Submit to Brain Sciences Review for Brain Sciences Propose a Special Issue

Journal Browser

Advances in Human Olfactory Perception

Print Special Issue Flyer
Special Issue Editors
Special Issue Information
Keywords
Published Papers

A special issue of Brain Sciences (ISSN 2076-3425). This special issue belongs to the section "Behavioral Neuroscience".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (30 June 2021) | Viewed by 42878

Share This Special Issue

Special Issue Editor

Dr. Rachel S. Herz

E-Mail Website1 Website2
Guest Editor

Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA
Interests: olfaction; senses; emotion; cognition; motivation; behavior; health; chronobiology

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Research in human olfactory perception has been slowly flourishing over the past decade, and has recently seen major advances and innovation in basic science and theoretical contributions as well as in clinical findings and therapies regarding smell loss. The aim of this Special Issue of Brain Sciences is to bring greater awareness and synthesis to these latest findings and showcase cutting-edge perspectives in human olfactory perception. Thus, this Issue will highlight basic, theoretical, and clinical neuroscience. Manuscripts to be considered for publication in this Issue can present new data or be review articles, and can be solo contributions or multi-laboratory collaborations. Topics can range from the latest data regarding smell loss (e.g., Covid-19) to theoretical discussions of the function of olfaction (e.g., odor and emotion, olfactory navigation), and many topics in between. Methods can include neuroimaging, biomarker sampling, behavior, and psychophysics. Survey/questionnaire data as the sole metric is discouraged. Regardless of the material presented, authors are encouraged to take a broad perceptive of the topic they cover and provide a deeper understanding of their topic area as a whole.

Rachel S. Herz
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Brain Sciences is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2200 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

olfaction
smell
odor
perception/sensation
senses
emotion
learning
memory
cognition
behavior
clinical
individual differences
anosmia
diagnostic
neuroimaging
neuroscience

Published Papers (12 papers)

Download All Papers

Research

Jump to: Review, Other

22 pages, 2044 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Your Money or Your Sense of Smell? A Comparative Analysis of the Sensory and Psychological Value of Olfaction

by Rachel S. Herz and Martha R. Bajec

Brain Sci. 2022, 12(3), 299; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/brainsci12030299 - 23 Feb 2022

Cited by 5 | Viewed by 4813

Abstract

In public discourse, the sense of smell is typically characterized as the least important of the five senses. However, there are very little empirical data on this topic. Recently, much more attention has been brought to the sense of smell since olfactory dysfunction is a primary and often long-term symptom of COVID-19 infection. It was therefore of interest to expand research on the perceived value of olfaction in the current cultural condition. We developed a survey that directly compared the value of the senses of smell, hearing, and vision with each other and in relation to nine common items representing digital, material, personal, and physical commodities of varying social and emotional meaningfulness (phone, $10,000, favorite social media, online shopping, favorite streaming service, dream vacation, pet, hair, little left toe). In total, four hundred and seven female and male respondents comprising two life-stage groups (college students, general public adults) participated in our online survey study during winter–spring of 2021. The results reveal that the sense of smell was perceived as vastly less important than vision and hearing and much less valuable than various common commodities. We also found that life-stage and gender mediated our findings. For example, one-quarter of the college student respondents would give up their sense of smell in order to keep their phone and nearly half of all women would give up their sense of smell to keep their hair. Our data further illustrate that the senses of vision and hearing are valued relatively similarly. A number of questions arise from the present data and suggestions for ways in which our survey can be expanded and altered to address further research are discussed. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Human Olfactory Perception)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 2611 KiB

Open AccessArticle

African Gene Flow Reduces Beta-Ionone Anosmia/Hyposmia Prevalence in Admixed Malagasy Populations

by Harilanto Razafindrazaka, Veronica Pereda-Loth, Camille Ferdenzi, Margit Heiske, Omar Alva, Minah Randriamialisoa, Caroline Costedoat, Michel Signoli, Thierry Talou, Monique Courtade-Saidi, Anne Boland, Jean-François Deleuze, Catherine Rouby, Chantal Radimilahy, Thierry Letellier, Moustafa Bensafi and Denis Pierron

