SynthesisChemical senses2025
A cognitive nose? Evaluating working memory benchmarks in the olfactory domain.
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.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
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
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.