Odour-modulation of taste ratings by chefs
Abstract
Odour-modulation of taste perception refers to the finding that adding a tasteless odorant can change a taste’s attributes. An extensively studied example is sweetness enhancement, whereby adding an odorant such as caramel makes a sucrose solution taste sweeter. Experiment 1 tested whether chefs would display odour-modulation to the same extent as controls. When asked to rate sucrose and citric acid solutions that contained an odorant, caramel or citral, or no odorant, participants showed sweetness enhancement and sourness suppression by caramel. Citral produced sourness enhancement of sucrose – a new finding – but, paradoxically, when added to citric acid it decreased sourness ratings and increased sweetness ratings. The only difference detected between chefs and controls was in the way that citral affected sourness ratings of sucrose solutions. Experiment 2 tested participants without professional culinary experience on their food/drink associations to caramel and citral. The results showed that, while the associations evoked by caramel were almost always sweet foods or drinks, associations to citral varied widely in terms of sweetness and sourness. The latter suggests an explanation for the mixed pattern of results obtained for citral in Experiment 1.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Aromas such as caramel, vanilla, and berry flavours increase the perception of sweetness, at least in Western participants.
“Aromas such as caramel, vanilla, and berry flavours have been found to increase the perception of sweetness, at least in Western participants (e.g., [2,44,45,93-100], see References [1,101] for reviews).”
From The Role of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Sensory Factors in Sweetness Perception of Food and Beverages: A Review (2019) · cites this paper as [93]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 26 · Cited by 55
- Authors
- Boakes, R. A., & Hemberger, H.
- Affiliations
- The University of Sydney (AU)
- National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Boakes, Robert A.
- ORCID
- Boakes, Robert A.
- Venue
- Food Quality and Preference
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2012-09
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 81-86
- ISSN
- 0950-3293 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2105894792
- Cited by
- 55
- References
- 26
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 1.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Food Quality and Preference (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Biochemical Analysis and Sensing Techniques
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Sensory Analysis and Statistical Methods
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Olfactory and Sensory Function Studies
- Keywords
- taste perception, chefs, sweetness enhancement, caramel, citral, sucrose, citric acid, aroma compounds
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review