Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 192

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Odor identification by males and females: predictions vs performance

Cain, William S.·1982·Chemical Senses

Abstract

More than 200 males and females estimated the identifiability of 80 common odorous objects (e.g., chocolate, beer, mustard, rubber). The two genders agreed rather closely in their estimates. The groups also agreed closely in their relative judgements of whether males or females could identify the objects better. Both groups anticipated that males would be superior for only a small number of substances, mainly substances that seem stereotypically ‘male’ (e.g., cigar butts, beer, machine oil). The groups anticipated female superiority for not only stereotypically ‘female’ substances (e.g., Ivory soap, Johnson's baby powder, nail polish remover), but also for virtually all foods, including foods presumably consumed equally by both sexes (e.g., potato chips, Juicy Fruit gum, grape drink). The results suggested the existence of a second stereotype, namely that females will be superior at identifying all substances not clearly in the male domain. An experiment that explored the performance of 46 males and females over five sessions revealed general female superiority. The superiority extended to odors considered ‘male’. Males seemed educable and could apparently overcome their disadvantage eventually with merely some help in the retrieval of odor names. Blockage of retrieval seems a strong limiting factor in odor identification for females as well as for males. Irrespective of gender, when persons have the veridical name of a well-known odor made available by one or another means, they exhibit considerable talent at identifying objects by smell.

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/7.2.129

Cites

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

Cited by

See all 192

Metadata

Authors
Cain, W. S.
Venue
Chemical Senses
Published
1982
Volume
7
Issue
2
Pages
129-142
ISSN
  • 0379-864X (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-3553
OpenAlex
W1964136277
Cited by
192
References
0
FWCI
1.05
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 identification by males and females: predictions vs performance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/chemse/7.2.129
The paper
Cain, W. S. (1982). Odor identification by males and females: predictions vs performance. Chemical Senses. https://doi.org/10.1093/chemse/7.2.129

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.