Search

A common tool to measure olfactory function is the Sniffin' Sticks Test extended version (SSET). The SSET evaluates olfactory ability by summing the scores of three subtests: Threshold, Discrimination, and Identification. Recent meta-scientific literature revealed that many psychometric instruments currently in use have not been adequately validated, leading to a measurement crisis that raises concerns about the validity of the conclusions drawn with these instruments. Two examples of the measurement crisis are (i) the use of sum scores without testing their assumptions (e.g. unidimensionality and tau-equivalence), which indicate that all subtests have the same, stable relationship with their underlying construct, and (ii) the lack of assessment of measurement invariance across groups. Here, we aim to investigate the unidimensionality and tau-equivalence assumptions, internal consistency, and measurement invariance of sex and age groups of the SSET. We tested 988 (555 females, mean ± SD: 39.75 ± 18.60 years) participants with the Italian version of the SSET. The tau-equivalent model demonstrated excellent fit indices (CFI robust = 1, TLI robust = 1, RMSEA robust = 0, SRMR = 0.013), which best explain the data, indicating that all subtests are equally important in measuring olfactory function, but not necessarily equally precise. The results also revealed full measurement invariance across age groups and configural, partial metric, and scalar invariance across sexes, indicating that the use of latent means to compare sex groups should be chosen over raw scores. However, the SSET demonstrated moderate internal consistency. Future studies should clarify whether the reliability of the SSET can be increased., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Recent anecdotal and scientific reports have provided evidence of a link between COVID-19 and chemosensory impairments, such as anosmia. However, these reports have downplayed or failed to distinguish potential effects on taste, ignored chemesthesis, and generally lacked quantitative measurements. Here, we report the development, implementation, and initial results of a multilingual, international questionnaire to assess self-reported quantity and quality of perception in 3 distinct chemosensory modalities (smell, taste, and chemesthesis) before and during COVID-19. In the first 11 days after questionnaire launch, 4039 participants (2913 women, 1118 men, and 8 others, aged 19-79) reported a COVID-19 diagnosis either via laboratory tests or clinical assessment. Importantly, smell, taste, and chemesthetic function were each significantly reduced compared to their status before the disease. Difference scores (maximum possible change ±100) revealed a mean reduction of smell (-79.7 ± 28.7, mean ± standard deviation), taste (-69.0 ± 32.6), and chemesthetic (-37.3 ± 36.2) function during COVID-19. Qualitative changes in olfactory ability (parosmia and phantosmia) were relatively rare and correlated with smell loss. Importantly, perceived nasal obstruction did not account for smell loss. Furthermore, chemosensory impairments were similar between participants in the laboratory test and clinical assessment groups. These results show that COVID-19-associated chemosensory impairment is not limited to smell but also affects taste and chemesthesis. The multimodal impact of COVID-19 and the lack of perceived nasal obstruction suggest that severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus strain 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection may disrupt sensory-neural mechanisms., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Disgust plays a crucial role in the avoidance of pathogen threats. In many species, body odors provide important information related to health and disease, and body odors are potent elicitors of disgust in humans. With this background, valid assessments of body odor disgust sensitivity are warranted. In the present article, we report the development and psychometric validation of the Body Odor Disgust Scale (BODS), a measure suited to assess individual differences in disgust reaction to a variety of body odors. Collected data from 3 studies (total n = 528) show that the scale can be used either as a unidimensional scale or as a scale that reflects two hypothesized factors: sensitivity to one's own body odors versus those of others. Guided by our results, we reduced the scale to 12 items that capture the essence of these 2 factors. The final version of the BODS shows an excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's αs > 0.9). The BODS subscales show convergent validity with other general disgust scales, as well as with other olfactory functions measures and with aspects of personality that are related to pathogen avoidance. A fourth study confirmed the construct validity of the BODS and its measurement invariance to gender. Moreover, we found that, compared with other general disgust scales, the BODS is more strongly related to perceived vulnerability to disease. The BODS is a brief and valid assessment of trait body odor disgust sensitivity., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Body odors are potent triggers of disgust and regulate social behaviors in many species. The role of olfaction in disgust-associated behaviors has received scant attention in the research literature, in part because olfactory disgust assessments have required laboratory testing with odors. We have devised the "Body Odor Disgust Scale" (BODS) to facilitate research on olfactory disgust. In this study, we evaluated whether individual differences in BODS scores would be associated with the perception of disgust for sweat samples in a laboratory setting. Results show that BODS was a strong predictor of disgust ratings of sweat samples even when controlling for general disgust sensitivity. In contrast, odor intensity ratings were unrelated to BODS scores. Our findings suggest that the BODS scores reflect body odor disgust perception. The BODS scale might facilitate research on olfactory disgust responses and associated behaviors., (© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)