Search

The dichotomy between certainty of results and resources is exemplified in sensory affective testing. Furthermore, the data produced through using 9-point hedonic scales has a unique underlying distribution that is dependent on consumer scale usage and the product itself. We use a combination of resampling real sensory hedonic data with simulations to characterize how the outcome of affective sensory tests change across a range of participants and product space. We found that most data is multimodal and non-parametric in nature, putting in question conventional measures of statistical power and sample size assessments that are parametric. Through a novel method of pseudo-simulation that uses the actual underlying distribution, we were able to find sample sizes and statistical power across a wide range of sample sizes. To our surprise, contrasting this new method to conventional methods of sample size estimation, gaussian sample size estimates consistently give a similar number of participants needed for a particular statistical power. Our novel method also compared similarly to sample size estimates generated from nonparametric methods. Our findings highlight the unique underlying distributions of data collected from 9-point hedonic scales and show how that distribution does not thwart conventional methods of sample size estimation.

Background: The literature regarding clinical olfaction, olfactory loss, and olfactory dysfunction has expanded rapidly over the past two decades, with an exponential rise in the past year. There is substantial variability in the quality of this literature and a need to consolidate and critically review the evidence. It is with that aim that we have gathered experts from around the world to produce this International Consensus on Allergy and Rhinology: Olfaction (ICAR:O). Methods: Using previously described methodology, specific topics were developed relating to olfaction. Each topic was assigned a literature review, evidence-based review, or evidence-based review with recommendations format as dictated by available evidence and scope within the ICAR:O document. Following iterative reviews of each topic, the ICAR:O document was integrated and reviewed by all authors for final consensus. Results: The ICAR:O document reviews nearly 100 separate topics within the realm of olfaction, including diagnosis, epidemiology, disease burden, diagnosis, testing, etiology, treatment, and associated pathologies. Conclusion: This critical review of the existing clinical olfaction literature provides much needed insight and clarity into the evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment of patients with olfactory dysfunction, while also clearly delineating gaps in our knowledge and evidence base that we should investigate further.

Neurotypical individuals have subjective sensitivity differences that may overlap with more heavily studied clinical populations. However, it is not known whether these subjective differences in sensory sensitivity are modality specific, or lead to behavioral shifts. In our experiment, we measured the oral touch sensitivity and food texture awareness differences in two neurotypical groups having either a high or low subjective sensitivity in touch modality. To measure oral touch sensitivity, individuals performed discrimination tasks across three types of stimuli (liquid, semisolid, and solid). Next, they performed two sorting exercises for two texture-centric food products: cookies and crackers. The stimuli that required low oral processing (liquid) were discriminated at higher rates by participants with high subjective sensitivity. Additionally, discrimination strategies between several foods in the same product space were different across the groups, and each group used attributes other than food texture as differentiating characteristics. The results show subjective touch sensitivity influences behavior (sensitivity and awareness). However, we show that the relationship between subjective touch sensitivity and behavior generalizes beyond just touch to other sensory modalities.

Height preferences reflecting positive assortative mating for height—wherein an individual’s own height positively predicts the preferred height of their mate—have been observed in several distinct human populations and are thought to increase reproductive fitness. However, the extent to which assortative preferences for height differ strategically for short-term versus long-term relationship partners, as they do for numerous other indices of mate quality, remains unclear. We explore this possibility in a large representative sample of over 500 men and women aged 15–77 from Canada, Cuba, Norway and the United States. Participants’ own heights were measured, and they indicated their height preferences for a long-term and short-term mate using graphic stimuli containing metric indices. Replicating the “male-taller norm,” participants on average preferred taller-than-average male mates, and shorter-than-average female mates. Positive assortative preferences for height were observed across sexes and samples, however the strength of these height preferences varied with relationship context for men, and not for women. Taller men preferred relatively shorter women for short-term relationships than for long-term relationships, indicating stronger assortative preferences for height in a long-term context. These results provide preliminary evidence that, in addition to mate preferences for other physical traits related to mate quality such as masculinity in the body, face, and voice, assortative preferences for height do vary as a function of expected relationship length, but this was surprisingly only observed in preferences for female height.

