Psycholinguistic variables matter in odor naming

Odor-evoked memories: The importance of choosing the right odor

Odors are known to entertain a special link with memory. However, the scientific literature investigating odors as powerful reminders of past experiences shows mixed results. This can be partly due to poor consistency in methodological approaches, especially concerning stimuli choice. Here, we presented 64 odorants to 130 young adults and asked them to freely report what each odor evoked to them. Responses were sorted in 1) mere odors' identification attempts and 2) any other memory-based verbal content, whose phenomenological properties were analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively. As expected, only a limited number of odors managed to spontaneously trigger high-quality autobiographical memories. In most cases, people engage in an odor identification task or evoke unspecific memory contents. We finally selected a pool of 20 odors as a function of the memory contents they're more likely to trigger. This enabled us to formulate recommendations for professionals (researchers or practitioners) performing olfactory-based memory stimulation.

Odor descriptive ratings can predict some odor-color associations in different color features of hue or lightness

Background

Olfactory information can be associated with color information. Researchers have investigated the role of descriptive ratings of odors on odor-color associations. Research into these associations should also focus on the differences in odor types. We aimed to identify the odor descriptive ratings that can predict odor-color corresponding formation, and predict features of the associated colors from the ratings taking into consideration the differences in the odor types.

Methods

We assessed 13 types of odors and their associated colors in participants with a Japanese cultural background. The associated colors from odors in the CIE L*a*b* space were subjectively evaluated to prevent the priming effect from selecting color patches. We analyzed the data using Bayesian multilevel modeling, which included the random effects of each odor, for investigating the effect of descriptive ratings on associated colors. We investigated the effects of five descriptive ratings, namely Edibility, Arousal, Familiarity, Pleasantness, and Strength on the associated colors.

Results

The Bayesian multilevel model indicated that the odor description of Edibility was related to the reddish hues of associated colors in three odors. Edibility was related to the yellow hues of colors in the remaining five odors. The Arousal description was related to the yellowish hues in two odors. The Strength of the tested odors was generally related to the color lightness. The present analysis could contribute in investigating the influence of the olfactory descriptive rating that anticipates the associated color for each odor.

Losing the sense of smell does not disrupt processing of odor words

Whether language is grounded in action and perception has been a key question in cognitive science, yet little attention has been given to the sense of smell. We directly test whether smell is necessary for comprehension of odor language, by comparing language processing in a group of participants with no sense of smell (anosmics) to a group of control participants. We found no evidence for a difference in online comprehension of odor and taste language between anosmics and controls using a lexical decision task and a semantic similarity judgment task, suggesting olfaction is not critical to the comprehension of odor language. Contrary to predictions, anosmics were better at remembering odor words, and rated odor and taste words as more positively valenced than control participants. This study finds no detriment to odor language after losing the sense of smell, supporting the proposal that odor language is not grounded in odor perception.

EXPRESS: Olfactory habituation for food and non-food odours

Olfactory perception can be modulated by the repeated exposure to odours. Olfactory habituation is a reduced behavioural response to repetitive stimulation. Edibility is considered an important top-down feature that can affect olfactory perception, but whether it could modulate olfactory habituation when food or non-food odours are repeatedly smelled remains unclear. Indeed, due to their ecological salience, food odours attract attention automatically which might slow down habituation. This registered report aimed to determine whether olfactory habituation shows a different pattern when participants are presented with food or non-food odours. In a within-subject design, 50 participants were tested under satiated and fasted states in separated experimental sessions. In each session, participants were exposed to the same food and non-food odour in different blocks of 20 trials each. Participants rated the perceived odour intensity and pleasantness after each trial. We used an intermittent odour presentation to reduce olfactory fatigue while capitalising on the effect of cognitive states on habituation. Linear mixed-effects models showed that the perceived odour intensity decreased over time only for non-food odours. Conversely, the perceived odour pleasantness decreased significantly more across trials for food odours. These effects were retrieved regardless of the participant's hunger state. Our results are in line with the olfactory specific satiety theory which posits a specific decrease in the perceived pleasantness of food odours, without changes in the perceived odour intensity. In short, our findings indicate that perceived odour edibility modulates olfactory habituation, extending the previous literature on the impact of top-down factors on olfactory perception.

