Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33613954›Full record

Articlei-Perception

Scent in the Context of Live Performance.

Charles Spence

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in i-Perception. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Charles SpenceCrossmodal Research Laboratory, Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2111-072X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ambient smell has long been a feature of live performance, no matter whether its presence was intentional or not. While, once upon a time, the incidental presence of malodour was an inevitable feature of proceedings, the deliberate use of scent can actually be traced all the way back to the earliest rituals. This review attempts to trace the long history of scent's use in processions, pageants, and, most important, performance. From Shakespeare's time onward, scent has been used as an atmospheric/ambient cue. It has been used to create a certain mood, to trigger memories/nostalgia, and, on occasion, it has also served a narrative role. While the use of scent has often been merely illustrative (or pleonastic), there have been numerous occasions where olfactory stimulation has taken on a far more important evaluative role, critical or otherwise. Most often, this has been in the theatre, but also on occasion in the context of the opera, musical, ballet, and comedy too. In recent years, there has been a resurgence of interest in scenting live performance/entertainment, especially in the context of highly immersive and experiential multisensory events. While high-tech solutions to scent delivery have been a prominent feature of its use in the cinema, low-tech solutions have more often been incorporated in the live-performance setting. This and a number of other important differences between scent's use in the theatrical versus cinematic setting are highlighted.

Indexed as

live performancemalodourscenttheatre

Identifiers

PMID33613954
PMCPMC7871084

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.