Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How Differences in Ratings of Odors and Odor Labels Are Associated with Identification Mechanisms

  • Published:
Chemosensory Perception

Abstract

Introduction

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.

Methods

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).

Results

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.

Conclusions

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.

Implications

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • de Araujo IE, Rolls ET, Velazco MI, Margot C, Cayeux I (2005) Cognitive modulation of olfactory processing. Neuron 46:671–679

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • 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) 5:34

    Google Scholar 

  • Auvray M, Spence C (2008) The multisensory perception of flavor. Conscious Cogn 17:1016–1031

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ayabe-Kanamura S, Kikuchi T, Saito S (1997) Effect of verbal cues on recognition memory and pleasantness evaluation of unfamiliar odors. Percept Mot Skills 85:275–285

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ayabe-Kanamura S, Schicker I, Laska M, Hudson R, Distel H, Kobayakawa T, Saito S (1998) Differences in perception of everyday odors: a Japanese-German cross-cultural study. Chem Senses 23:31–38

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bensafi M, Rinck F, Schaal B, Rouby C (2007) Verbal cues modulate hedonic perception of odors in 5-year-old children as well as in adults. Chem Senses 32:855–862

    Article  PubMed  Google 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. 3–21

  • 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 International

  • Bonfigli L, Kodilja R, Zanuttini L (2002) Verbal versus olfactory cues: affect in elicited memories. Percept Mot Skills 94:9–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Breckler SJ, Fried HS (1993) On knowing what you like and liking what you smell: attitudes depend on the form in which the object is represented. Pers Soc Psychol B 19:228–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bueno S, Megherbi H (2009) French categorization norms for 70 semantic categories and comparison with van Overschelde et al.’s (2004) English norms. Behav Res Methods 41:1018–1028

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cain WS (1979) To know with the nose: keys to odor identification. Science 203:467–470

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cain WS, Gent J, Catalanotto FA, Goodspeed RB (1983) Clinical evaluation of olfaction. Am J Otolaryng 4:252–256

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cain WS, Potts BC (1996) Switch and bait: probing the discriminative basis of odor identification via recognition memory. Chem Senses 21:35–44

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cain WS, de Wijk R, Lulejian C, Schiet F, See L-C (1998) Odor identification: perceptual and semantic dimensions. Chem Senses 23:309–326

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Carrasco M, Ridout JB (1993) Olfactory perception and olfactory imagery: a multidimensional analysis. J Exp Psychol Human Percept 19:287–301

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chrea C, Valentin D, Abdi H (2009) Graded structure in odour categories: a cross-cultural case study. Perception 38:292–309

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chrea C, Valentin D, Sulmont-Rossé C, Hoang Nguyen D, Abdi H (2005) Semantic, typicality and odor representation: a cross-cultural study. Chem Senses 30:37–49

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chrea C, Valentin D, Sulmont-Rossé C, Ly Mai H, Hoang Nguyen D, Abdi H (2004) Culture and odor categorization: agreement between cultures depends upon the odors. Food Qual Prefer 15:669–679

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cleary AM, Konkel KE, Nomi JS, McCabe DP (2010) Odor recognition without identification. Mem Cognition 38:452–460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coxon JM, Gregson RAM, Paddick RG (1978) Multidimensional scaling of perceived odour of bicyclo [2.2.1] heptane, 1,7,7-trimethylbicyclo [2.2.1] heptane and cyclohexane derivatives. Chem Senses 3:431–441

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Crisinel A-S, Jones S, Spence C (2012) ‘The sweet taste of Maluma’: Crossmodal associations between tastes and words. Chem Percept 5:266–273

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham M, Crady CA (1971) Identification of olfactory dimensions by semantic differential technique. Psychon Sci 23:387–388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalton P, Maute C, Oshida A, Hikichi S, Izumi YU (2008) The use of semantic differential scaling to define the multidimensional representation of odors. J Sens Stud 23:485–497

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Dematte ML, Sanabria D, Spence C (2006) Cross-modal associations between odors and colors. Chem Senses 31:531–538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desor JA, Beauchamp GK (1974) The human capacity to transmit olfactory information. Percept Psychophys 16:551–556

    Article  Google 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:1171–1179

  • de Wijk RA, Cain WS (1994a) Odor identification by name and by edibility: life-span development and safety. Hum Factors 36:182–187

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • de Wijk RA, Cain WS (1994b) Odor quality: discrimination versus free and cued identification. Percept Psychophys 56:12–18

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • de Wijk RA, Schab FR, Cain WS (1995) Odor identification In: Schab FR, Crowder RG (eds) Memory for odors. Erlbaum, Mahwah, p 21–38

