How well can young adults and children discriminate between odors?

It is widely believed that people can distinguish between many odors although there is limited empirical evidence. Odor discrimination tasks are employed much less often than other measures of olfaction, but, interestingly, performance is typically ~ 75% correct. This less-than-perfect performance is rarely highlighted, although it suggests that people may not be as good at discriminating odors as is commonly believed. Odor discrimination is understudied in children, and although available evidence suggests that it improves with age, children perform better when the task is simpler. In the present study, we explored odor discrimination in children and young adults with a relatively simple same-different task using common and uncommon odors. We found that children perform as well as young adults, but that overall performance was less than perfect and depended on the odors to be discriminated. We found evidence that ability to discriminate between odors improves as the difference in pleasantness of the odors increases. In a second experiment, we tested this directly by exploring whether odors that differ in pleasantness and edibility, two dimensions that appear to be important in olfactory perception, are easier to discriminate than odors that are the same on those dimensions. We found further evidence that odors that differ in pleasantness are easier to discriminate.

Effects of COVID-19 on Sense of Smell: Human Factors/Ergonomics Considerations.

OBJECTIVE: We review the effects of COVID-19 on the human sense of smell (olfaction) and discuss implications for human-system interactions. We emphasize how critical smell is and how the widespread loss of smell due to COVID-19 will impact human-system interaction. BACKGROUND: COVID-19 reduces the sense of smell in people who contract the disease. Thus far, olfaction has received relatively little attention from human factors/ergonomics professionals. While smell is not a primary means of human-system communication, humans rely on smell in many important ways related to both quality of life and safety. METHOD: We briefly review and synthesize the rapidly expanding literature through September 2020 on the topic of smell loss caused by COVID-19. We interpret findings in terms of their relevance to human factors/ergonomics researchers and practitioners. RESULTS: Since March 2020 dozens of articles have been published that report smell loss in COVID-19 patients. The prevalence and duration of COVID-19-related smell loss is still under investigation, but the available data suggest that it may leave many people with long-term deficits and distortions in sense of smell. CONCLUSION: We suggest that the human factors/ergonomics community could become more aware of the importance of the sense of smell and focus on accommodating the increasing number of people with reduced olfactory performance. APPLICATION: We present examples of how olfaction can augment human-system communication and how human factors/ergonomics professionals might accommodate people with olfactory dysfunction. While seemingly at odds, both of these goals can be achieved.

Olfaction in pregnancy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Little attention has been paid to olfactory changes during pregnancy with contemporary studies limited in number and sample size. We examined whether pregnancy is associated with differences in olfactory performance and if there were any specific gestational ages at which these differences occur through a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of the current literature. An initial electronic database search identified 234 citations, which were screened at the abstract level. Twenty-three citations were germane for full-text review, and 13 met criteria for inclusion. Our review assessed 5 olfactory measures of interest: odor identification (n = 11 articles), threshold (n = 8), discrimination (n = 5), hedonics (n = 6), and intensity (n = 5). Nine of these 13 studies contained sufficient data for meta-analysis, and these studies included a total of 523 pregnant women and 365 non-pregnant controls. Despite previous subjective and objective reports of odor intolerances and odor hypersensitivity, we did not find any significant differences between pregnant and non-pregnant women in odor discrimination, thresholds, or hedonics. However, meta-analysis of 506 cases and 333 controls showed worse odor identification in pregnant women compared to controls in a random-effects model. Thus, we demonstrate worse performance at odor identification during pregnancy. In this review, we discuss the current evidence (and lack thereof) regarding olfaction in pregnancy as well as highlight current knowledge gaps in this field.

Is Novelty Detection Important in Long-Term Odor Memory?

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.

Novelty Detection in Memory for Common and Uncommon Odors over Short Delays.