Purpose The present study aimed to establish a test battery for the clinical assessment of retronasal odor thresholds and retronasal odor identification. Study design Prospective case–control series. Methods Sixty participants (36 women, 24 men, mean age 37.6 ± 19.4 years) were enrolled in this study; 36 were healthy controls and 24 were patients with olfactory dysfunction. Orthonasal olfactory function was assessed with the “Sniffin’ Sticks” test battery. Retronasal olfaction was assessed with oral odorant delivery using special containers for threshold function, and with oral tasteless powders for odor identification. Results Retronasal and orthonasal olfaction were significantly correlated for threshold scores, identification score, and the sum of threshold and identification score (TI score). Validity analyses showed that the retronasal TI score was able to discriminate between healthy controls and patients with olfactory dysfunction. Conclusions Normosmic participants can be distinctly differentiated from patients with olfactory dysfunction using a valid test battery comprised of retronasal threshold and identification tests. Based on the current findings, we advocate a TI score of 16 as a cut-off between patients and controls. Therefore, TI scores of 17 and above would indicate retronasal normosmia.

The COVID-19 pandemic has increased the prevalence of people suffering from olfactory disorders. In the absence of quick, population-wide olfactory tests, we developed SCENTinel, a rapid, inexpensive smell test to assess odor detection, intensity, and identification ability, which can discriminate anosmia (e.g., total smell loss) from normosmia (e.g., normal sense of smell) using a single odor. A new version, SCENTinel 1.1, extends the original test with one of four possible odors and a hedonic subtest (“how pleasant is the odor”). The purpose of this study was to determine if SCENTinel 1.1 can discriminate other types of olfactory disorders common to COVID-19, such as hyposmia (e.g., reduced sense of smell), parosmia (e.g., distorted odor perception), and phantosmia (e.g., odor sensation without an odor source). Participants (N=381) were divided into three groups based on their self-reported olfactory function: quantitative smell disorder (anosmia or hyposmia, N=135), qualitative smell disorder (parosmia and/or phantosmia; n=86), and normosmia (N=66). SCENTinel 1.1 classifies anosmia and normosmia groups with high sensitivity (AUC=0.94), similar to SCENTinel 1.0 (AUC=0.95). SCENTinel 1.1 also accurately discriminates quantitative from qualitative (AUC=0.76), and normosmia (AUC=0.84), and normosmia from qualitative (AUC=0.73) groups. We also considered a subset of participants who only reported one type of olfactory disorder. SCENTinel 1.1 discriminates hyposmia from parosmia (AUC=0.89), and anosmia (AUC=0.78); as well as parosmia from anosmia (AUC=0.82). Participants with parosmia had a significantly lower hedonic score than those without parosmia, indicating odor distortions are unpleasant. SCENTinel 1.1 is a rapid smell test that can discriminate quantitative (anosmia, hyposmia) and qualitative (parosmia, phantosmia) olfactory disorders, and it is among the only direct tests to rapidly screen for parosmia.

Among those many individuals who experience a reduced odor sensitivity (hyposmia/anosmia), some individuals also have disorders that lead to odor distortion, such as parosmia (i.e. distorted odor with a known source), or odor phantoms (i.e. odor sensation without an odor source). We surveyed a large population with at least one olfactory disorder (N = 2031) and found that odor distortions were common (46%), with respondents reporting either parosmia (19%), phantosmia (11%), or both (16%). In comparison to respondents with hyposmia or anosmia, respondents with parosmia were more likely to be female, young, and suffering from post-viral olfactory loss (P < 0.001), while respondents with phantosmia were more likely to be middle-aged (P < 0.01) and experiencing symptoms caused by head trauma (P < 0.01). In addition, parosmia, compared to phantosmia or anosmia/hyposmia, was most prevalent 3 months to a year after olfactory symptom onset (P < 0.001), which coincides with the timeline of physiological recovery. Finally, we observed that the frequency and duration of distortions negatively affects the quality of life, with parosmia showing a higher range of severity than phantosmia (P < 0.001). Previous research often grouped these distortions together, but our results show that they have distinct patterns of demographics, medical history, and loss in quality of life.