  • Distel H, Ayabe-Kanamura S, Martí­nez-Gómez M, Schicker I, Kobayakawa T, Saito S, Hudson R (1999) Perception of everyday odors: correlation between intensity, familiarity and strength of hedonic judgement. Chem Senses 24:191–199

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Distel H, Hudson R (2001) Judgement of odor intensity is influenced by subjects’ knowledge of the odor source. Chem Senses 26:247–251

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Djordjevic J, Lundstrom JN, Clement F, Boyle JA, Pouliot S, Jones-Gotman M (2008) A rose by any other name: would it smell as sweet? J Neurophysiol 99:386–393

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Doty RL (1975) An examination of relationships between the pleasantness, intensity, and concentration of 10 odorous stimuli. Percept Psychophys 17:492–496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doty RL, Shaman P, Dann M (1984) Development of the university of Pennsylvania smell identification test: a standardized microencapsulated test of olfactory function. Physiol Behav 32:489–502

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dravnieks A (1985) Atlas of odor character profiles. Philadelphia (PA): ASTM

  • Fornazieri MA, Pinna FR, Bezerra TFP, Antunes MB, Voegels RL (2010) Applicability of the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (SIT) in Brazilians: pilot study. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 76:695–699

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson JJ (1966) The senses considered as perceptual systems. Hougthon Miflin, Boston (MA)

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert AN, Martin R, Kemp SE (1996) Cross-modal correspondence between vision and olfaction: the color of smells. Am J Psychol 109:335–351

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Henion KE (1971) Odor pleasantness and intensity: a single dimension? J Exp Psychol 90:275–279

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Herz RS (2003) The effect of verbal context on olfactory perception. J Exp Psychol Gen 132:595–606

    Article  PubMed  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. 91–109

  • Herz RS, von Clef J (2001) The influence of verbal labeling on the perception of odors: evidence for olfactory illusions? Perception 30:381–391

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Herz RS, Eich E (1995) Commentary and envoi In: Schab FR, Crowder RG, editors. Memory for odors. Mahwah (NJ): Erlbaum. p. 159–176

  • Higuchi T, Shoji K, Hatayama T (2004) Multidimensional scaling of fragrances: a comparison between the verbal and non-verbal methods of classifying fragrances. Jpn Psychol Res 46:10–19

    Article  Google 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. 16–17

  • 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. 408–420

  • Hummel T, Sekinger B, Wolf SR, Pauli E, Kobal G (1997) ‘Sniffin’ Sticks’: olfactory performance assessed by the combined testing of odour identification, odor discrimination and olfactory threshold. Chem Senses 22:39–52

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jacquot M, Noel F, Velasco C, Spence C (2016) On the colours of odours. Chem Percept 9:79–93

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kaeppler K (2018) Crossmodal associations between olfaction and vision color and shape visualizations of odors. Chem Percept 95:24

    Google 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. 27–43

  • Köster EP (2005) Does olfactory memory depend on remembering odors? Chem Senses 30:i236–i237

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lawless HT (1984) Flavor description of white wine by “expert” and nonexpert wine consumers. J Food Sci 49:120–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehrner JP (1993) Gender differences in long-term odor recognition memory verbal versus sensory influences and the consistency of label use. Chem Senses 18:17–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levinson SC, Majid A (2014) Differential ineffability and the senses. Mind Lang 29:407–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levitan CA et al (2014) Cross-cultural color-odor associations. PLoS One 9:e101651

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Lorig TS, Roberts M (1990) Odor and cognitive alteration of the contingent negative variation. Chem Senses 15:537–545

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lundström JN, Seven S, Olsson MJ, Schaal B, Hummel T (2006) Olfactory event-related potentials reflect individual differences in odor valence perception. Chem Senses 31:705–711

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Majid A (2015) Cultural factors shape olfactory language. Trends Cogn Sci 19:629–630

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Majid A, Burenhult N (2014) Odors are expressible in language, as long as you speak the right language. Cognition 130:266–270

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Maric Y, Jacquot M (2013) Contribution to understanding odour–colour associations. Food Qual Prefer 27:191–195

    Article  Google 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. 131–141

  • Moskowitz HR, Dravnieks A, Klarman LA (1976) Odor intensity and pleasantness for a diverse set of odorants. Percept Psychophys 19:122–128

    Article  Google 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) 7:1267

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordin S, Brämerson A, Bende M (1998) The Scandinavian odor-identification test: development, reliability, validity and normative data. Acta Otolaryngol 118:226–234

