Amadeu Martins, Ana Nunes, Andreia Lima, Carlos Ribeiro, Carolina Pedro, Jéssica Oliveira, Monalisa Vieira, Patrícia Monteiro
{"title":"“气味景观”的战略设计:气味会影响我们的决策吗?","authors":"Amadeu Martins, Ana Nunes, Andreia Lima, Carlos Ribeiro, Carolina Pedro, Jéssica Oliveira, Monalisa Vieira, Patrícia Monteiro","doi":"10.54941/ahfe1001402","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Most design interventions manipulate the environment to convey sensory information to the public. However, aside from cosmetic industry, research on the olfactory modality has been broadly overlooked. Being one of the most ancient senses, smell provides motivational guidance within the environment, and some evidence has pointed to multisensory influences of smell. Thus, if the olfactory experience could surpass its mere perception and extend to our decisions, it would become a critical topic for design R&D. We assessed the influence of environmental smells on the performance of two distinct decision tasks, namely, a parallel response selection / conflict monitoring task (see Beste et al. 2013) and a cocoa taste-discrimination task, respectively employing an orthonasal (experiment 1) and a retronasal (experiment 2) smell exposure. Three identical laboratory rooms were used in both experiments to expose the participants to control, pleasant (apple fragrance scented room), and unpleasant (faecal / putrid room) smells in a counterbalanced within-subject design. Although participants’ response times were equivalent between conditions in experiment 1, the unpleasant room was associated with a decreased (albeit non-significant) number of errors. Remarkably, experiment 2 revealed that the unpleasant smell condition produced significantly more accurate judgments about the cocoa content of the trials than those obtained under pleasant (p< 0.01) and control (p< 0.05) conditions. Our findings are discussed considering the salience of smells (i.e., motivational value), and task demands (i.e., exposure length and type of cognitive processes engaged). Those factors likely combine to determine the resources (e.g., attention) allocated at each task and consequently, the degree of interference that smells could have on decision-making. We argue that olfactory design interventions might benefit those people in various contexts where sharp decisions are an asset (e.g., operating rooms, court rooms, etc).\n","PeriodicalId":308830,"journal":{"name":"Human Dynamics and Design for the Development of Contemporary Societies","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Strategic Design for “Smellscapes”: Do Smells Get Into Our Decisions?\",\"authors\":\"Amadeu Martins, Ana Nunes, Andreia Lima, Carlos Ribeiro, Carolina Pedro, Jéssica Oliveira, Monalisa Vieira, Patrícia Monteiro\",\"doi\":\"10.54941/ahfe1001402\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Most design interventions manipulate the environment to convey sensory information to the public. However, aside from cosmetic industry, research on the olfactory modality has been broadly overlooked. Being one of the most ancient senses, smell provides motivational guidance within the environment, and some evidence has pointed to multisensory influences of smell. Thus, if the olfactory experience could surpass its mere perception and extend to our decisions, it would become a critical topic for design R&D. We assessed the influence of environmental smells on the performance of two distinct decision tasks, namely, a parallel response selection / conflict monitoring task (see Beste et al. 2013) and a cocoa taste-discrimination task, respectively employing an orthonasal (experiment 1) and a retronasal (experiment 2) smell exposure. Three identical laboratory rooms were used in both experiments to expose the participants to control, pleasant (apple fragrance scented room), and unpleasant (faecal / putrid room) smells in a counterbalanced within-subject design. Although participants’ response times were equivalent between conditions in experiment 1, the unpleasant room was associated with a decreased (albeit non-significant) number of errors. Remarkably, experiment 2 revealed that the unpleasant smell condition produced significantly more accurate judgments about the cocoa content of the trials than those obtained under pleasant (p< 0.01) and control (p< 0.05) conditions. Our findings are discussed considering the salience of smells (i.e., motivational value), and task demands (i.e., exposure length and type of cognitive processes engaged). Those factors likely combine to determine the resources (e.g., attention) allocated at each task and consequently, the degree of interference that smells could have on decision-making. We argue that olfactory design interventions might benefit those people in various contexts where sharp decisions are an asset (e.g., operating rooms, court rooms, etc).\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":308830,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Dynamics and Design for the Development of Contemporary Societies\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Dynamics and Design for the Development of Contemporary Societies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54941/ahfe1001402\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Dynamics and Design for the Development of Contemporary Societies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54941/ahfe1001402","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
大多数设计干预都是通过操纵环境来向公众传达感官信息。然而,除了化妆品行业,对嗅觉模式的研究一直被广泛忽视。作为最古老的感官之一,嗅觉在环境中提供动机指导,一些证据表明嗅觉的多感官影响。因此,如果嗅觉体验能够超越单纯的感知并延伸到我们的决策中,它将成为设计研发的一个重要课题。我们评估了环境气味对两个不同决策任务的影响,即平行反应选择/冲突监测任务(见Beste et al. 2013)和可可味道辨别任务,分别采用正交鼻(实验1)和后鼻(实验2)气味暴露。两个实验都使用了三个相同的实验室房间,让参与者暴露在控制气味、令人愉快的气味(苹果香味的房间)和令人不愉快的气味(粪便/腐烂的房间)中,以平衡受试者内部的设计。尽管在实验1中,参与者的反应时间在两个条件之间是相等的,但令人不快的房间与错误数量的减少(尽管不显著)有关。值得注意的是,实验2显示,难闻气味条件下对可可含量的判断明显高于难闻气味条件下(p< 0.01)和对照组(p< 0.05)。我们的研究结果是考虑到气味的显著性(即,动机价值)和任务需求(即,暴露时间和参与的认知过程类型)。这些因素可能共同决定了在每项任务中分配的资源(例如,注意力),从而决定了气味可能对决策产生的干扰程度。我们认为,嗅觉设计干预可能会使那些在各种情况下(例如,手术室,法庭等)做出敏锐决策的人受益。
Strategic Design for “Smellscapes”: Do Smells Get Into Our Decisions?
Most design interventions manipulate the environment to convey sensory information to the public. However, aside from cosmetic industry, research on the olfactory modality has been broadly overlooked. Being one of the most ancient senses, smell provides motivational guidance within the environment, and some evidence has pointed to multisensory influences of smell. Thus, if the olfactory experience could surpass its mere perception and extend to our decisions, it would become a critical topic for design R&D. We assessed the influence of environmental smells on the performance of two distinct decision tasks, namely, a parallel response selection / conflict monitoring task (see Beste et al. 2013) and a cocoa taste-discrimination task, respectively employing an orthonasal (experiment 1) and a retronasal (experiment 2) smell exposure. Three identical laboratory rooms were used in both experiments to expose the participants to control, pleasant (apple fragrance scented room), and unpleasant (faecal / putrid room) smells in a counterbalanced within-subject design. Although participants’ response times were equivalent between conditions in experiment 1, the unpleasant room was associated with a decreased (albeit non-significant) number of errors. Remarkably, experiment 2 revealed that the unpleasant smell condition produced significantly more accurate judgments about the cocoa content of the trials than those obtained under pleasant (p< 0.01) and control (p< 0.05) conditions. Our findings are discussed considering the salience of smells (i.e., motivational value), and task demands (i.e., exposure length and type of cognitive processes engaged). Those factors likely combine to determine the resources (e.g., attention) allocated at each task and consequently, the degree of interference that smells could have on decision-making. We argue that olfactory design interventions might benefit those people in various contexts where sharp decisions are an asset (e.g., operating rooms, court rooms, etc).