ImportanceSudden smell loss is a specific early symptom of COVID-19, with an estimated prevalence of ~40% to 75%. Smell impairment affects physical and mental health, and dietary behavior. Thus, it is critical to understand the rate and time course of smell recovery.ObjectiveTo characterize smell function and recovery up to 11 months post COVID-19 infection.Settings, ParticipantsThis longitudinal survey of individuals suffering COVID-19-related smell loss assessed disease symptoms and gustatory and olfactory function. Participants (n=12,313) who completed an initial respiratory symptoms, chemosensory function and COVID-19 diagnosis survey (S1) between April and September 2020 and completed a follow-up survey (S2) between September 2020 and February 2021; 27.5% participants responded (n=3,386), with 1,468 being diagnosed with COVID-19 and suffering co-occurring smell and taste loss at the beginning of their illness.Main Outcomes & MeasuresPrimary outcomes are ratings of smell and taste function on a visual analog scale, and self-report of parosmia (smell distortions) and phantosmia (unexplained smells). Secondary outcomes include a checklist of other COVID-19 symptoms.ResultsOn follow-up (median time since COVID-19 onset ~200 days), ~60% of women and ~48% of men reported less than 80% of their pre-illness smell ability. Taste typically recovered faster than smell, and taste loss rarely persisted if smell recovered. Prevalence of parosmia and phantosmia was ~10% of participants in S1 and increased substantially in S2: ~47% for parosmia and ~25% for phantosmia. Persistent smell impairment was associated with more symptoms overall, suggesting it may be a key marker of long-COVID. During COVID-19 illness, the ability to smell was slightly lower among those who did not recover their pre-illness ability to smell at S2.Conclusions and RelevanceWhile smell loss improves for many individuals who lost it due to COVID-19, the prevalence of parosmia and phantosmia increases substantially over time. Olfactory dysfunction is also associated with wider COVID-19 symptoms and may persist for many months after COVID-19 onset. Taste loss in the absence of smell loss is rare. Persistent qualitative smell symptoms are emerging as common long term sequelae; more research into treatment options is strongly warranted given that conservative estimates suggest millions of individuals may experience parosmia following COVID-19. Healthcare providers worldwide need to be prepared to treat post COVID-19 secondary effects on physical and mental health.Trial registrationThis project was pre-registered at OSF: https://osf.io/3e6zc.Graphical abstractKey PointsQuestionWhat are the characteristics of smell and taste recovery of COVID-19 patients?FindingsIn this preregistered observational study of 1,468 participants, smell loss is associated with a higher number of COVID-19 symptoms, and may persist for at least 11 months following disease onset. While a majority of participants report quantitative improvement in their ability to smell, the prevalence of parosmia and phantosmia increases substantially at follow-up. Taste recovers faster than smell, suggesting taste and smell recover separately and can be distinguished by the respondents.MeaningOlfactory dysfunction appears to be a component of long-COVID, with parosmia as a prominent symptom in almost half of those with smell loss. More research into treatment is needed, especially given that olfactory dysfunction is associated with depression and loss of appetite. Health professionals should be aware of these common and long lasting effects.