Brain Sci. 2021, 11(11), 1405; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/brainsci11111405 - 25 Oct 2021

Viewed by 1930

Abstract

While recent advances in genetics make it possible to follow the genetic exchanges between populations and their phenotypic consequences, the impact of the genetic exchanges on the sensory perception of populations has yet to be explored. From this perspective, the present study investigated the consequences of African gene flow on odor perception in a Malagasy population with a predominantly East Asian genetic background. To this end, we combined psychophysical tests with genotype data of 235 individuals who were asked to smell the odorant molecule beta-ionone (βI). Results showed that in this population the ancestry of the OR5A1 gene significantly influences the ability to detect βI. At the individual level, African ancestry significantly protects against specific anosmia/hyposmia due to the higher frequency of the functional gene (OR ratios = 14, CI: 1.8–110, p-value = 0.012). At the population level, African introgression decreased the prevalence of specific anosmia/hyposmia to this odorous compound. Taken together, these findings validate the conjecture that in addition to cultural exchanges, genetic transfer may also influence the sensory perception of the population in contact. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Human Olfactory Perception)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 1822 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Olfactory Measures as Predictors of Conversion to Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer’s Disease

by Paul Loyd Wheeler and Claire Murphy

Brain Sci. 2021, 11(11), 1391; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/brainsci11111391 - 23 Oct 2021

Cited by 10 | Viewed by 1802

Abstract

Background: Early biomarkers of prodromal Alzheimer’s disease (AD) are critical both to initiate interventions and to choose participants for clinical trials. Odor threshold, odor identification and odor familiarity are impaired in AD. Methods: We investigated the relative abilities of standard screening (MMSE) and olfactory measures to predict transitions from cognitively normal (CN) to mild cognitive impairment (MCI), from CN to AD, and MCI to AD. The archival sample of 497, from the UCSD ADRC, included participants who were CN, MCI, AD and converters to MCI or AD. Apoe ε4 status, a genetic risk factor, was available for 256 participants, 132 were ε4 carriers. A receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) curve plots the trade-off between sensitivity and specificity. Area under the ROC curve (AUC) was used to determine diagnostic accuracy. Results: Different measures were better predictors at specific stages of disease risk; e.g., odor familiarity, odor identification and the combination showed higher predictive value for converting from MCI to AD in ε4 carriers than the MMSE. Combining odor familiarity and odor identification produced an AUC of 1.0 in ε4 carriers, MMSE alone was 0.58. Conclusions: Olfactory biomarkers show real promise as non-invasive indicators of prodromal AD. The results support the value of combining olfactory measures in assessment of risk for conversion to MCI and to AD. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Human Olfactory Perception)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

20 pages, 539 KiB

Open AccessArticle

by Lenka Martinec Nováková, Monika Kliková, Eva Miletínová and Jitka Bušková

Brain Sci. 2021, 11(9), 1225; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/brainsci11091225 - 16 Sep 2021

Cited by 4 | Viewed by 2633

Abstract

Mental activity in sleep often involves visual and auditory content. Chemosensory (olfactory and gustatory) experiences are less common and underexplored. The aim of the study was to identify olfaction-related factors that may affect the occurrence of chemosensory dream content. Specifically, we investigated the effects of all-night exposure to an ambient odour, participants’ appraisal of their current olfactory environment, their general propensity to notice odours and act on them (i.e., odour awareness), and their olfactory acuity. Sixty pre-screened healthy young adults underwent olfactory assessment, completed a measure of odour awareness, and spent three nights in weekly intervals in a sleep laboratory. The purpose of the first visit was to adapt to the experimental setting. On the second visit, half of them were exposed to the smell of vanillin or thioglycolic acid and the other half to an odourless control condition. On the third visit, they received control or stimulation in a balanced order. On each visit, data were collected twice: once from the first rapid eye movement (REM) stage that occurred after 3 a.m., and then shortly before getting up, usually from a non-REM stage. Participants were asked to report the presence of sensory dream content and to assess their current olfactory environment. Neither exposure, nor participants’ assessments of the ambient odour, or olfactory acuity affected reports of chemosensory dream content but they were more frequent in individuals with greater odour awareness. This finding may have implications for treatment when such experiences become unwanted or bothersome. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Human Olfactory Perception)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

