ArticleFrontiers in psychology2021
Crossmodal Interactions Between Olfaction and Touch Affecting Well-Being and Perception of Cosmetic Creams.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Neurophysiological approaches to exploring emotional responses to cosmetics: a systematic review of the literature.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2024Pooled it
- Cosmetic after-feel modulates brain activity in sensory and reward networks: an fMRI study.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
- Emojis in Marketing and Advertising: A Systematic Literature Review.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Reshaping the experience of topical skincare products: A multisensory approach for promoting loyalty and adherence.Heliyon · 2025Review
- What emotions are elicited by smells in Japanese people? Emotional measurement using a universal scale in Japanese.PloS one · 2025Article
- Applying cosmetic oil with added aromatic compounds improves tactile sensitivity and skin properties.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- A three-factor benefits framework for understanding consumer preference for scented household products: psychological interactions and implications for future development.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the present series of studies, we investigated crossmodal perception of odor and texture. In four studies, participants tried two textures of face creams, one high viscosity (HV) and one low viscosity (LV), each with one of three levels of added odor (standard level, half of standard, or base [no added odor]), and then reported their levels of well-being. They also reported their perceptions of the face creams, including liking (global liking of the product, liking of its texture) and "objective" evaluations on just about right (JAR) scales (texture and visual appearance evaluations). In Study 1, women in France tried the creams on their hands, as they would when testing them in a store, and in Study 2, a second group of French women tried the creams on their faces, as they would at home. In Studies 3 and 4, these same two procedures were repeated in China. Results showed that both odor and texture had effects on well-being, liking, and JAR ratings, including interaction effects. Though effects varied by country and context (hand or face), the addition of odor to the creams generally increased reports of well-being, global liking and texture liking, in some cases affecting the "objective" evaluations of texture. This is one of the first investigations of crossmodal olfactory and tactile perception's impacts on well-being, and it reinforces previous literature showing the importance of olfaction on well-being.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.