Among those many individuals who suffer from a reduced odor sensitivity (hyposmia/anosmia) some individuals also experience disorders that lead to odor distortion, such as parosmia (i.e., distorted odor with a known source), or odor phantoms (i.e., odor sensation without an odor source). We surveyed a large population with at least one olfactory disorder (N = 2031) and found that odor distortions were common (46%), with respondents reporting either parosmia (19%), phantosmia (11%), or both (16%). In comparison to respondents with hyposmia or anosmia, respondents with parosmia were more likely to be female, young, and suffered from post-viral olfactory loss (p < 0.001), while phantosmia occurred most frequently in middle-aged respondents (p < 0.01) and was more likely to be caused by head trauma than parosmia (p < 0.01). A higher prevalence of odor distortion was observed 3 months to a year after their olfactory symptom onset (p < 0.001), which coincides with the timeline of physiological recovery. Additionally, we observed that the frequency and duration of distortions negatively affects quality of life, with parosmia showing a higher range of severity than phantosmia (p < 0.001). Previous research often grouped these distortions together, but our results show that they have distinct patterns of demographics, medical history, and loss in quality of life.

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.

Olfactory impairment after a traumatic impact to the head is associated with changes in olfactory cortex, including decreased gray matter density and decreased BOLD response to odors. Much less is known about the role of other cortical areas in olfactory impairment. We used fMRI in a sample of 63 participants, consisting of 25 with post-traumatic functional anosmia, 16 with post-traumatic hyposmia, and 22 healthy controls with normosmia to investigate whole brain response to odors. Similar neural responses were observed across the groups to odor versus odorless stimuli in the primary olfactory areas in piriform cortex, whereas response in the frontal operculum and anterior insula (fO/aI) increased with olfactory function (normosmia > hyposmia > functional anosmia). Unexpectedly, a negative association was observed between response and olfactory perceptual function in the mediodorsal thalamus (mdT), ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) and posterior cingulate cortex (pCC). Finally, connectivity within a network consisting of vmPFC, fO, and pCC could be used to successfully classify participants as having functional anosmia or normosmia. We conclude that, at the neural level, olfactory impairment due to head trauma is best characterized by heightened responses and differential connectivity in higher-order areas beyond olfactory cortex.

Neurotypical individuals have subjective sensitivity differences that may overlap with the more heavily studied clinical populations. However, it is not known whether these subjective differences in sensory sensitivity are modality specific or lead to behavioral shifts. In our experiment, we measured the touch sensitivity and texture awareness differences in two neurotypical groups having either a high or low subjective sensitivity in touch modality. To measure touch sensitivity, individuals performed discrimination tasks across three types of stimuli (liquid, semi-solid, and solid). Next, they performed two sorting exercises for two texture-centric food products: cookies and crackers. The stimuli that required low oral processing (liquid) were discriminated at higher rates by the high subjective sensitivity compared to the solid stimuli. Additionally, discrimination strategies between several foods in the same product space were different across the groups, and each group used attributes other than texture as differentiating characteristics. The results show subjective touch sensitivity influences behavior (sensitivity and awareness). However, we show that the relationship between subjective touch sensitivity and behavior generalizes across several modalities.

BackgroundCommercially available smell tests are primarily used in research or in-depth clinical evaluations, but are too costly and lengthy for population surveillance in health emergencies like COVID-19. We developed the SCENTinel 1.0 test which rapidly evaluates three olfactory functions (detection, intensity, and identification). We tested whether self-administering the SCENTinel 1.0 test discriminates between individuals with smell loss or average smell ability (normosmics), and provides comparable performance as the validated and standardized NIH Toolbox® Odor Identification Test in normosmics.MethodsUsing Bayesian linear models and prognostic classification algorithms, we compared the SCENTinel 1.0 performance of a group of self-reported anosmics (N=111, 47±13yo, F=71%,) and normosmics (N=154, 47±14yo, F=74%), as well as individuals reporting other smell disorders (e.g., hyposmia, parosmia; N=42, 55±10yo, F=67%).ResultsNinety-four percent of normosmics met our SCENTinel 1.0 accuracy criteria, while only 10% of anosmics and 64% of individuals with other smell disorders did. Overall performance on SCENTinel 1.0 predicted belonging to the normosmic group better than identification or detection alone (vs. anosmic: AUC=0.95, Sensitivity=0.72, Specificity=0.94). Odor intensity provided the best single-feature predictor to classify normosmics. Among normosmics, 92% met the accuracy criteria at both SCENTinel 1.0 and the NIH Toolbox® Odor Identification Test.ConclusionsSCENTinel 1.0 is a practical test able to discriminate individuals with smell loss and is likely to be useful in many clinical situations, including COVID-19 symptom screening.

