Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35618859›Full record

ArticlePsychopharmacology2022

Does the smell of alcohol make it harder to resist? The impact of olfactory cues on inhibitory control and attentional bias.

R L Monk, A Qureshi, G Wernham, D Heim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychopharmacology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Prediction of alcohol intake patterns with olfactory and gustatory brain connectivity networks.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2025
    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

4 authors.

R L MonkEdge Hill University, Saint Helens Road, Ormskirk, L39 4QP, UK. monkre@edgehill.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3554-9007
A QureshiEdge Hill University, Saint Helens Road, Ormskirk, L39 4QP, UK.
G WernhamEdge Hill University, Saint Helens Road, Ormskirk, L39 4QP, UK.
D HeimEdge Hill University, Saint Helens Road, Ormskirk, L39 4QP, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt is well known that, owing to associative processing, olfactory cues can impact memory, emotion and behaviour. Research also points to a link between the smells of particular substances and craving. Yet, to date, little research has investigated how smell may impact other cognitive processes that are known to drive alcohol consumption.

aimTo assess how exposure to alcohol-related (vodka) relative to neutral (citrus) olfactory cues impacts inhibitory control and attentional bias.

methodParticipants took part in a go/no-go (Study 1) and Stroop task (Study 2) while wearing masks that were pre-treated with vodka or citrus oil of equivalent intensity. STUDY 1

resultsResponse error rates were higher in participants in the alcohol-related (versus neutral) olfactory condition, with no interaction between olfactory and visual cue. STUDY 2

resultsResponses to alcohol-related versus neutral words were similar, while performance appeared significantly impaired among participants wearing alcohol (relative to citrus) infused masks. Conclusion The smell of alcohol may impair signal detection performance on the go/no-go and Stroop task. As inhibitory control and attentional processes are known to be associated with decisions to drink or exercise restraint, these results may have implications for our understanding of alcohol consumption and for tailoring interventions.

Indexed as

Attentional BiasCuesCravingEthanolHumansSmellEthanolAlcoholAttentionGo/no-goInhibitionOlfactionSmellStroop

Identifiers

PMID35618859
PMCPMC9205803

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.