Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35625030›Full record

ArticleBrain sciences2022

Reading the Mind through the Nose: Mentalizing Skills Predict Olfactory Performance.

Katrin T Lübke, Tobias C Blum, Bettina M Pause

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 35% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Past, Present, and Future of Human Chemical Communication Research.Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2025
    Review
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Katrin T LübkeDepartment of Experimental Psychology, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, D-40225 Düsseldorf, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3209-6284
Tobias C BlumDepartment of Experimental Psychology, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, D-40225 Düsseldorf, Germany.
Bettina M PauseDepartment of Experimental Psychology, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, D-40225 Düsseldorf, Germany.
Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf · DE

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft PA937/13-1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A growing body of literature suggests a close link between olfaction and social expertise. The current study examines whether mentalizing skills are related to olfactory discrimination performance. In order to assess their mentalizing ability, 21 women and 20 men completed the “Reading the Mind in the Eyes” test (RMET). Here, the participants have to infer other persons’ mental state from photographs of eye regions. Odor discrimination was assessed using the “Düsseldorf Odour Discrimination Test” (DODT). The DODT consists of 15 items, each containing mixtures of four monomolecular substances. Within each item, two bottles contain the same mixing ratio, while the third contains the reversed mixing ratio. The participants had to identify the deviating odor. Women’s expertise in mentalizing (RMET score) is strongly related to olfactory discrimination performance (DODT score): The better women are in mentalizing, the better their performance in olfactory discrimination (rho = 0.572, p = 0.042, Bonferroni-corrected). Men’s mentalizing capability was unrelated to olfactory discrimination (rho = −0.117, p > 0.999, Bonferroni-corrected). The current results suggest that the social skill of mentalizing might underly the link between olfaction and social integration, at least in women, and are discussed with regard to the social nature of human olfaction.

Indexed as

empathygendermentalizingolfactionolfactory discriminationsocial skillstheory of mind

Identifiers

PMID35625030
PMCPMC9139398
OpenAlexW4280617126

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.