Olfactory research in humans has largely focused on odors perceived via sniffing, orthonasal olfaction, while ignoring odors perceived from the mouth, retronasal olfaction. Prior work on retronasally presented odors use 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. As expected, we found route-dependent differences in perceptual odor quality (pleasantness, edibility, and familiarity ratings), and a better ability to identify odors during orthonasal presentation. Additionally, more concrete (and source-based) language was used when describing odors presented orthonasally. Exploratory analyses revealed that while 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 sensitivity and intensity differences, suggesting cognitive and linguistic processes differed 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.

The main neurological manifestation of COVID-19 is loss of smell or taste. The high incidence of smell loss without significant rhinorrhea or nasal congestion suggests that SARS-CoV-2 targets the chemical senses through mechanisms distinct from those used by endemic coronaviruses or other common cold-causing agents. Here we review recently developed hypotheses about how SARS-CoV-2 might alter the cells and circuits involved in chemosensory processing and thereby change perception. Given our limited understanding of SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis, we propose future experiments to elucidate disease mechanisms and highlight the relevance of this ongoing work to understanding how the virus might alter brain function more broadly., Impairments of smell and taste perception are two of the main symptoms of COVID–19. In this issue of Neuron, Cooper et al. focus on these chemosensory symptoms and review recent hypotheses of the putative mechanisms mediating the loss of taste and smell through COVID–19.

Olfactory impairment after trauma is associated with changes in olfactory cortex, including decreased gray matter density and decreased response to odors. Much less is known about the role of other cortical areas in olfactory impairment. We used fMRI in a sample of 63 participants, consisting of 25 with post-traumatic functional anosmia, 16 with post-traumatic hyposmia, and 22 healthy controls with normosmia to investigate whole brain response to odors. Similar neural responses were observed across the groups to odor versus odorless stimuli in the primary olfactory areas in piriform cortex, whereas response in the frontal operculum and anterior insula (fO/al) increased with olfactory function (normosmia > hyposmia > functional anosmia). Unexpectedly, a negative association was observed between response and olfactory function in the mediodorsal thalamus (mdT), ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) and posterior cingulate cortex (pCC). Finally, connectivity within a network consisting of vmPFC, fO, and pCC could be used to successfully classify participants as having functional anosmia or normosmia. We conclude that, at the neural level, olfactory impairment due to head trauma is best characterized by heightened responses and differential connectivity in higher-order areas beyond olfactory cortex.Significance StatementOlfactory impairment affects a quarter of the population, with subjective complaints usually confirmed with psychophysical measurements. Here, we demonstrate that the degree of olfactory impairment can also be categorized using neural responses to odors. Remarkably, regions with neural responses that were predictive usually showed an increase in response to odors with degree of impairment, rather than a reduction, as might be expected. Further, predictive cortical regions were not isolated to canonical olfactory areas.

A wealth of rapidly evolving reports suggests that olfaction and taste disturbances may be manifestations of the novel COVID-19 pandemic. While otolaryngological societies worldwide have started to consider chemosensory evaluation as a screening tool for COVID-19 infection, the true nature of the relationship between the changes in chemosensory ability and COVID-19 is unclear. Our goal with this review is to provide a brief overview of published and archived literature, as well as the anecdotal reports and social trends related to this topic up to April 29, 2020. We also aim to draw parallels between the clinical/chemosensory symptomology reported in association to past coronavirus pandemics (such as SARS and MERS) and the novel COVID-19. This review also highlights current evidence on persistent chemosensory disturbances after the infection has resolved. Overall, our analysis pinpoints the need for further studies: (1) to better quantify olfaction and taste disturbances associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, compared to those of other viral and respiratory infections, (2) to understand the relation between smell, taste, and chemesthesis disturbances in COVID-19, and (3) to understand how persistent are these disturbances after the infection has resolved.