22 pages, 6563 KiB

Open AccessArticle

You See What You Smell: Preferential Processing of Chemosensory Satiety Cues and Its Impact on Body Shape Perception

by Bettina M. Pause, Annika S. Schäfer, Matthias Hoenen, Katrin T. Lübke and Ursula Stockhorst

Brain Sci. 2021, 11(9), 1152; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/brainsci11091152 - 30 Aug 2021

Viewed by 2518

Abstract

The current study examines neural responses to satiety- and fasting-related volatiles and their effect on the processing of body shapes. Axillary sweat was sampled with cotton pads from 10 individuals after 12 h of fasting, and after having consumed a standard breakfast. Pure cotton pads served as the control. The chemosensory stimuli were presented to 20 participants (via a constant-flow olfactometer) exclusively, and additionally as context to images of overweight and underweight avatars. EEG was recorded (61 electrodes), and chemosensory (CSERPs; P1, N1, P2, P3) and visual event-related potentials (VERPs; N1, P2, P3a, P3b) were analyzed. The amplitudes of all positive CSERP components differed more strongly from cotton in response to chemosensory satiety cues as compared to fasting cues (P1: p = 0.023, P2: p = 0.083, P3: p = 0.031), paralleled by activity within the middle frontal and temporal gyrus. Overweight compared to underweight body shapes tended to elicit larger VERP P2 amplitudes (p = 0.068), and chemosensory satiety cues amplified the VERP amplitudes in response to any body shape (P2, P3a, P3b; all p_s ≤ 0.017) as compared to the cotton control. The results indicate that chemosensory satiety cues transmit complex social information, overriding the processing of analogous visual input. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Human Olfactory Perception)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

23 pages, 3428 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Is Novelty Detection Important in Long-Term Odor Memory?

by E. Leslie Cameron, E. P. Köster and Per Møller

Brain Sci. 2021, 11(9), 1146; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/brainsci11091146 - 29 Aug 2021

Cited by 4 | Viewed by 1899

Abstract

Memory for odors is believed to be longer-lasting than memory for visual stimuli, as is evidenced by flat forgetting curves. However, performance on memory tasks is typically weaker in olfaction than vision. Studies of odor memory that use forced-choice methods confound responses that are a result of a trace memory and responses that can be obtained through process of elimination. Moreover, odor memory is typically measured with common stimuli, which are more familiar and responses may be confounded by verbal memory, and measure memory in intentional learning conditions, which are ecologically questionable. Here we demonstrate the value of using tests of memory in which hit rate and correct rejection rate are evaluated separately (i.e., not using forced-choice methods) and uncommon stimuli are used. This study compared memory for common and uncommon odors and pictures that were learned either intentionally (Exp. 1) or incidentally (Exp. 2) and tested with either a forced-choice or a one-stimulus-at-a-time (“monadic”) recognition task after delays of 15 min, 48 h or 1 week. As expected, memory declined with delay in most conditions, but depended upon the particular measure of memory and was better for pictures than odors and for common than uncommon stimuli. For common odors, hit rates decreased with delay but correct rejection rates remained constant with delay. For common pictures, we found the opposite result, constant hit rates and decreased correct rejection rates. Our results support the ‘misfit theory of conscious olfactory perception’, which highlights the importance of the detection of novelty in olfactory memory and suggests that olfactory memory should be studied using more ecologically valid methods. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Human Olfactory Perception)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 403 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Scent of a Woman—Or Man: Odors Influence Person Knowledge

by Nicole L. Hovis, Paul R. Sheehe and Theresa L. White

Brain Sci. 2021, 11(7), 955; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/brainsci11070955 - 20 Jul 2021