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Olofsson JK (2014) Time to smell a cascade model of human olfactory perception based on response-time (RT) measurement. Front Psychol 5:33

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Olofsson JK, Bowman NE, Gottfried JA (2013) High and low roads to odor valence? A choice response-time study. J Exp Psychol Human Percept Perform 39:1205–1211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olofsson JK, Gottfried JA (2015) The muted sense: neurocognitive limitations of olfactory language. Trends Cogn Sci 19:314–321

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google 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 Press

  • Prost C, Le Guen S, Courcoux P, Demaimay M (2001) Similarities among 40 pure odorant compounds evaluated by consumers. J Sens Stud 16:551–565

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rabin MD, Cain WS (1984) Odor recognition: familiarity, identifiability, and encoding consistency. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 10:316–325

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rolls ET, Kringelbach ML, Araujo IET de. 2003. Different representations of pleasant and unpleasant odours in the human brain. Eur J Neurosci 18:695–703

  • Royet J-P et al (1999) Functional anatomy of perceptual and semantic processing for odors. J Cognitive Neurosci 11:94–109

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Seo H-S, Buschhüter D, Hummel T (2008) Contextual influences on the relationship between familiarity and hedonicity of odors. J Food Sci 73:273–278

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Seo H-S, Guarneros M, Hudson R, Distel H, Min B-C, Kang J-K, Croy I, Vodicka J, Hummel T (2011) Attitudes toward olfaction: a cross-regional study. Chem Senses 36:177–187

    Article  PubMed  Google 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

  • Solomon GEA (1990) Psychology of novice and expert wine talk. Am J Psychol 103:495–517

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solomon GEA (1997) Conceptual change and wine expertise. J Learn Sci 6:41–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spector F, Maurer D (2008) The colour of Os: naturally biased associations between shape and colour. Perception 37:841–847

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson RJ, Case TI, Mahmut M (2007) Difficulty in evoking odor images: the role of odor naming. Mem Cognition 35:578–589

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson RJ, Mahmut MK (2013) Using response consistency to probe olfactory knowledge. Chem Senses 38:237–249

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Storms G, Boeck P, Ruts W (2001) Categorization of novel stimuli in well-known natural concepts: a case study. Psychon Bull Rev 8:377–384

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sugiyama H, Ayabe-Kanamura S, Kikuchi T (2006) Are olfactory images sensory in nature? Perception 35:1699–1708

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sulmont C, Issanchou S, Köster EP (2002) Selection of odorants for memory tests on the basis of familiarity, perceived complexity, pleasantness, similarity and identification. Chem Senses 27:307–317

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sulmont-Rosse C (2005) Odor naming methodology: correct identification with multiple-choice versus repeatable identification in a free task. Chem Senses 30:23–27

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thiboud M. (1991) Empirical classification of odours In: Müller PM, Lamparsky D, editors. Perfumes: Art, science, and technology. New York (NY): Elsevier. p. 252–286

  • Ueno Y (1993) Cross-cultural study of odor perception in Sherpa and Japanese people. Chem Senses 18:352–353

    Google Scholar 

  • Urdapilleta I, Giboreau A, Manetta C, Houix O, Richard JF (2006) The mental context for the description of odors: a semantic space. Eur Rev Appl Psychol 56:261–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Overschelde JP, Rawson KA, Dunlosky J (2004) Category norms an updated and expanded version of the Battig and Montague (1969) norms. J Mem Lang 50:289–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeshurun Y, Sobel N (2010) An odor is not worth a thousand words: from multidimensional odors to unidimensional odor objects. Annu Rev Psychol 61:219–241

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zarzo M (2008) Psychological dimensions in the perception of erveryday odors: pleasantness and edibility. J Sens Stud 23:354–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zellner DA, McGarry A, Mattern-McClory R, Abreu D (2008) Masculinity/femininity of fine fragrances affects color-odor correspondences: a case for cognitions influencing cross-modal correspondences. Chem Senses 33:211–222

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Leuphana University Lueneburg, Institute of Experimental Business Psychology, Wilschenbrucher Weg 84a, 21335, Lueneburg, Germany

    Kathrin Kaeppler

Authors
  1. Kathrin Kaeppler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kathrin Kaeppler.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The author declares that she has no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

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

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(XLSX 67 kb)

ESM 2

(PDF 66 kb)

ESM 3

(PDF 59 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kaeppler, K. How Differences in Ratings of Odors and Odor Labels Are Associated with Identification Mechanisms. Chem. Percept. 12, 18–31 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12078-018-9247-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12078-018-9247-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation