Use of Sense of Smell in Determining Environmental Quality

  • Trygg Engen
Conference paper
Part of the Environmental Science Research book series (ESRH, volume 1)


The avoidance of harmful situations and agents often depends on man’s ability to assess odor characteristics. Although a few odors, for example, lemon, are considered pleasant and clean and are used for commercial purposes, odors are generally considered unhealthy annoyances to be removed from the air. This is in line with the view held by the World Health Organization’s definition of health26 as “a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.” The present emphasis will be the subjective or mental experience of odor. No attempt will be made to describe the physical or chemical attributes of the sources of odors; neither will any space be devoted to the physiological or anatomical characteristics of the olfactory system.20


False Alarm Olfactory System Difference Threshold Correct Rejection Psychophysical Function 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Berglund, B., U. Berglund, G. Ekman, and T. Engen. Individual psychophysical functions for 28 odorants, Perception and Psychophysics, 9(3B): 379–384 (1971).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Berglund, B., U. Berglund, T. Engen, and T. Lindvall. The effect of adaptation on odor detection, Perception and Psychophysics, 9(5): 435–438 (1971).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cain, W. S. Odor intensity: Differences in the exponent of the psychophysical function, Perception and Psychophysics, 6A: 349–354 (1969).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cain, W. S., and T. Engen. Olfactory adaptation and the scaling of odor intensity, pp. 127–141 in Olfaction and Taste III, C. Pfaffmann (ed.), Rockefeller University Press, New York, 1969.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cederlöf, R., L. Friberg, E. Jonsson, L. Kaij, and T. Lindvall. Studies of annoyance connected with offensive smell from sulfate cellulose factory, Nordisk Hygienisk Tidskrift, 45: 39–48 (1964).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Corbit, T. E., and T. Engen. Facilitation of olfactory detection, Perception and Psychophysics, 10: 433–436 (1971).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ekman, G., B. Berglund, U. Berglund, and T. Lindvall. Perceived intensity of odor as a function of time of adaptation, Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 8: 177–186 (1967).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Engen, T. Effect of practice and instruction on olfactory threshold, Perceptual and Motor Skills, 10: 195–198 (1960).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Engen, T. Man’s ability to perceive odors, pp. 361–384 in Advances in Chemoreception, J. W. Johnston, Jr., D. G. Moulton, and A. Turk (eds.), Vol. 1. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York, 1970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Engen, T. Olfactory psychophysics, pp. 216–244 in Handbook of Sensory Physiology, L. M. Bedler (ed.)., Vol 14. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1971.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Engen, T. Method and theory in the study of odor preferences, in Advances in Chemoreception, Vol. II. Human Responses to Environmental Odors, J. W. Johnston, Jr., D. G. Moulton, and A. Turk (eds.). Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York in press.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Engen, T., and D. H. McBurney. Magnitude and category scales of the pleasantness of odors, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68: 435–440 (1964).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Engen, T., and L. Moskowitz. The influence of the trigeminal stimulation on children’s judgments of odor. Injury Control Research Laboratory, Publication No. ICRL-RR-71–4. U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, in press.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fechner, G. T. Elemente der Psychophysik. Breitkopf and Harterl, Leipzig, 1860; English translation of Vol. 1 by H. E. Adler (D. H. Howe and E. G. Boring, eds.). Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1966.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Foster, D. Odors in series and parallel. Proceedings of Scientific Section, The Toilet Goods Association, 39: 1–6 (1963).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Green, D. M., and J. A. Swets. Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1966.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Harper, R., E. C. Bate-Smith, and D. G. Land. Odour Description and Odour Classification. J & A Churchill Ltd., London, 1968.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jones, F. N. Information content of olfactory quality, in Theories of Odors and Odor Measurement, N. Tanyolac (ed.). Robert College Research Center, Bebek, Turkey. Bantam Books, New York, 1968.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Moncrieff, R. W. Odour Preferences. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1966.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mozell, M. M. The chemical senses, II. Olfaction, pp. 193–222 in Woodworth & Schlosberg’s Experimental Psychology (3rd Ed.), J. W. Kling and L. A. Riggs (eds.). Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., New York, 1971.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sandusky, A., and A. Porducci. Pleasantness of odors as a function of the immediate stimulus context, Psychonomic Science, 3: 321–322 (1965).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Semb, G. The detectability of the odor of butanol, Perception and Psychophysics, 4: 335–340 (1968).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Stevens, S. S. On the psychophysical law, Psychological Review, 64: 153–181 (1957).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Stone, H., and J. J. Bosley. Olfactory discrimination and Weber’s law, Perceptual and Motor Skills, 20: 657–665 (1965).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Swets, J. A. Is there a sensory threshold?, Science, 134: 168–177 (1961).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    World Health Organization, p. 1080 in Yearbook of International Organizations. Union of International Associations, Brussels, 1968–69.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zwaardemaker, H. L’Odorat. Librairie Octave Doin, Paris, 1925.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zwaardemaker, H. An intellectual history of a physiologist with psychological aspirations, pp. 491–516 in A History of Psychology in Autobiography, C. Murchison (ed.). Clark University Press, Worcester, Mass., 1930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1972

Authors and Affiliations

  • Trygg Engen
    • 1
  1. 1.Walter S. Hunter Laboratory of PsychologyBrown UniversityProvidenceUSA

Personalised recommendations