Olfactory habituation results from prolonged exposure to an odor, leading to perceptual changes defined by several characteristics. To date, human habituation research has focused on orthonasal olfaction which is perceived externally while ignoring internal routes of odor perception related to flavor. In our study, we conducted two experiments to characterize retronasal olfactory habituation and measured its impact on flavor perception. In Experiment 1, participants were presented a food odor and non-food odor retronasally, using an orally adhered strip. Each participant rated the odor intensity using a time-intensity procedure. After exposure, the participants ate a lime-flavored gummy and rated the lime flavor. In experiment 2, the same procedure was performed for a low-level lime odor, a simple (lime oil) and complex (lime oil + sucrose + citric acid) beverage as the flavor stimuli. Our results demonstrated two known principles of habituation for retronasally presented odors: (1) prolonged exposure leads to decreased perception and (2) weaker stimuli lead to more rapid habituation. Additionally, we found that the non-food odor habituated slower than the food odor; however, the participants seemed to recover simultaneously upon food and beverage consumption leading to no change in flavor perception. The findings of this study give evidence that we habituate to different odors at different rates; more specifically, we provide evidence that differentiates between odor origin and concentration. This is the first time-intensity characterization of retronasal odor habituation. Additionally, a novel method of administering retronasal odors is presented.

Texture has long been considered an important attribute for food acceptance. However, which specific textural characteristics contribute to overall acceptance of a food is not well understood. It has been suggested that texture contrasts and combinations are a universal feature in giving foods a desirable texture, yet this notion is largely based upon anecdotal data. This study uses multiple survey research methods to assess the importance of texture contrast and combinations across cultures (Poland, U.S.A., and Singapore). Participants (n = 288) completed a survey that included overt measures of food texture contrast importance as well as free response questions regarding texture. The overall importance of texture for food liking was not different across the populations. However, the participants from Singapore and Poland gave more importance to a desirable food having multiple textures than the U.S.A. cohort. When looking at free responses, participants were twice as likely to mention combinations (multiple textures) with a texture contrast when describing foods they liked, in comparison to foods they disliked. This was observed across all 3 cultures. However, the type and quantity of texture terms used within combinations were different among cultures. For instance, Asians enjoyed more texturally diverse food combinations than the other two cultures. These findings highlight the importance of texture contrasts and combinations in three distinct cultures.

Typically, broccoli arrives at the store within 7&ndash, 14 days of harvest and is kept refrigerated until purchased or considered waste. To date, information has been limited on how this time on the shelf or storage temperature affects the sensory attributes that contribute to broccoli purchase or repurchase. In this study, 100 consumers performed acceptance tests and a check-all-that-apply (CATA) section to characterize sensory changes in two cultivars of broccoli (&lsquo, Diplomat&rsquo, and &lsquo, Emerald Crown&rsquo, ) stored at two temperatures (0 &deg, C and 4 &deg, C) over five time points: 0, 14, 21, 28, and 42 days. Due to quality degradation during storage, the overall liking of broccoli decreased regardless of holding temperature and variety. This was in accordance with a decrease in sweetness and an increase in bitterness intensity. However, there were differences between varieties in which Diplomat had more sensory changes at higher temperatures and only Emerald showed negative changes to its appearance in color. Lastly, the CATA data revealed the attributes responsible for modulating the consumer acceptance of broccoli such as tastes, colors and flavors (e.g., grassy, musty, dirt-like). This information can be used to better inform shelf-life determinations of broccoli. Additionally, these changes in taste, odor, texture, and color can inform those interested in investigating the biochemical processes related to broccoli storage.

