Scents

Recent research elevates our understanding of olfactory experiences.  A project lead by Hörberg and published in Cognitive Science established that “Most languages lack a specialized vocabulary to describe smell experiences. People instead use words from other domains, such as ‘heavy’, ‘good’ or ‘fruity’, when talking about smells. But which words are really used and how do they relate to each other? This has been answered for English by researchers at Stockholm University. . .

Chen and Spence investigated how smelling particular sorts of odors influenced perceptions of facial attractiveness; it seems likely that their findings can also be applied in other contexts.  The researchers report that they studied “whether the presentation of a range of pleasant fragrances, containing both floral and fruity notes, would modulate people’s judgements of the facial attractiveness . . . of a selection of typical female faces varying in age in the range 20–69 years. . . .

Researchers have investigated the consequences of smelling the sorts of odors present in deserts when it rains.  Nabhan, Daugherty, and Hartung found that “Desert dwellers know it well: the smell of rain and the feeling of euphoria that comes when a storm washes over the parched earth. That feeling, and the health benefits that come with it, may be the result of oils and other chemicals released by desert plants after a good soaking. . . .

Erraiaa and teammates evaluated the importance of aligning scents experienced in a store with brand image.  They determined via an experiment that “when the scent is perceived as congruent with the brand image, reactions in the store are more favourable. It is not enough to use a scent that ‘smells good’ or that is congruent with other factors (e.g. sensory environment); the scent must be perceived by consumers as consistent with the brand image.

Some researchers are suggesting that smell and taste be considered one sensory channel, not two.  A paper to be published in The Quarterly Review of Biology written by Mollo and 14 colleagues “proposes the unification of all chemosensory modalities into a single sense. . . . The paper thus envisages a rupture with what emerges as one of the most deeply rooted confirmation biases in the scientific literature: the differentiation between gustation (taste) and olfaction (smell). . . .

An exhibit at the Museum of Craft and Design (San Francisco; February 12 to June 5, 2022, “Living with Scents”) focuses on scent-based experiences.  The show’s website reports that “researchers and practitioners, from the neurosciences to the humanities, have strived to gain a better understanding of the sense of smell, which deeply, yet often unknowingly, shapes the way we live: our eating habits, our social interactions, our emotions, memories, and even our well-being and safety. . . . scents may thus be purposefully used to improve many aspects of our lives. . . .

Arshamian and teammates determined that worldwide people tend to find the same odors pleasant to smell.  As they report, they “asked 225 individuals from 9 diverse nonwestern cultures—hunter-gatherer to urban dwelling—to rank . . . odorants from most to least pleasant. Contrary to expectations, culture explained only 6% of the variance in pleasantness rankings, whereas individual variability or personal taste explained 54%. Importantly, there was substantial global consistency, with molecular identity explaining 41% of the variance in odor pleasantness rankings. . . .