Cited by 1 | Viewed by 3112

Abstract

First impressions of social traits are regularly, rapidly, and readily determined from limited information about another individual. Relatively little is known about the way that olfactory information, particularly from scents that are not body odors, alters a first impression. Can the attributes of an odorant be conferred onto a person associated with that scent? To explore this, 101 participants were asked to form an impression of a hypothetical person based on the following stimuli: A gender-neutral silhouette, a list of six personal characteristics, and one of five odorants. Participants then rated the likelihood that the hypothetical person possessed each of 51 personality traits that were determined a priori as falling into six attribute categories. Participants also directly rated all odorants for the six categories and intensity. A T-test showed that ratings of the hypothetical person were less disparate from the odor that was presented during impression formation than from other odors. ANOVA revealed that the effects were heterogeneous, with odorants varying in their effectiveness in associating the hypothetical person with categories. The present data suggest that a hypothetical person can be imbued with the specific attributes of an odor and that some odors are better at contributing to impressions than others. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Human Olfactory Perception)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

21 pages, 1009 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Body Odours Sampled at Different Body Sites in Infants and Mothers—A Comparison of Olfactory Perception

by Katharina Hierl, Ilona Croy and Laura Schäfer

Brain Sci. 2021, 11(6), 820; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/brainsci11060820 - 21 Jun 2021

Cited by 9 | Viewed by 2547

Abstract

Body odours and their importance for human chemical communication, e.g., in the mother–child relationship, are an increasing focus of recent research. Precise examination of sampling methods considering physiology and feasibility aspects in order to obtain robust and informative odour samples is therefore necessary. Studies comparing body odour sampling at different body sites are still pending. Therefore, we sampled axilla, breast, and head odour from 28 mother–infant dyads and examined whether odour perception differs with regard to the body site. The participating mothers were asked to evaluate their own and their infant’s body odour samples, as well as odours of two unfamiliar mother–infant dyads. We tested whether maternal pleasantness and intensity evaluation, as well as recognition ability of the odours differed between the body sites. In infants, the head odour exhibited slightly lower pleasantness ratings than axilla and breast, and intensity ratings did not differ between body sites. In mothers, body site affected intensity ratings but not pleasantness ratings, as the breast odour was rated as less intense compared with head and axilla. Across all body sites, mothers rated the own and their infant’s odour as less intense when compared with unfamiliar samples. Recognition ability did not differ between body sites, and in line with previous studies, mothers were able to recognize their own and their own infant’s odour above chance. In sum, our study extends the previous methodological repertoire of body odour sampling and indicates that the axilla, breast, and head of adults as well as infants serve as informative odour sources. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Human Olfactory Perception)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

22 pages, 4013 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Olfactory Perception in Relation to the Physicochemical Odor Space

by Antonie Louise Bierling, Ilona Croy, Thomas Hummel, Gianaurelio Cuniberti and Alexander Croy

Brain Sci. 2021, 11(5), 563; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/brainsci11050563 - 28 Apr 2021

Cited by 9 | Viewed by 5035

Abstract

A growing body of research aims at solving what is often referred to as the stimulus-percept problem in olfactory perception. Although computational efforts have made it possible to predict perceptual impressions from the physicochemical space of odors, studies with large psychophysical datasets from non-experts remain scarce. Following previous approaches, we developed a physicochemical odor space using 4094 molecular descriptors of 1389 odor molecules. For 20 of these odors, we examined associations with perceived pleasantness, intensity, odor quality and detection threshold, obtained from a dataset of 2000 naïve participants. Our results show significant differences in perceptual ratings, and we were able to replicate previous findings on the association between perceptual ratings and the first dimensions of the physicochemical odor space. However, the present analyses also revealed striking interindividual variations in perceived pleasantness and intensity. Additionally, interactions between pleasantness, intensity, and olfactory and trigeminal qualitative dimensions were found. To conclude, our results support previous findings on the relation between structure and perception on the group level in our sample of non-expert raters. In the challenging task to relate olfactory stimulus and percept, the physicochemical odor space can serve as a reliable and helpful tool to structure the high-dimensional space of olfactory stimuli. Nevertheless, human olfactory perception in the individual is not an analytic process of molecule detection alone, but is part of a holistic integration of multisensory inputs, context and experience. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Human Olfactory Perception)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 421 KiB