Olfactory habituation results from prolonged exposure to an odor, leading to perceptual changes defined by several characteristics. To date, human habituation research has focused on orthonasal olfaction which is perceived externally while ignoring internal routes of odor perception related to flavor. In our study, we conducted two experiments to characterize retronasal olfactory habituation and measured its impact on flavor perception. In Experiment 1, 22 participants rhythmically breathed a food odor (lime), non-food odor (lavender), and blank (propylene glycol) that was presented using an orally-adhered strip, while rating the odor intensity using the time-intensity procedure. After a 10-minute exposure, the participants ate a lime-flavored gummy and rated the lime flavor. In Experiment 2, the same procedure was performed for a low-level lime odor, a simple (lime oil) and complex (lime oil + sucrose + citric acid) beverage as the flavor stimuli. Our results demonstrated two known principles of habituation for retronasally presented odors: 1) prolonged exposure lead to decreased perception, 2) weaker stimuli lead to more rapid habituation. Additionally, we found that the non-food odor habituated slower than the food odor; however, the participants seemed to recover simultaneously upon food and beverage consumption leading to no change in flavor perception.

Assessment of odor thresholds is a widely recognized method of measuring olfactory abilities in humans. To date no attempts have been made to assess whether chemical complexity of odors used can produce more reliable results. To this end, we performed two studies of repeated measures design with 121 healthy volunteers (age 19–62 years). In Study 1, we compared thresholds obtained from tests based on one odor presented in a pen-like odor dispensing device with three odors and six odors mixtures presented in glass containers. In study 2 we compared stimuli of one and three odors, both presented in glass containers. In both studies measurements were performed twice, separated by at least three days. Results indicate that the multiple odor mixtures produced more reliable threshold scores, as compared to thresholds based on a single substance.

Sniffin' Sticks have become a popular procedure to measure overall olfactory functionality with 3 subtest: phenyl ethyl alcohol threshold test (T), discrimination (D), and identification (I). However, several procedural components specified by the original paper have not been tested nor has the impact of deviations been measured. The aim of the present work was to measure olfactory performance under modified testing procedures. First, the reverse order of subtests (IDT) was compared with more standard practices (TDI). Next, the possible impact of background noise and positive concurrent feedback were assessed. A total of 120 individuals participated in the study where the 3 conditional experiments, each involving 40 participants, were completed. Testing procedures that reversed the presentation order of subtests (I->D->T) scored a significantly lower overall TDI score than standard testing order with the threshold subtest being the most influenced. Additionally, nonverbal background noise lowered overall olfactory performance while concurrent feedback modulated threshold performance. These results emphasize the importance of testing parameters where olfactory perception and tasks may be modulated by adaptation and attentional distraction, respectively. This study helped furthermore to demonstrate that the investigated 3 deviations from the standard procedure revealed a significant impact on the performance outcome in olfactory assessment using the Sniffin' Sticks.

Lack of hand washing is a leading cause of food borne illnesses. To successfully increase hand hygiene compliance, interventions must have continual engagement with employees. This study used a real-time prospective memory (PM) scenario to measure the effectiveness of a control and sensory reminders of disgust to influence hand washing behavior and performance. First, a model of hand washing performance was built by having six participants’ hands contaminated with GermGlo (a florescent micro-particle) and then washed their hands using predetermined protocols while monitored by an electronic hand hygiene verification (HHV) system. Next, eighty Hispanic/Latino participants, in a between-group experimental design, performed a PM experiment while one of four reminders were present (hand washing poster, disgusting image, disgusting sound and disgusting odor) as the HHV recorded their hand washing performance. Visual cues, typical of hand washing campaigns, were not as effective at increasing hand hygiene compliance as disgust-induced sensory cues. Furthermore, olfactory disgust showed a significantly higher probability that individuals would engage in hand washing behaviors than all other conditions. This study provides new insight into the effectiveness of different senses and emotion to reduce the intention-behavior gap associated with modifying behaviors and broadens current PM research to a real-time application.

The authors would like to make corrections to the name of an author and the affiliations representing the authors. Namely, we would like to change the spelling of Johnathan Warr to its correct spelling of Jonathan Warr as shown above.