Advertisement

Virtual Reality

, Volume 21, Issue 2, pp 59–74 | Cite as

Exposure to an unpleasant odour increases the sense of Presence in virtual reality

  • Oliver BausEmail author
  • Stéphane Bouchard
Original Article

Abstract

While olfactory cues affect the everyday human experience in the physical world, few studies have empirically examined the effect they could have on the human experience in virtual reality (VR). This project’s goal was to determine whether the exposure to olfactory stimuli would affect the senses of Presence (primary measure), Reality and Realism (exploratory measures) in VR. In a virtual kitchen devoid of obvious visual cues linking the visual scene to an odour, three groups of 20 randomly assigned participants (12 females and 8 males per group), unaware of the potential exposure to olfactory stimuli, were exposed to either ambient air, a pleasant odour, or an unpleasant odour. The results reveal that the unpleasant odour had a statistically significant effect on the sense of Presence (as measured by repeated brief measures of Presence and the Independent Television Commission Sense of Presence Inventory), but the pleasant one did not. The lower perceived intensity of the pleasant odour may have contributed to its lower detection rate which, in turn, may have contributed to the pleasant odour’s lack of effect on the sense of Presence. Neither of the olfactory stimuli had an effect on either the sense of Reality or the sense of Realism.

Keywords

Virtual reality Presence Olfaction Odours Reality Realism 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) scholarship awarded to the first author, as well as by grants from the NSERC, the Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI) and the Canada Research Chairs awarded to the second author.

