Odors Are More Sensitive to Evaluative Conditioning than Sounds
- 108 Downloads
Stimuli of different modalities can acquire an affective value via evaluative conditioning. This process describes a shift in perceived affective quality of a neutral stimulus towards the hedonics of an associated affective stimulus. The olfactory system, as compared to other modalities, might be especially prone to attributing affective value to an odor due to its close neuroanatomical connectivity with brain regions processing emotion.
In the present study, we investigated whether perceived affective quality of odors is more sensitive to evaluative conditioning than that of sounds. For this purpose, 48 healthy participants (50% male) rated unfamiliar and emotionally neutral odors and sounds before and after pairing with either aversive or neutral pictures.
Our results show a stronger decrease in odor valence and stronger increases in arousal and dominance ratings for odors paired with aversive compared to neutral pictures. For sounds, ratings of valence, arousal, and dominance were independent of picture emotionality.
Odors appear to be more sensitive to evaluative conditioning than sounds. Our findings extend existing modality comparisons mainly focusing on characteristics of odor-associated memories by specifically looking at affective quality of the odor itself in associative learning.
Perceived affective quality of a stimulus goes along with the tendency to approach or avoid this stimulus. For odors, it is especially prone to change into an aversive direction. This may have implications for food and fragrance choices but also for the understanding of clinical conditions in which odors become highly aversive, such as post-traumatic stress disorder.
KeywordsEvaluative conditioning Associative learning Affective quality Odor Sound Modality comparison
This work was supported by the German Research foundation (DFG) project B4 of the Collaborative Research Center (SFB) 874 “Integration and Representation of Sensory processes.”
We would like to thank Claire Sulmont-Rossé for providing us with the odorant ratings obtained in her 2012 study and the authors of the Nencki Affective Picture System for making the pictures available to us. We gratefully acknowledge the help of Jonas Chan in proofreading and Dennis Pomrehn, Lea-Marie Knöppel, Viviane Gallus, and Melanie Stockmann in data acquisition.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The study was approved by the local ethics committee of the Faculty of Psychology.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Bliss-Moreau E, Owren MJ, Barrett LF (2010) I like the sound of your voice: Affective learning about vocal signals. J Exp Soc Psychol 46:557–563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.12.017
- Bradley MM, Lang PJ (2007) The International Affective Digitized Sounds (2nd Edition; IADS-2): Affective ratings of sounds and instruction manual. University of Florida, GainesvilleGoogle Scholar
- Buck LB (2000) Smell and taste: the chemical senses. In: Kandel ER, Schwartz JR, Jessell TM (eds) Principles of neural science. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 625–652Google Scholar
- Coppens E, Vansteenwegen D, Baeyens F, Vandenbulcke M, van Paesschen W, Eelen P (2006) Evaluative conditioning is intact after unilateral resection of the anterior temporal lobe in humans. Neuropsychologia 44:840–843. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.NEUROPSYCHOLOGIA.2005.06.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Gottfried JA, O'Doherty J, Dolan RJ (2002) Appetitive and aversive olfactory learning in humans studied using event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging. J Neurosci 22:10829–10837. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.22-24-10829.2002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Herz RS (1998) Are odors the best cues to memory? A cross-modal comparison of associative memory stimuli. Ann N Y Acad Sci 855:670–674. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1998.tb10643.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Herz RS, Beland SL, Hellerstein M (2004a) Changing odor hedonic perception through emotional associations in humansGoogle Scholar
- Herz RS, Eliassen J, Beland S, Souza T (2004b) Neuroimaging evidence for the emotional potency of odor-evoked memory. Neuropsychologia 42:371–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2003.08.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hummel T, Rosenheim K, Konnerth C-G, Kobal G (2001) Screening of olfactory function with a four-minute odor identification test: reliability, normative data, and investigations in patients with olfactory loss. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 110:976–981. https://doi.org/10.1177/000348940111001015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Osgood CE, suci GJ, Tannenbaum PH (1957) The measurement of meaning. In: Illinois Press. England, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Pellegrino R, Sinding C, De Wijk RA, Hummel T (2017) Habituation and adaptation to odors in humans. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2017.04.006
- Royet J, Zald D, Costes N et al (2000) Emotional responses to pleasant and unpleasant olfactory, visual, and auditory stimuli: a positron emission tomography study. 20:7752–7759Google Scholar
- Seitz H, Bühringer G (2010) Empfehlungen des wissenschaftlichen Kuratoriums der DHS zu Grenzwerten für den Konsum alkoholischer GetränkeGoogle Scholar
- van den Bosch I, van Delft JM, de Wijk RA, de Graaf C, Boesveldt S (2015) Learning to (dis)like: the effect of evaluative conditioning with tastes and faces on odor valence assessed by implicit and explicit measurements. Physiol Behav 151:478–484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2015.08.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar