Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 235

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Odor Hedonics: Connection With Emotional Response Estimated by Autonomic Parameters

Alaoui-Ismaïli, O., Vernet-Maury, E., Dittmar, A., Delhomme, G., Chanel, J.·1997·Chemical Senses

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to analyse the relationship between self-report hedonic evaluations and the physiological expression of emotion in response to odorants. We try to solve the following questions: (1) Is it possible to find any experimental evidence that the sense of smell is linked with emotion? (2) What kind of odorants can be distinguished by autonomic analysis? (3) Is there a link between hedonics and autonomic information? The effects of odorants on the emotional process were estimated, in terms of autonomic nervous system (ANS) activity. Fifteen subjects inhaled five odorants as olfactory stimuli: lavender (LAV), ethyl acetoacetate (EAA), camphor (CAM), acetic acid (AA) and butyric acid (BA). After inhaling the odorant, subjects were requested to fill out an 11-point hedonic scale to rate its pleasantness versus unpleasantness. ANS parameters were as follows: two electrodermal responses, skin potential (SP) and resistance (SR); two thermovascular parameters, skin blood flow (SBF) and skin temperature (ST); and two cardiorespiratory parameters; instantaneous respiratory frequency (IRF) and instantaneous heart rate (IHR). Simultaneous recording of six parameters showed that specific autonomic patterns were associated with each odorant. An analysis of variance made it possible to differentiate among the five odorants. Two-by-two odorant comparisons for autonomic responses using Tukey's HSD multiple comparison test only permitted differentiation between pleasant odorants (LAV and EAA) and unpleasant (AA and BA) ones, but camphor was differentiated from both pleasant and unpleasant odorants. Each odorant elicited responses in the different parameters, yet subjects responded through their preferential channels; an average of two channels was used by each subject. These results when compared with those obtained with other senses (visual and auditory), did not evidence the postulated preferential link between olfaction and emotion. A strong link between hedonics and ANS response could be demonstrated when considering each subject and mainly through his/her preferential channel(s); conversely a weak correlation (SR duration excepted) was obtained between inter-subjects' hedonic evaluation. It seems that for a given population the autonomic response reflect the odor valence only through some parameters related to the main preferential channel(s) and thus the global autonomic pattern has to be considered.

Overview

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 · 10.1093/chemse/22.3.237

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 235

Metadata

Authors
Alaoui-Ismaïli, O., Vernet-Maury, E., Dittmar, A., Delhomme, G., & Chanel, J.
Venue
Chemical Senses
Published
1997
Volume
22
Issue
3
Pages
237-248
ISSN
  • 0379-864X (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-3553
OpenAlex
W2065441331
Cited by
235
References
2
FWCI
1.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Odor Hedonics: Connection With Emotional Response Estimated by Autonomic Parameters. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/chemse/22.3.237
The paper
Alaoui-Ismaïli, O., Vernet-Maury, E., Dittmar, A., Delhomme, G., & Chanel, J. (1997). Odor Hedonics: Connection With Emotional Response Estimated by Autonomic Parameters. Chemical Senses. https://doi.org/10.1093/chemse/22.3.237

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.