Cited by 72Odor and Emission Control TechnologiesOlfactory and Sensory Function StudiesSensory Analysis and Statistical Methods

Hedonics of odors and odor descriptors

Open access
Dravnieks, Andrew, Masurat, Thomas, Lamm, Richard A.·1984·Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association

Abstract

The hedonic tone (pleasantness-unpleasantness) of an air pollution odor depends on its character and influences how annoying the odor may be. In the context of air pollution, both unpleasant and pleasant odors may become objectionable, while this is less likely for hedonically neutral odors. A profile of an odor consists of a list of odor descriptors and ratings of the applicabilities of each of the descriptors to the odor being characterized. The working hypothesis was that each of the descriptors can be assigned its own hedonic connotation (tone) from very pleasant, through neutral, to the very unpleasant. The hedonic tones of the descriptors could then be combined with the descriptor applicability percentages over the entire profile, producing a profile-derived hedonic index. The data that were used were profiles of odors and the hedonic ratings of the same odors made directly upon smelling these odors, obtained independently of the study.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/00022470.1984.10465810

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Estimated hedonic values of odor descriptors reported in the survey were significantly higher than those of descriptors not reported, supporting odor-memory congruency.

    “We observed that the estimated hedonic values of the descriptors identified in our survey were significantly higher than those of the descriptors not reported (one-tailed t test, t(98.9) = 2.01, p = 0.024, d = 0.35; Fig 1D; S1 Data).”

    From Positive early-life olfactory memory is rooted in the olfactory bulb and triggers large-scale changes beyond the olfactory system (2026) · cites this paper as [32]

    The Hedonic Tones of Descriptors and APCA NOTE-BOOK sections report hedonic ratings and mean values for odor descriptors, which could provide the values used in the citing authors’ analysis. They do not report the citing authors’ survey, a significant difference between reported and unreported descriptors, or an odor-memory congruency finding; the citing sentence presents that comparison as its own observation. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. D. H. Nochumson, M. D. Williams, "Copper Smelters and At- mospheric Visibility in the Southwest, Seasonal Analysis," in Proceedings of the 76th Annual Meeting, Air Pollution Control Association, Pittsburgh, PA, 1983.
  2. D. H. Nochumson, "Models for the Long Distance Transport of Atmospheric Sulfur Oxides," Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard Uni- versity, Cambridge, MA, January 1978 (Garland Publishing, Inc., New York, 1979).
  3. D. H. Nochumson, "Regional Air Quality in the Four Corners Study Region: Modeling Approach," in Proceedings of the Third Joint Conference on Applications of Air Pollution Meteorology, San Antonio, TX, January 1982.
  4. W. E. K. Middleton, Vision Through the Atmosphere, University of Toronto Press, Toronto, 1952.
  5. D. H. Nochumson, M. Wecksung, F. Gurule, "Potential Future Impacts on Visual Air Quality for Class I Areas," in Proceedings of the National Conference on Applied Techniques for Analysis and Management of the Visual Resource, Incline Village, NV, April 1979.
  6. Odors from Stationary and Mobile Sources, National Academy of Sciences, 1979, pp. 373 and 451-452.
  7. M. H. Woskow, "Multidimensional Scaling of Odors," Ph.D. thesis, University of California, 1964; University Microfilms, Inc. No. 64-6198, Ann Arbor, MI, 1966.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dravnieks, A., Masurat, T., & Lamm, R. A.
Venue
Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association
Published
1984-07
Volume
34
Issue
7
Pages
752-755
ISSN
0002-2470 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2093136582
Cited by
72
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Chemical Engineering › Process Chemistry and Technology › Odor and Emission Control Technologies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Olfactory and Sensory Function Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Sensory Analysis and Statistical Methods
Keywords
odor descriptors, odor annoyance, odor profile, odor pleasantness, odor characterization

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