References

  1. Alaoui-Ismaïli O, Vernet-Maury E, Dittmar A, Delhomme G, Chanel J (1997) Odor hedonics: connection with emotional response estimated by autonomic parameters. Chem Senses 22:237–248. doi: 10.1093/chemse/22.3.237 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aymerich-Franch L (2010) Presence and emotions in playing a group game in a virtual environment: the influence of body participation. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 13(6):649–654. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2009.0412 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bangay S, Preston L (1998) An investigation into factors influencing immersion in interactive virtual reality environments. In: Riva G, Wiederhold BK, Molinari E (eds) Virtual environments in clinical psychology and neuroscience: methods and techniques in advanced patient-therapist interaction, vol 58. IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp 43–51Google Scholar
  4. Baños RM, Botella C, Garcia-Palacios A, Villa H, Perpiña C, Alcañiz M (2000) Presence and reality judgment in virtual environments: a unitary construct? Cyberpsychol Behav 3(3):327–335. doi: 10.1089/10949310050078760 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barfield W, Danas E (1996) Comments on the use of olfactory displays for virtual environments. Presence Teleoper Virtual Environ 5(1):109–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baus O, Bouchard S (2010) The sense of olfaction: its characteristics and its possible applications in virtual environments. J CyberTherapy Rehabil 3(1):31–50Google Scholar
  7. Baus O, Bouchard S (2014) Moving from virtual reality exposure-based therapy to augmented reality exposure-based therapy: a review. Front Hum Neurosci 8:112. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00112 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bouchard S, Robillard G, St-Jacques J, Dumoulin S, Patry MJ, Renaud P (2004) Reliability and validity of a single-item measure of presence in VR. IEEE international workshop on haptic virtual environments and their applications 3(October): 59–31Google Scholar
  9. Bouchard S, St-Jacques J, Robillard G, Renaud P (2008) Anxiety increases the sense of presence in virtual reality. Presence Teleoper Virtual Environ 4(1):376–391. doi: 10.1162/pres.17.4.376 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cater JP (1992) The nose have it! Presence Teleoper Virtual Environ 1(4):493–494Google Scholar
  11. Chen Y (2006) Olfactory display: development and application in virtual reality therapy. In: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on artificial reality and telexistence-Workshops (ICAT’06). http://www.computer.org/csdl/proceedings/icat/2006/2754/00/27540580-abs.html. Retrieved from 14 June 2012
  12. Delplanque S, Grandjean D, Chrea C, Aymard L, Cayeux I, Le Calve B, Velazco MI, Scherer KR, Sander D (2008) Emotional processing of odors: evidence for a nonlinear relation between pleasantness and familiarity evaluations. Chem Senses 33(5):469–479. doi: 10.1093/chemse/bjn014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Demattè ML, Sanabria D, Spence C (2009) Olfactory identification: when vision matters? Chem Senses 34(2):103–109. doi: 10.1093/chemse/bjn055 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dinh HQ, Walker N, Song C, Kobayashi A, Hodges LF (1999) Evaluating the importance of multi-sensory input on memory and the sense of presence in virtual environments. Proc IEEE Virtual Real 1999:222–228. doi: 10.1109/VR.1999.756955 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Doop M, Mohr C, Folley B, Brewer WJ, Park S (2006) Olfaction and memory. In: Brewer WJ, Castle D, Pantelis C (eds) Olfaction and the brain. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  16. Ferrier L, Streff A, Martin S, Brouillet D, Barkat-Defradas M, Jiménez M (2009) Influence des stimuli olfactifs dans une tâche d’évaluation hédonique de couleurs : les yeux voient ce que le nez sent. L’Année Psychologique 109(3):361–381. doi: 10.4074/S0003503309003017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Freeman J, Avons SE, Meddis R, Pearson D, IJsselsteijn W (2000) Using behavioral realism to estimate presence: a study of the utility of postural responses to motion stimuli. Presence 9(2):149–164. doi: 10.1162/105474600566691 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Heeter C (1992) Being there: the subjective experience of presence. Presence 1(2):262–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hendrix C, Barfield W (1996) Presence within virtual environments as a function of visual display parameters. Presence 4(3):274–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hirsch AR (1995) Effects of ambient odors on slot-machine usage in a Las Vegas casino. Psychol Mark 12:585–594. doi: 10.1002/mar.4220120703 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. IJsselsteijn W, Harper B (2001) Virtually there: a vision on presence research. EC Public deliverable, Presence Research Working Group. ftp://cordis.europa.eu/pub/ist/docs/fet/fetpr-4.pdf. Retrieved from 13 June 2012
  22. Jackman AH, Doty RL (2009) Utility of a three-item smell identification test in detecting olfactory dysfunction. Laryngoscope 115(12):2209–2212. doi: 10.1097/01.mlg.0000183194.17484.bb CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jacob TJC, Wang L (2006) A new method for measuring reaction times for odour detection at iso-intensity: comparison between an unpleasant and pleasant odour. Physiol Behav 87:500–505. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2005.11.018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jamieson GA (2005) The modified Tellegen absorption scale: a clearer window on the structure and meaning of absorption. Aust J Clin Exp Hypn 33(2):119–139Google Scholar
  25. Jamieson GA, Loi N (2013) An empirical test of Tellegen’s model of absorption: instrumental and experiential sets and the phenomenology of trance induction. http://une-au.academia.edu/GrahamJamieson/Papers. Retrieved from 10 Dec 2015
  26. Jones L, Bowers CA, Washburn D, Cortes A, Satya RV (2004) The effect of olfaction on immersion into virtual environments. In: Vincenzi DA, Mouloua M, Hancock PA (eds) Human performance, situation awareness and automation: issues and considerations for the 21st century. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp 282–285. http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA426023#page=292. Retrieved from 14 June 2012
  27. Kalawsky RS (2000) The validity of presence as a reliable human performance metric in immersive environments. Paper presented at Presence 2000: International Workshop on Presence, Delft, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  28. Kennedy RS, Lane NE, Berbaum KS, Lilienthal MG (1993) Simulator sickness questionnaire: an enhanced method for quantifying simulator sickness. Int J Aviat Psychol 3(3):203–220. doi: 10.1207/s15327108ijap0303_3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kennedy RS, Stanney KM, Dunlap WP (2000) Duration and exposure to virtual environments: sickness curves during and across sessions. Presence 9(5):466–475. doi: 10.1162/105474600566952 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kirk-Smith MD, Booth DA (1990) The effect of five odorants on mood and the judgments of others. In: Macdonald DW, Müller-Schwarze D, Natynczuk S (eds) Chemical signals in vertebrates 5. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 48–54Google Scholar
