[5] The term allows for a clear and understandable way of representing the concept of contextual stigma in a literal and applicable sense.
Repugnancy costs were first mentioned in a debate between Alvin Roth and Julio Elias on whether there should be an official market for kidneys.
[6] The act of buying and selling organs may be against one's cultural mores; it may be repugnant.
Hence, this is an additional cost one must bear if such a market was deemed repugnant in the context of one's culture.
In an experimental survey, Elias, Lacetera and Macis (2019) find that preferences for compensation have strong moral foundations; participants in the experiment especially reject direct payments by patients, which they find would violate principles of fairness.