How Differences in Ratings of Odors and Odor Labels Are Associated with Identification Mechanisms
Odor perception is biased by verbal–semantic processes when cues on an odor’s source are readily available from the context. At the same time, olfaction has been characterized as basically sensation driven when this information is absent. In the present study, we examined whether language effects occur when verbal cues are absent and how expectations about an odor’s identity shape odor evaluations.
A total of 56 subjects were asked to rate 20 unlabeled odor samples on perceptual dimensions as well as quality attributes and to eventually provide an odor source name. In a subsequent session, they performed the same rating tasks on a set of written odor labels that was compiled individually for each participant. It included both the 20 correct odor names (true labels) and in any case of incorrect odor naming in the first session, the self–generated labels (identified labels).
We compared odor ratings to ratings of both types of labels to test whether differences between odor and odor label evaluations were rooted in identification mechanisms. In cases of false identifications, we found higher consistencies between the evaluation of an odor and its identified label than between the description of an odor and its true (yet not associated) label.
These results indicate that odor evaluations are strongly affected by the mental image of an odor rather than the actual sensory codes and that this mental image is built spontaneously. Our findings imply that odors and odor labels are evaluated similarly for identical objects and that the differences found in similar studies may have been rooted in different mental representations being evaluated.
Odor sensations provoke odor naming without explicit demand. These self–generated hypotheses about an odor’s source exert a considerable semantic impact on odor perceptual processing, regardless of their accuracy.
KeywordsLanguage Olfaction Odor evaluation Odor identification Perceptual processing Semantic processing
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The author declares that she has no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Arctander S (1969) Perfume and flavor chemicals (aroma chemicals). Volume 1 and 2. S. Arctander, Montclair (NJ)Google Scholar
- Arshamian A, Larsson M (2014) Same same but different: the case of olfactory imagery. Front Psychol (Frontiers in Psychology) 5:34Google Scholar
- Berglund B, Höglund A (2012) Is there a measurement system for odor quality? In: Zucco GM, editor. Olfactory cognition: from perception and memory to environmental odours and neuroscience. Amsterdam (NL): Benjamins. p. 3–21Google Scholar
- Boelens H, Haring H. 1981. Molecular structure and olfactive quality: an investigation of structure-activity relationships in fragance chemistry by human olfaction. Bussum (NL): Naarden InternationalGoogle Scholar
- Crisinel A-S, Jones S, Spence C (2012) ‘The sweet taste of Maluma’: Crossmodal associations between tastes and words. Chem Percept 5:266–273Google Scholar
- de Valk JM, Wnuk E, Huisman JLA, Majid A (2017) Odor-color associations differ with verbal descriptors for odors: a comparison of three linguistically diverse groups. Psychon Bull Rev:1171–1179Google Scholar
- de Wijk RA, Schab FR, Cain WS (1995) Odor identification In: Schab FR, Crowder RG (eds) Memory for odors. Erlbaum, Mahwah, p 21–38Google Scholar
- Dravnieks A (1985) Atlas of odor character profiles. Philadelphia (PA): ASTMGoogle Scholar
- Gibson JJ (1966) The senses considered as perceptual systems. Hougthon Miflin, Boston (MA)Google Scholar
- Herz RS (2005) The unique interaction between language and olfactory perception and cognition In: Rosen DT, editor. Trends in experimental psychology research. New York (NY): Nova Science p. 91–109Google Scholar
- Herz RS, Eich E (1995) Commentary and envoi In: Schab FR, Crowder RG, editors. Memory for odors. Mahwah (NJ): Erlbaum. p. 159–176Google Scholar
- Holley A (2002) Cognitive aspects of olfaction in perfumer practice In: Rouby C, Schaal B, Dubois D, Gervais R, Holley A, editors. Olfaction, Taste, and Cognition. Cambridge (GB): Cambridge University Press. p. 16–17Google Scholar
- Hudson R, Distel H (2002) The individuality of odor perception In: Rouby C, Schaal B, Dubois D, Gervais R, Holley A, editors. Olfaction, Taste, and Cognition. Cambridge (GB): Cambridge University Press. p. 408–420Google Scholar
- Kaeppler K (2018) Crossmodal associations between olfaction and vision color and shape visualizations of odors. Chem Percept 95:24Google Scholar
- Köster EP (2002) The specific characteristics of the sense of smell In: Rouby C, Schaal B, Dubois D, Gervais R, Holley A, editors. Olfaction, Taste, and Cognition. Cambridge (GB): Cambridge University Press. p. 27–43Google Scholar
- Moskowitz HR (1979) Mind body and pleasure: an analysis of factors which influence sensory hedonics In: Kroeze JHA, editor. Preference Behavior and Chemoreception. London (GB): IRL Press. p. 131–141Google Scholar
- Moss AG, Miles C, Elsley JV, Johnson AJ (2016) Odorant normative data for use in olfactory memory experiments: dimension selection and analysis of individual differences. Front Psychol (Frontiers in Psychology) 7:1267Google Scholar
- Pilgrim FJ, Schutz HG (1957) Measurement of quantitative and qualitative attributes of flavor In: National Academy of Sciences–National Research Council Symposium, editor. Chemistry of food flavors. Washington D.C.: National Academy PressGoogle Scholar
- Rolls ET, Kringelbach ML, Araujo IET de. 2003. Different representations of pleasant and unpleasant odours in the human brain. Eur J Neurosci 18:695–703Google Scholar
- Sigma-Aldrich Company. 2011. Flavors and Fragrances Catalog [Internet]. [cited 2012 Jun 12]. Available from: http://www.sigmaaldrich.com/etc/medialib/docs/SAFC/General_Information/1/safc_flavors_and_fragrances_catalog.Par.0001.File.tmp/safc_flavors_and_fragrances_catalog.pdf
- Thiboud M. (1991) Empirical classification of odours In: Müller PM, Lamparsky D, editors. Perfumes: Art, science, and technology. New York (NY): Elsevier. p. 252–286Google Scholar
- Ueno Y (1993) Cross-cultural study of odor perception in Sherpa and Japanese people. Chem Senses 18:352–353Google Scholar