Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40062486›Full record

SynthesisChemical senses2025

A cognitive nose? Evaluating working memory benchmarks in the olfactory domain.

Theresa L White, Nira Cedres, Jonas K Olofsson

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Chemical senses, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Theresa L WhiteDepartment of Psychology, Le Moyne College, Syracuse, NY, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-5060-0894
Nira CedresFaculty of Health Sciences, University Fernando Pessoa Canarias, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-1850-6451
Jonas K OlofssonDepartment of Psychology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-0856-0569

Funding

Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation KAW 2016:0229Swedish Research Council 2020-00266
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Working memory (WM) processes are assumed to operate on a wide variety of sensory materials, yet WM research rarely extends beyond sight and hearing. In this systematic review, we integrate research from studies that address WM in olfaction, the sense of smell, spanning the last 50 yr (N = 44). We assessed whether 21 proposed "benchmarks" for WM generalize to olfactory WM. Seven benchmarks generalized to olfaction, whereas 2 failed to generalize. Evidence was insufficient to address the remaining 12 benchmarks (4 had mixed support and 8 were yet unaddressed). We conclude that the available evidence indicates that the sense of smell has a short-term memory system that mostly resembles WM processes in "higher" senses, although there are exceptions related to how olfactory WM performance is associated with other functions. We argue that researchers studying WM should explicitly consider evidence outside of the audio-visual senses when establishing theoretical frameworks. Further, we point out avenues for future research that may help close the remaining gaps in knowledge on this neglected topic.

Indexed as

CognitionMemory, Short-TermSmellHumansolfactionperceptionsense of smellshort-term memorysmell

Identifiers

PMID40062486
PMCPMC11985691

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.