  31. Köster EP, Degel J, Piper D (2002) Proactive and retroactive interference in implicit odor memory. Chem Senses 27:191–207. doi: 10.1093/chemse/27.3.191 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Laurel B (1993) Computers as theatre. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., BostonGoogle Scholar
  33. Lauria R (1997) Virtual reality: an empirical-metaphysical testbed. J Comput Mediat Commun 3(2). http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol3/issue2/lauria.html. Retrieved from 14 June 2012
  34. Lee KM (2004) Presence, explicated. Commun Theory 14:27–50. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2885.2004.tb00302.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lessiter J, Freeman J, Keogh E, Davidoff J (2001) A cross-media presence questionnaire: the ITC-sense of presence inventory. Presence Teleoper Virtual Environ 10:282–297. doi: 10.1162/105474601300343612 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Li W, Moallem I, Paller KA, Gottfried JA (2007) Subliminal smells can guise social preferences. Psychol Sci 18(12):1044–1049. doi: 10.111/j.1467-9280.2007.02023.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lombard M, Ditton TB (1997) At the heart of it all: the concept of presence. J Comput Mediat Commun 3(2). http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol3/issue2/lombard.html. Retrieved from 13 June 2012
  38. Mantovani F, Castelnuovo G (2003) The sense of presence in virtual training: enhancing skills acquisition and transfer of knowledge through learning experience in virtual environments. In: Davide F, Riva G, IJsselsteijn WA (eds) Being there: concepts, effects and measurement of user presence in synthetic environments. Ios Press, Amsterdam, pp 167–182Google Scholar
  39. Minsky M (1980) Telepresence. Omni 2(9):45–51. doi: 10.1145/566654.566630 Google Scholar
  40. Nicovich SG, Boller GW, Cornwell TB (2005) Experienced presence within computer medicated communications: initial explorations on the effects of gender with respect to empathy and immersion. J Comput Mediat Commun 10(6). http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue2/nicovich.html. Retrieved from 14 June 2012
  41. Pratt DR, Zyda M, Kelleher K (1995) Virtual reality: in the mind of the beholder. IEEE Comput 28(7):17–19. doi: 10.1109/MC.1995.10085 Google Scholar
  42. Ratey JJ (2001) A user’s guide to the brain. Pantheon Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  43. Rattaz C, Goubet N, Bullinger A (2001) The calming effect of a familiar odor following a painful experience. Poster presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Minneapolis, MNGoogle Scholar
  44. Sacau A, Laarni J, Hartmann T (2008) Influence of individual factors on presence. Comput Hum Behav 24:2255–2273. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2007.11.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sanchez-Vives MV, Slater M (2005) From presence to consciousness through virtual reality. Nat Rev Neurosci 6(4):332–339. doi: 10.1038/nrn1651 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sas C (2004) Individual differences in virtual environments. In Bubak M, van Albada GD, Sloot PMA, Dongarra J (eds) Lecture notes in computer science: vol. 3038. Computational science—ICCS 2004. Berlin, Springer, Germany, pp 1017–1024. doi: 10.1007/b97989
  47. Schank RC (1997) Virtual learning: a revolutionary approach to building a highly skilled workforce. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  48. Schiffman SS (1974) Psychochemical correlates of olfactory quality. Science 185(146):112–117. doi: 10.1126/science.185.4146.112 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Schubert T, Friedmann F, Regenbrecht H (2001) The experience of presence: factor analytic insights. Presence Teleoper Virtual Environ 10(3):266–281. doi: 10.1162/105474601300343603 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Schuemie MJ (2003) Human–computer interaction and presence in virtual reality exposure therapy. Doctoral dissertation, Technische Universiteit Delft, Holland. http://graphics.tudelft.nl/~vrphobia/dissertation.pdf. Retrieved from 13 June 2012
  51. Seigneuric A, Durand K, Jiang T, Baudouin J-Y, Schaal B (2010) The nose tells it to the eyes: crossmodal associations between olfaction and vision. Perception 39(11):1541–1554. doi: 10.1068/p6740 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sheridan TB (1992) Musings on telepresence and virtual presence. Presence Teleoper Virtual Environ 1(1):120–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Siegel S (1999) Multiple chemical sensitivity as a conditional response. Toxicol Ind Health 15:323–330. doi: 10.1177/074823379901500306 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Slater M (2003) A note on presence terminology, Presence connect, 3. http://people.cs.uct.ac.za/~dnunez/reading/papers/presenceterminology.pdf. Retrieved from 13 June 2012
  55. Slater M (2004) How colorful was your day? Why questionnaires cannot assess presence in virtual environments. Presence Teleoper Virtual Environ 13(4):484–493. doi: 10.1162/1054746041944849 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Slater M, Usoh M (1993) Representations systems, perceptual position, and presence in immersive virtual environments. Presence Teleoper Virtual Environ 2(3):221–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Slater M, Wilbur S (1995) Through the looking glass world of presence: a framework for immersive virtual environments. In: Slater M (ed) FIVE’95 framework for immersive virtual environments. QMW University, LondonGoogle Scholar
  58. Slater M, Lotto B, Arnold MM, Sanchez-Vives MV (2009) How we experience immersive virtual environments: the concept of presence and its measurement. Anuario de Psicología 40(2):193–210Google Scholar
  59. Steuer J (1995) Defining virtual reality: dimensions determining telepresence. In: Biocca F, Levy MR (eds) Communication in the age of virtual reality. L.E.A, Englewood, pp 33–56Google Scholar
  60. Tellegen A, Atkinson G (1974) Openness to absorbing and self-altering experiences (‘absorption’), a trait related to hypnotic susceptibility. J Abnorm Psychol 83(3):268–277. doi: 10.1037/h0036681 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Thornson CA, Goldiez BF, Le H (2009) Predicting presence: constructing the tendency toward presence inventory. Int J Hum Comput Stud 67:62–78. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2008.08.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Van Schaik P, Turnbull T, van Wersch A, Drummond S (2004) Presence within a mixed reality environment. CyberPsychol Behav 7:540–552. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2004.7.540 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Washburn DA, Jones LM, Vijaya Satya R, Bowers CA, Cortes A (2003) Olfactory use in virtual environment training. Model Simul Mag 2(3):19–25Google Scholar
  64. Witmer BG, Singer MJ (1998) Measuring presence in virtual environments: a presence questionnaire. Presence 7(3):225–240. doi: 10.1162/105474698565686 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Zybura M, Eskeland GA (1999) Olfaction for virtual reality. Quarter Project, Industrial Engineering 543. University of Washington, Winter 1999. http://www.hitl.washington.edu/people/tfurness/courses/inde543/reports/3doc. Retrieved from 14 June 2012

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of OttawaOttawaCanada
  2. 2.Département de psychoéducation et de psychologieUniversité du Québec en OutaouaisGatineauCanada

Personalised recommendations