Odor memory is commonly believed to be very strong and long-lasting. The present study examined factors that impact odor recognition memory over short delay intervals (immediately or 30 s after target presentation) with emphasis on memory task (forced-choice vs "monadic"/single stimulus yes/no), odor category, and target/foil relationship. We explored trial-by-trial confidence as well as the effect of target familiarity, pleasantness, and intensity ratings, and odor nameability on memory for odors. Overall odor recognition memory in terms of proportion correct and sensitivity measures did not decline significantly during the 30-s delay interval in either task. However, hit rates were lower at 30 s and correct rejection rates for common odors remained consistently high. Recognition memory was better on trials in which the odor pairs were highly dissimilar, as well as on trials in which the target was an uncommon odor, particularly if it could be named. Familiarity, pleasantness, and intensity had no systematic effect on recognition memory. Whereas the results provide evidence of a fading memory trace, indicated by the decreased hit rates after a 30-s delay, the constant rates of correct rejections and high confidence ratings on those trials, even after delay, suggests that novelty detection (i.e., recognition that an odor is not one that has been encountered previously in that context) may play an important role in the memory for odors over short delays. Whether there is a separate short-term odor memory store is also addressed.

Olfactory perception in children.

The ability to smell is important for protection from danger and quality of life, even in children. Although smell loss is rare in children, it can be indicative of some childhood disorders and may be useful for understanding some disorders. This paper reviews the methods and results of behavioral testing olfaction in children, with an emphasis on odor identification, the most common method of assessing the sense of smell in both children and adults. The Pediatric Smell Wheel® is described as a relatively new and powerful tool for testing olfaction in children as young as 4 years of age. An example of its use in testing children with a childhood disorders (autism spectrum disorder, ASD) is provided in addition to a review of the literature on smell function in ASD. It is possible to reliably test sense of smell in children as young as 4 years old and many studies have shown that performance improves with age and can be impacted by childhood disorders. Sex differences in children are briefly discussed. Finally, the paper suggests other methods of testing olfaction in children, such as odor discrimination, that depend less on cognitive factors, which may enhance our understanding of the olfactory capabilities of young children.

Pregnancy and olfaction: a review.

Many women report a heightened sense of smell during pregnancy. Accounts of these anecdotes have existed for over 100 years, but scientific evidence has been sparse and inconclusive. In this review, I examine the literature on olfactory perception during pregnancy including measures of self-report, olfactory thresholds, odor identification, intensity and hedonic ratings, and disgust. Support for a general decrease in olfactory thresholds (increase in sensitivity) is generally lacking. There is limited evidence that some suprathreshold measures of olfactory perception, such as hedonic ratings of odors, are affected by pregnancy, but these effects are idiosyncratic. In this review, I explore the hypotheses that have been put forth to explain changes in olfactory perception during pregnancy and provide suggestions for further research.

Pregnancy does not affect human olfactory detection thresholds.

Hyperosmia is suspected in pregnancy; however, no empirical study using validated measures of olfactory function has clearly confirmed the anecdotal reports of this phenomenon. The goal of the current study is to compare the olfactory sensitivity of pregnant women to that of nonpregnant women and men. All participants rated their sense of smell and pregnant women listed the odors to which they were most sensitive. Detection thresholds were measured using a well-validated protocol. A group of pregnant and nonpregnant women was studied longitudinally using a signal detection procedure designed to detect small differences in sensitivity. Pregnant women, particularly in the 1st trimester, rated their sense of smell to be higher than nonpregnant women and men and indicated many (primarily unpleasant) odors to which they were more sensitive. Women rated their sense of smell higher than men. However, there was no sex difference in thresholds and neither thresholds nor signal detection measures of sensitivity were significantly affected by either sex or pregnancy status. The implications of the lack of relationship between self-report and measures of olfactory sensitivity, particularly in pregnancy, are discussed.

Odor identification testing in children and young adults using the smell wheel.

OBJECTIVE: Olfaction is important for nutrition, safety, and quality of life. Detecting smell loss in young children can be difficult, since many children with olfactory deficits do not recognize their problem and may even pretend to smell. The short attention span of some young children precludes testing with longer standardized olfactory tests. Currently there is a dearth of pediatric smell tests. In this study we evaluated the performance of 152 children and young adults on a game-like rotating "Smell Wheel" odor identification test. This forced-choice test, which can be self-administered, was designed to capture the child's imagination and to provide a standardized test measure with odors known to young children using a minimum number of trials. METHOD: Thirty 4-5-year olds (10 female), 62 6-7-year olds (17 female), 30 10-11-year olds (18 female) and 30 18-19-year olds (15 female) were tested. Analysis of variance was used to assess the influences of sex and age on the test scores. RESULTS: All participants completed the simple and rapid test protocol. Test performance and age-related changes analogous to those obtained using longer tests were observed. Test scores of participants who self-administered the test were equivalent to those for whom the test was administered by the experimenter. CONCLUSION: Good compliance and olfactory test findings congruent with literature results were obtained using the Smell Wheel, suggesting that this test may be useful in assessing olfactory function in pediatric settings where attentional demands are compromised and test time is limited.

