ReviewFrontiers in psychology2023
Why human olfaction should not be modeled on theories and tasks of vision.
Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Olfactory spatial memory: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this paper we analyze some key concepts and problems in olfaction and argue that many concepts borrowed from vision are not helpful in elucidating the functions of human olfaction. This is illustrated with several examples. Olfaction is rarely in the focus of human attention. Olfaction is, compared to vision, a 'hidden sense', but still guides many important behaviors by way of unattended unconscious olfactory perception and implicit memory. Not all olfactory processing, however, is of an unconscious nature. Flavors, and the pleasures gained from them, are most often consciously perceived. These are experiences mostly determined by olfaction, taste, touch and chemesthesis. Our analyses lead us to conclude that olfaction should not be modeled on vision, neither conceptually nor with respect to the problems solved by the two senses. A critical examination of the ecological and physical constraints of olfaction and the other senses should be given priority. Such analyses will further our understanding of which problems are solved by the different senses and how they collaborate to guide us through the world.
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.