The Sound of Smell: Associating Odor Valence With Disgust Sounds

Olfaction has recently been highlighted as a sense poorly connected with language. Odor is difficult to verbalize, and it has few qualities that afford mimicry by vision or sound. At the same time, emotion is thought to be the most salient dimension of an odor, and it could therefore be an olfactory dimension more easily communicated. We investigated whether sounds imitative of an innate disgust response can be associated with unpleasant odors. In two experiments, participants were asked to make a forced choice between a pseudoword including a disgust sound and a neutral pseudoword, for pleasant and unpleasant odors. Overall, participants chose more disgust pseudowords than neutral pseudowords for unpleasant odors, but this was not the case for pleasant odors. This effect was not driven by a general association between unpleasant sounds and unpleasant odors, but specifically the sounds [x/χ] and [f], thought to reflect physical responses to disgusting odors, as seen in the Polish fu! or the English ugh!. In line with growing evidence that language can encode odor, we provide the first experimental evidence for an association between the sound of a word and odor valence.

Duality of Smell: Route-Dependent Effects on Olfactory Perception and Language

Olfactory research in humans has largely focused on odors perceived via sniffing, orthonasal olfaction, whereas odors perceived from the mouth, retronasal olfaction, are less well understood. Prior work on retronasally presented odors involves animal models and focus mainly on odor sensitivity, but little is known about retronasal olfactory perception and cognition in humans. In this study, we compared orthonasal and retronasal odor presentation routes to investigate differences in odor descriptions and evaluations. Thirty-six individuals participated in a within-subjects study using twelve odors (varying in pleasantness and edibility) in perceptual and semantic tasks. Orthonasal presentation was associated with a better ability to identify odors, and with more concrete (and source-based) language. Exploratory analyses revealed that whereas orthonasal odors were described with words that had visual associations, retronasal odors were described with words that had interoceptive associations. Interestingly, these route-dependent differences in descriptor usage were not explained by differences in sensitivity and intensity, suggesting instead a cognitive and linguistic processing difference between odors presented orthonasally and retronasally. Our results indicate that olfaction is, in fact, a dual sense, in which the routes change the perception of an odor.

Human Olfaction at the Intersection of Language, Culture, and Biology

The human sense of smell can accomplish astonishing feats, yet there remains a prevailing belief that olfactory language is deficient. Numerous studies with English speakers support this view: there are few terms for odors, odor talk is infrequent, and naming odors is difficult. However, this is not true across the world. Many languages have sizeable smell lexicons - smell is even grammaticalized. In addition, for some cultures smell talk is more frequent and odor naming easier. This linguistic variation is as yet unexplained but could be the result of ecological, cultural, or genetic factors or a combination thereof. Different ways of talking about smells may shape aspects of olfactory cognition too. Critically, this variation sheds new light on this important sensory modality.

An Exception to Mental Simulation: No Evidence for Embodied Odor Language

Do we mentally simulate olfactory information? We investigated mental simulation of odors and sounds in two experiments. Participants retained a word while they smelled an odor or heard a sound, then rated odor/sound intensity and recalled the word. Later odor/sound recognition was also tested, and pleasantness and familiarity judgments were collected. Word recall was slower when the sound and sound‐word mismatched (e.g., bee sound with the word typhoon). Sound recognition was higher when sounds were paired with a match or near‐match word (e.g., bee sound with bee or buzzer). This indicates sound‐words are mentally simulated. However, using the same paradigm no memory effects were observed for odor. Instead it appears odor‐words only affect lexical‐semantic representations, demonstrated by higher ratings of odor intensity and pleasantness when an odor was paired with a match or near‐match word (e.g., peach odor with peach or mango). These results suggest fundamental differences in how odor and sound‐words are represented.