Odors and the remembrance of things past.

Schab, Frank R.

doi:10.1037/0278-7393.16.4.648

Cited by 120 publications

(125 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

105

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the olfactory domain, several studies have been carried out in order to investigate the encoding of odors in memory structures (Engen & Ross, 1973;Eskenazi, Cain, & Friend, 1986;Lawless, 1978;Lyman & McDaniel, 1986, 1990Murphy, Cain, Gilmore, & Skinner, 1991;Rabin, 1988;Rabin & Cain, 1984;Schab, 1990). Some of these studies have indicated that the familiarity of subjects with the tested odors seems to be a determinant variable in a type of experimental procedure developed in order to evaluate olfactory memory in terms of odor recognition (Cain, 1984;Rabin & Cain, 1984).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Odor discrimination and recognition memory as a

Jehl

Royet

Holley

1995

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The role of olfactory familiarization in short-term recognition of odors was investigated. Subjects were asked to make qualitative similarity judgments regarding either identical or dissimilar odors delivered in pairs. Except for control groups, subjects got familiarized with either the first (target) or the second (distractor) or both odors from a pair. Groups also differed according to the number offamiliarization sessions-one, two, or three-taking place prior to the discrimination judgments. There was no significant influence offamiliarization on correct recognition scores for pairs ofidentical odors. The most salient finding was a marked decrease of false alarms as a function of the number of familiarization sessions, which evidenced a positive effect of familiarization on discrimination for pairs of dissimilar odors. These judgments were not dependent on an intensity criterion. False alarms did not vary according to whether subjects had been familiarized with the target or the distractor or both odors from a pair. A positive correlation found between discrimination performances and the number of odors correctly remembered as being presented during familiarization suggested that familiarization resulted in long-term storing of memory traces for familiarized odors. Since familiarization was effective despite conditions unfavorable to the use of semantic encoding, the results argue in favor of a predominantly perceptual encoding of odors in the investigated task.In the olfactory domain, several studies have been carried out in order to investigate the encoding of odors in memory structures (Engen & Ross, 1973;Eskenazi, Cain, & Friend, 1986;Lawless, 1978;Lyman & McDaniel, 1986, 1990 Murphy, Cain, Gilmore, & Skinner, 1991;Rabin, 1988;Rabin & Cain, 1984;Schab, 1990). Some of these studies have indicated that the familiarity of subjects with the tested odors seems to be a determinant variable in a type of experimental procedure developed in order to evaluate olfactory memory in terms of odor recognition (Cain, 1984;Rabin & Cain, 1984). In principle, this procedure consists ofpresenting subjects with odors throughout the first part ofthe experiment, and then presenting the same subjects with the same odors, called targets, interspersed with other ones, called distractors, during the second part ofthe experiment. Hence, the task consists ofrecognizing, among the distractors, the target odors that have initiaIIy been delivered during the first part.The influence of familiarity is expressed by an increase in performance, which depends on subjects' experience with the tested odors before the experiment has even begun. To study the effect of subjects' prior experience with tested odors, Rabin (1988) examined the ability of subjects to discriminate odors-that is, to recognize the odors as being the same or different when they are presented in pairs after having been learned. Rabin observed Correspondence should be addressed to loP. Royet, Universite Claude-Bernard Lyon I, Laboratoire de Physiologie Neurosensorielle, 43, ...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Odor discrimination and recognition memory as a

Jehl

Royet

Holley

1995

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, Schab (1990) found that memory retrieval during a test can be aided if the same aroma is present in both the encoding and testing conditions. He also showed that learner performance can be further enhanced when the aroma is related, or congruent with the task at hand.…”

Section: Olfaction and Learner Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…These studies are Cann and Ross (1989); Herz (1997b); Schab (1990);. Herz and Engen (1996) also explained the cause of powerful emotions that are generated by olfactory experiences:…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tool use in open learning environments: In search of learner-related determinants

Clarebout

Elen

2008

Learning Environ Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionBeliefs about teaching and learning play an important role in transforming classrooms through the use of technology (Ertmer, 1999(Ertmer, , 2005. Additionally, attitudes toward technology can influence teachers' technology uses (Myers & Halpin, 2002;Yildirim, 2000). In order to prepare preservice teachers to use technology effectively, it is necessary to examine their beliefs about learning and teaching and their attitudes toward technology. Teacher educators must act as role models for preservice teachers and prepare them to use technology in their future professional practices. In this paper we report the results of a study that examined teacher educators' beliefs and technology uses in relation to preservice teachers' beliefs and technology attitudes. Ertmer (1999) described two types of barriers to technology integration: first-order barriers and secondorder barriers. First-order barriers are extrinsic to teachers and include lack of access to hardware and software, time, and necessary support. Second-order barriers are intrinsic to teachers and include teachers' belief systems about teaching and learning, as well as their familiar teaching practices, which can affect meaningful technology integration. Since second-order barriers are more ingrained and personal than first-order barriers, they may be harder to overcome. Current literature Niederhauser & Stoddart, 2001; Norm, Grabinger & Duffield, 1999) indicated that teachers who had more constructivist or student-centered beliefs tended to use technology and engage the students in more technology-supported student-centered learning activities, while those who had more traditional or teacher-centered beliefs tended to use less technology and had students use technology to reinforce skills.Some researchers (Cifuentes, 1997;Daniel, 1996; Friel & Carboni, 2000; Hart, 2002) suggested that participation in teacher education programs could influence preservice teachers' beliefs. In teacher education courses, teacher educators create learning environments through specific teaching strategies that allow preservice teachers to experience models of teaching and learning that they might use in their future teaching. Supporting the strategies that teacher educators employ are their underlying beliefs about teaching and learning (Pajares, 1992). Since we may be able to predict teacher educators' teaching practices from their beliefs, and their practices are likely to influence preservice teachers' beliefs, it may be possible to predict preservice teachers' beliefs from teacher educators' beliefs. Thus, one of the research interests in this study was the relationship between teacher educators' beliefs and preservice teachers' beliefs.Besides beliefs, attitudes are thought to serve as predictors of behaviors (Richardson, 2003). Applied to technology use, attitudes toward technology are expected to predict one's uses of technology. According to Aiken (1980), attitudes can be "learned directly by observing the activities of people who are perceived as signific...

show abstract

“…Recent research has suggested that olfactory stimuli modify memory, concentration, and attention (Baron, 1990;Ludvigson & Rottman, 1989;Schab 1990;Warm, Oember, & Parasuraman, 1991). However, there are many inconsistent results within the literature from this and other olfactory research.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A number ofresearchers have constructed dynamictype odor delivery systems that use aroma disc player diffusers (e.g., Ludvigson & Rottman, 1989;Schab, 1990). These diffusers vaporize specified amounts of olfactory stimuli over controlled time periods, typically into a testing room designed to minimize outside air disturbances.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A delivery system for olfactory stimuli

Palmer

Stough

Patterson

1999

Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes the design of a new method for controlling and adrninistering olfactory stimulinarnely,the hood system. The hood system involves a strearn ofvaporized odor (at known concentrations) mixed with odorless air and pumped (at a constant flow rate) into an oxygen therapy hood. It is designed to be used with odorants in solution, such as essential oils, as the olfactory stimulus. The use of oxygen therapy hoods allows for the precise control of a constant concentration of odorized air over time, while allowing subjects to breathe normally. The hood system provides a natural administration of olfactory stimuli and the exact determination of the stimulus concentration. The use of this system will allow experimental conditions to be completely defined and results and replication studies to be accurately interpreted. The hood system is portable, cost effective, and constructed from readily available components. It is proposed that the hood system could be adopted to suit a wide range of olfactory research, particularly that in which the effects of chronic exposure to olfactory stimuli on cognition are exarnined.

show abstract

Odors and the remembrance of things past.

Cited by 120 publications

References 36 publications

Odor discrimination and recognition memory as a

Odor discrimination and recognition memory as a

Tool use in open learning environments: In search of learner-related determinants

A delivery system for olfactory stimuli

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About