Sex differences and reproductive hormone influences on human odor perception.

The question of whether men and women differ in their ability to smell has been the topic of scientific investigation for over a hundred years. Although conflicting findings abound, most studies suggest that, for at least some odorants, women outperform men on tests of odor detection, identification, discrimination, and memory. Most functional imaging and electrophysiological studies similarly imply that, when sex differences are present, they favor women. In this review we examine what is known about sex-related alterations in human smell function, including influences of the menstrual cycle, pregnancy, gonadectomy, and hormone replacement therapy on a range of olfactory measures. We conclude that the relationship between reproductive hormones and human olfactory function is complex and that simple associations between circulating levels of gonadal hormones and measures of olfactory function are rarely present.

Measures of human olfactory perception during pregnancy.

Although considerable anecdotal evidence suggests that pregnancy affects olfactory sensitivity, scientific evidence is limited and inconclusive. Whereas hedonic ratings are affected by pregnancy, odor identification is not. The aim of the current study was to examine odor perception in women across pregnancy and in the postpartum period. One hundred nonsmoking women who were pregnant, postpartum, or had never been pregnant were tested on the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT). Intensity ratings and scratch patterns were collected as potential indicators of sensitivity, and participants rated the odors' pleasantness. Participants also rated their own sense of smell. Mean UPSIT scores did not differ significantly across groups indicating no difference in odor identification. Trends in planned comparisons suggested that in the first trimester, odors were rated as more intense and less pleasant. In the first trimester, women scratched the odor strips significantly fewer times. Consistent with previous reports, 90% of pregnant women reported that specific odors smelled less pleasant and 60% reported that some odors smelled more pleasant. Although nearly two-thirds of pregnant women rated their olfactory sensitivity to be enhanced during pregnancy and overall pregnant women's self-rated olfactory sensitivity was higher than controls', self-ratings were not correlated with UPSIT scores nor odor intensity ratings. These results suggest that these and previous findings may reflect the fact that the effect of pregnancy on olfaction is small and inconsistent.

Signal detection theory applied to three visual search tasks--identification, yes/no detection and localization.

Adding distracters to a display impairs performance on visual tasks (i.e. the set-size effect). While keeping the display characteristics constant, we investigated this effect in three tasks: 2 target identification, yes-no detection with 2 targets, and 8-alternative localization. A Signal Detection Theory (SDT) model, tailored for each task, accounts for the set-size effects observed in identification and localization tasks, and slightly under-predicts the set-size effect in a detection task. Given that sensitivity varies as a function of spatial frequency (SF), we measured performance in each of these three tasks in neutral and peripheral precue conditions for each of six spatial frequencies (0.5-12 cpd). For all spatial frequencies tested, performance on the three tasks decreased as set size increased in the neutral precue condition, and the peripheral precue reduced the effect. Larger set-size effects were observed at low SFs in the identification and localization tasks. This effect can be described using the SDT model, but was not predicted by it. For each of these tasks we also established the extent to which covert attention modulates performance across a range of set sizes. A peripheral precue substantially diminished the set-size effect and improved performance, even at set size 1. These results provide support for distracter exclusion, and suggest that signal enhancement may also be a mechanism by which covert attention can impose its effect.

Covert attention affects the psychometric function of contrast sensitivity.

We examined the effect of transient covert attention on the psychometric function for contrast sensitivity in an orientation discrimination task when the target was presented alone in the absence of distracters and visual masks. Transient covert attention decreased both the threshold (consistent with a contrast gain mechanism) and, less consistently, the slope of the psychometric function. We assessed performance at 8 equidistant locations (4.5 degrees eccentricity) and found that threshold and slope depended on target location-both were higher on the vertical than the horizontal meridian, particularly directly above fixation. All effects were robust across a range of spatial frequencies, and the visual field asymmetries increased with spatial frequency. Notwithstanding the dependence of the psychometric function on target location, attention improved performance to a similar extent across the visual field.Given that, in this study, we excluded all sources of external noise, and that we showed experimentally that spatial uncertainty cannot explain the present results, we conclude that the observed attentional benefit is consistent with signal enhancement.