气味地图:气味感知是否有共性?

S Carrie, J W Scannell, P J Dawes
{"title":"气味地图:气味感知是否有共性?","authors":"S Carrie,&nbsp;J W Scannell,&nbsp;P J Dawes","doi":"10.1046/j.1365-2273.1999.00242.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The normal perception of odour quality is poorly understood, so formulating meaningful tests of olfaction is difficult. While tests of odour discrimination and odour detection threshold have helped quantify olfactory dysfunction, there are not yet predictive relationships between sensitivity to particular odours and particular forms of olfactory dysfunction. Using 11 commonly encountered odours, 20 normosmics performed similarity ratings of odour pairs. Multidimensional scaling, a standard behavioural sciences data analysis method, was used to explore the perceptual relationships between the odours based on their pair-wise similarity ratings. Smell maps were created for each individual as was a common or archetypal map which indicated a commonality in individuals' odour perception, far greater than chance alone (P < 10(-6)). A preliminary analysis of four hyposmics suggests that they do not conform to the normosmic archetype. Future studies assessing the relationship between odours in the archetype should improve the selection of odours to be included in tests of odour discrimination.</p>","PeriodicalId":10694,"journal":{"name":"Clinical otolaryngology and allied sciences","volume":"24 3","pages":"184-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1046/j.1365-2273.1999.00242.x","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The smell map: is there a commonality of odour perception?\",\"authors\":\"S Carrie,&nbsp;J W Scannell,&nbsp;P J Dawes\",\"doi\":\"10.1046/j.1365-2273.1999.00242.x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The normal perception of odour quality is poorly understood, so formulating meaningful tests of olfaction is difficult. While tests of odour discrimination and odour detection threshold have helped quantify olfactory dysfunction, there are not yet predictive relationships between sensitivity to particular odours and particular forms of olfactory dysfunction. Using 11 commonly encountered odours, 20 normosmics performed similarity ratings of odour pairs. Multidimensional scaling, a standard behavioural sciences data analysis method, was used to explore the perceptual relationships between the odours based on their pair-wise similarity ratings. Smell maps were created for each individual as was a common or archetypal map which indicated a commonality in individuals' odour perception, far greater than chance alone (P < 10(-6)). A preliminary analysis of four hyposmics suggests that they do not conform to the normosmic archetype. Future studies assessing the relationship between odours in the archetype should improve the selection of odours to be included in tests of odour discrimination.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10694,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical otolaryngology and allied sciences\",\"volume\":\"24 3\",\"pages\":\"184-9\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1999-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1046/j.1365-2273.1999.00242.x\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical otolaryngology and allied sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2273.1999.00242.x\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical otolaryngology and allied sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2273.1999.00242.x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

摘要

对气味质量的正常感知知之甚少,因此制定有意义的嗅觉测试是困难的。虽然气味辨别和气味检测阈值的测试有助于量化嗅觉功能障碍,但对特定气味的敏感性与特定形式的嗅觉功能障碍之间还没有预测关系。使用11种常见的气味,20名normmosmics对气味对进行相似性评级。多维尺度,一种标准的行为科学数据分析方法,被用来探索基于它们成对相似度评级的气味之间的感知关系。为每个个体创建气味地图,作为一个共同或原型地图,表明个体气味感知的共性,远远大于单独的机会(P < 10(-6))。对四种假说的初步分析表明,它们不符合常态原型。评估原型中气味之间关系的未来研究应该改进气味识别测试中所包含的气味的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The smell map: is there a commonality of odour perception?

The normal perception of odour quality is poorly understood, so formulating meaningful tests of olfaction is difficult. While tests of odour discrimination and odour detection threshold have helped quantify olfactory dysfunction, there are not yet predictive relationships between sensitivity to particular odours and particular forms of olfactory dysfunction. Using 11 commonly encountered odours, 20 normosmics performed similarity ratings of odour pairs. Multidimensional scaling, a standard behavioural sciences data analysis method, was used to explore the perceptual relationships between the odours based on their pair-wise similarity ratings. Smell maps were created for each individual as was a common or archetypal map which indicated a commonality in individuals' odour perception, far greater than chance alone (P < 10(-6)). A preliminary analysis of four hyposmics suggests that they do not conform to the normosmic archetype. Future studies assessing the relationship between odours in the archetype should improve the selection of odours to be included in tests of odour discrimination.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信