Cited by 500Olfactory and Sensory Function StudiesAdvanced Chemical Sensor TechnologiesTactile and Sensory Interactions

Poor human olfaction is a 19th-century myth

Open access
McGann, John P.·2017·Science

Abstract

Humans have a good sense of smell: In comparison to that of other animals, the human sense of smell is widely considered to be weak and underdeveloped. This is, however, an unproven hypothesis. In a Review, McGann traces the origins of this false belief back to comparative 19th-century neuroanatomical studies by Broca. A modern look at the human olfactory bulb shows that it is rather large compared with those of rats and mice, which are presumed to possess a superior sense of smell. In fact, the number of olfactory bulb neurons across 24 mammalian species is comparatively similar, with humans in the middle of the pack, and our sense of smell is similar to that of other mammals. Science , this issue p. eaam7263

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 · 10.1126/science.aam7263

Cites

91 of 91 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [5]Schiller F Paul Broca University of California Press Berkeley, CA 1979
  2. [32]Walker JC Jennings RA The Human Sense of Smell Laing DG Doty RL Breipohl W Springer-Verlag Berlin 1991 261 282

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McGann, J. P.
Affiliations
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
Corresponding author
McGann, John P.
Venue
Science
Published
2017-05-12
Volume
356
Issue
6338
Pages
eaam7263
ISSN
  • 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-9203
OpenAlex
W2613914436
Cited by
500
References
91
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 43 · 2023: 45 · 2022: 81 · 2021: 71 · 2020: 96 · 2019: 58 · 2018: 52 · 2017: 9
FWCI
8.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (award308931, R01 MH101293)
  • National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (award308932, R01 DC013090)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Olfactory and Sensory Function Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Advanced Chemical Sensor Technologies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
Keywords
human olfaction, olfactory bulb, olfactory sensitivity, odor detection, odor discrimination, odor tracking, olfactory sensory neurons, olfactory evolution
MeSH terms
Animals, Humans, Mammals, Neurons, Olfactory Bulb, Smell, Olfactory Perception

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