeal:
  “Zombies are interesting because they tap into all four domains of morbid curiosity… probably one of the only horror stories that reliably do that.” (Colton, 54:01)

• Empathy in horror fans:
  “In order for [horror] to deliver reliably, you have to empathize with the protagonist and you have to be a little bit afraid.” (Colton, 64:32)

• Why true crime is “true crime for dudes”: “Real world war stories are just true crime for dudes.” (Chris, 40:15)

• On play and development: “Children are super morbidly curious, but it shows up in their pretend play a lot, where they have control over how that feels to them.” (Colton, 47:06)

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 00:00–03:20: Colton’s background and academic journey
• 04:19–06:17: Why humans are drawn to morbid content; evolutionary perspective
• 07:27–12:24: The four domains of morbid curiosity
• 12:50–15:25: Common thread: threat-learning and simulation
• 16:53–23:23: Animal vs. human morbid curiosity; dreams as threat rehearsal
• 24:44–30:53: Predictors of morbid curiosity: personality, age, gender
• 34:07–35:02: Morbid curiosity and resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic
• 36:39–39:12: Women’s interest in serial killers and dark trait attraction
• 40:19–44:41: Gendered content preferences, development, and play
• 47:19–49:20: Car crashes, body cams, fascination with real violence
• 50:45–55:18: Horror genre mechanics and the psychology of zombie movies
• 56:00–59:36: Cinematic techniques: "Monster enters left"
• 60:14–66:00: Empathy, desensitization, violent media, social perceptions

Tone and Delivery

Scrivner’s approach remains measured, scientific, and inquisitive throughout. Chris Williamson injects humor (“Bro Science Cap is coming on early today…” 05:43), brings pop culture references, and blends speculative questions with serious scientific inquiry, fostering an engaging and accessible conversation.

Further Resources

• Colton Scrivner’s Book: Available from major retailers starting October 7th
• Substack: morbidlycuriousthoughts.com

This summary was prepared for listeners seeking a comprehensive, nuanced understanding of morbid curiosity, its roots, domains, and cultural expressions as discussed by Chris Williamson and Colton Scrivner.