Open AccessFeature PaperArticle

The Aetiology of Olfactory Dysfunction and Its Relationship to Diet Quality

by Richard J. Stevenson, Mehmet K. Mahmut, Annette Horstmann and Thomas Hummel

Brain Sci. 2020, 10(11), 769; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/brainsci10110769 - 23 Oct 2020

Cited by 15 | Viewed by 2574

Abstract

People with olfactory loss may choose foods rich in sugar, salt and fat to compensate their loss—foods that constitute a Western-style diet (WSD). However, olfactory dysfunction has not been consistently linked to any particular type of dietary change. Here we considered whether the aetiology of olfactory dysfunction may affect consumption of a WSD. Two-hundred and twenty-two people with olfactory dysfunction of varying cause, were tested for chemosensory performance and their frequency of consumption of a WSD. There was no evidence of a link between a WSD and olfactory dysfunction at the aggregate level, but an aetiology-based approach revealed various patterns, showing both positive and negative associations between olfactory performance and consumption of a WSD. We suggest a number of reasons why, in certain cases, greater olfactory dysfunction may be linked to lower intakes of a WSD, and the role that different aetiologies may have in affecting choices for foods that may appeal following olfactory impairment. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Human Olfactory Perception)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research, Other

24 pages, 428 KiB

Open AccessEditor’s ChoiceReview

Multiple Chemical Sensitivity

by Gesualdo M. Zucco and Richard L. Doty

Brain Sci. 2022, 12(1), 46; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/brainsci12010046 - 29 Dec 2021

Cited by 15 | Viewed by 6882

Abstract

Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS), a condition also known as Chemical Sensitivity (CS), Chemical Intolerance (CI), Idiopathic Environmental Illness (IEI) and Toxicant Induced Loss of Tolerance (TILT), is an acquired multifactorial syndrome characterized by a recurrent set of debilitating symptoms. The symptoms of this controversial disorder are reported to be induced by environmental chemicals at doses far below those usually harmful to most persons. They involve a large spectrum of organ systems and typically disappear when the environmental chemicals are removed. However, no clear link has emerged among self-reported MCS symptoms and widely accepted objective measures of physiological dysfunction, and no clear dose-response relationship between exposure and symptom reactions has been observed. In addition, the underlying etiology and pathogenic processes of the disorder remain unknown and disputed, although biologic and psychologic hypotheses abound. It is currently debated whether MCS should be considered a clinical entity at all. Nevertheless, in the last few decades MCS has received considerable scientific and governmental attention in light of the many persons reporting this illness. In this review, we provide a general overview of the history, definition, demographics, prevalence, and etiologic challenges in defining and understanding MCS. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Human Olfactory Perception)

Other

Jump to: Research, Review

14 pages, 308 KiB

Open AccessPerspective

Olfactory Virtual Reality: A New Frontier in the Treatment and Prevention of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder

by Rachel S. Herz

Brain Sci. 2021, 11(8), 1070; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/brainsci11081070 - 16 Aug 2021

Cited by 11 | Viewed by 4639

Abstract

This perspective piece reviews the clinical condition of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), which is currently increasing due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and recent research illustrating how olfaction is being incorporated into virtual reality (VR) platforms. I then discuss the latest work examining the potential of olfactory virtual reality (OVR) for the treatment of PTSD. From this foundation I suggest novel ways in which OVR may be implemented in PTSD therapy and harnessed for preventing the development of PTSD. Perceptual and chemical features of olfaction that should be considered in OVR applications are also discussed. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Human Olfactory Perception)

Journal Menu

Journal Browser

Advances in Human Olfactory Perception

Share This Special Issue

Special Issue Editor

Special Issue Information

Keywords

Published Papers (12 papers)

Research

Review

Other

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI