Sie sind auf Seite 1von 4

Neuroscience Letters 322 (2002) 7982

www.elsevier.com/locate/neulet

Effects of ambient odors on reaction time in humans


Jean-Louis Millot*, Gerard Brand, Nadege Morand
Laboratoire de Neurosciences, Faculte des Sciences et Techniques, Universite de Franche-Comte, Place Leclerc,
25030 Besancon Cedex, France
Received 28 September 2001; received in revised form 14 January 2002; accepted 14 January 2002

Abstract
The perception of odors is well identified as having strong emotional correlates. The effects of ambient odors on
arousal level and task performance have also been suspected but remain poorly assessed in the literature. The present
study compared the reaction times of subjects between ambient odor conditions (pleasant and unpleasant) and a no-
odor condition. The results showed that the reaction time in simple tasks (responses to visual or auditory stimulation)
significantly decreased in the ambient odor conditions (whatever the pleasantness of the odors) compared with the no-
odor condition. These results underline the importance of the olfactory environment in human behavior. q 2002 Elsevier
Science Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Odor hedonics; Human; Reaction time; Olfaction; Olfactory environment

The sense of smell presents great originalities in compar- to be more ambiguous. Testing different cognitive tasks,
ison with the other sensorial means particularly due to the Ludvingson and Rottman [13] concluded on a partially
strong limbic projections of the olfactory pathways relaxing effect of lavender (and not of the odor of cloves)
[4,18,22]. Consequently, it is not surprising to consider with some adverse influences on arithmetic reasoning.
that perception of odors can easily modify affects, emotions Further studies have drawn different conclusions: pleasant
or mood and some related aspects such as psycho-physiolo- ambient odors increased alertness and performance on vigi-
gical parameters. In humans, this point is beginning to be lance tasks [23] (lily of the valley and peppermint were
documented by a growing number of studies [6,10,20]. tested), on cognitive tasks [3] (lemon and floral odors
Usually based on self-reports by the subjects and despite were tested), and recovery from exercise [17] (lavender).
the great diversity of odors tested and experimental situa- Some attempts have been made to directly evaluate the
tions, the findings indicate positive affects when subjects are effect of odors on the central nervous system. Thus, some
exposed to a pleasant odor and negative affects when odors (floral odors have usually been tested) appeared to
exposed to an unpleasant one. Some studies have concerned modify brain wave responses such as the contingent nega-
the startle reflex as it can provide a useful tool for the tive variation (CNV) in different ways. This electroencepha-
emotional qualities of a foreground stimulation. Thus, it lographic parameter is present when a warning signal (a
appears that the blink magnitude differs in opposite ways sound) is followed at a short interval by a second signal (a
according to the hedonic valence of the ambient odor [7]. light) which subjects must terminate as rapidly as possible
When considering psycho-physiological parameters (such by a motor response (pressing a switch). CNV has proven to
as the form of the skin potential response or the heart be related to arousal and thus looked like a good candidate
rate), different modifications were observed according to to evaluate the arousing versus relaxing effects of odors
the pleasantness of the odor tested [1]. Beyond, or in corre- [14]. Unfortunately, the observed variations of the CNV
lations with these emotional impacts of odors, effects on are still difficult to interpret [21] and subjective expectan-
alertness, arousal level, performance and vigilance tasks cies can play an important role in modulating CNV effects
have also been suspected. The literature on this issue is as [12]. Otherwise, it has been suggested that improvement in
yet relatively limited and the conclusions can be considered task performance with pleasant odors could result from their
relaxing effects [2]. Thus, the improvement in mood with
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 133-3-81-665719; fax: 133-3-81- pleasant odors would induce improvement on sensory-
665746. motor tasks involving different levels of cognitive treat-
E-mail address: jean-louis.millot@univ-fcomte.fr (J.-L. Millot).

0304-3940/02/$ - see front matter q 2002 Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S03 04 - 394 0( 0 2) 00 09 2- 7
80 J.-L. Millot et al. / Neuroscience Letters 322 (2002) 7982

ment. Consequently, it can be asked if unpleasant ambient supplementary trial was given). At the end of the three
odors, which induce opposite effects on mood and affects series, the computer gave the mean and the standard devia-
could also induce opposite effects on sensory-motor tasks. tion of the reaction time for each of the series. The
The present research aims to contribute to this debate. Two researcher informed the subject that she/he had to react as
ambient odors with well-assessed opposite hedonic valence quickly as possible to the different tests. The participants
were tested and compared with a no-odor condition. The were also informed that there could be odors in the experi-
sensory-motor task used was a classical reaction time para- mental room because it had been previously used by
digm which can modulate different cognitive involvement. researchers for studies on olfaction. This remark was
Only female subjects were tested as it has been shown that made to all subjects, assigned or not to the odor sessions
they are more sensitive than males to odor perception and in order to dissociate the presence of odors from the current
that their behavior is affected more than that of males by research [2]. Then the researcher left the room and the
ambient odor [5,8,15]. subject performed the tests alone. The time needed to
The subjects were three groups of 33 women each perform the three tests was about 5 min.
enrolled in undergraduate bio-psychology courses at the Table 1 gives the mean reaction times (and standard
University of Franche-Comte (east of France). They were deviations) for each type of test and each of the three experi-
asked to take part in a study of the reaction time to visual mental sessions.
and acoustic stimulations and gave their informed consent. A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was
Each of these groups was assigned to one of the experimen- conducted to test the effect of the three ambient odor condi-
tal sessions: no-odor; pleasant odor; unpleasant odor. The tions on the reaction times in the three types of tasks. The
experimental room was well-ventilated prior to each odor reaction times were significantly different according to the
session. For the pleasant and unpleasant odor sessions, ambient odor condition (F2;96 11:49, P , 0:0001) and
lavender and pyridine were respectively sprayed in the according to the type of tasks (F2;96 417:34,
room with a sufficient concentration to obtain an immediate P , 0:0001). However, the MANOVA revealed no signifi-
and absolute perception of odors by all the participants. The cant interaction effect.
perceived intensity was approximately matched by two Three follow-up separate ANOVAs were performed to
independent judges to minimize the differences of concen- test the effect of the ambient odors on each type of tests.
tration in the air between the different sessions and odors There were significant differences according to the experi-
were sprayed as often it appeared necessary to maintain the mental conditions concerning the reaction times to the
same subjective assessment. The subjects were individually visual stimulus (F2;96 12:32, P , 0:0001), to the acous-
introduced into the experimental room and were seated tic stimulus (F2;96 7:47, P , 0:0009), but not in the last
comfortably at a table in front of a computer. The researcher situation with a choice between visual and acoustic stimuli
explained first to each participant during a few minutes the (F2;96 1:69; not significant].
nature and stages of the different tests. Firstly, the program When the visual stimulus test was considered, post-hoc
tested the reaction time to a visual stimulus, and secondly, to comparisons indicated a significant decrease in the reaction
an acoustic stimulus; as soon as a cross appeared in the time in the pleasant and unpleasant conditions compared
center of the screen or a sound was emitted by the computer, with the no-odor condition (P , 0:05 in both cases: Scheffe
the subject had to press the space bar. Thirdly, the program tests). The same significant decrease with the no-odor
tested the reaction time when the subject had to press on the condition was noted when the acoustic stimulation was
space bar when a sound was heard but not when a cross considered (P , 0:05 in both cases: Scheffe tests). There
appeared. In this last task, the computer delivered at random was no significant difference between the reaction time in
either the visual or the acoustic stimulus. Each of these three the two odor conditions.
series was made up of 20 successive tests (for the last series, These results clearly show that ambient odors modify the
when there was an error, it was not taken into account and a reaction time at least for simple sensory-motor tasks. They

Table 1
Mean values in milliseconds a of the reaction time for the three experimental sessions b and the three types of tests c,d

Visual stimulus Acoustic stimulus Acoustic stimulus with


a visual distractor

No-odor condition 301.6 (34.75) 165.23 (37.34) 246.26 (55.42)


Pleasant odor 274.17 (20.16) 146.28 (22.32) 225.2 (38.91)
Unpleasant odor 274.26 (24.04) 142.82 (15.72) 234.76 (48.36)
a
Mean values and SDs.
b
Odor condition.
c
Type of stimulus.
d
N 33 subjects for each of the experimental sessions.
J.-L. Millot et al. / Neuroscience Letters 322 (2002) 7982 81

also showed that there was a decrease in the reaction time To summarize, it is apparent that ambient odors, whatever
for both types of ambient odors compared with the no-odor the hedonic valence, could have strong effects at least on
condition and consequently that modifications on perfor- simple aspects of human behavior. Surprisingly, although
mance tasks were not correlated with the hedonic valence they constitute supplementary stimulations from the envir-
of the odors and their influences on mood. When consider- onment, they operate on the reaction time in an opposite
ing the peer-reviewed literature, most of the studies way compared with usual distracting stimuli. Our results
concerned by arousal and vigilance have compared the focus the need to compare odors of various types before
behavior only between a pleasant ambient odor condition trying to assess specific properties of precise odors on beha-
and a control, no-odor condition. Thus, the improvement in viors. Further studies including psycho-physiological
the reaction time in an unpleasant odor condition can be assessment are needed. They would provide some insight
considered to be a new piece in the puzzle of odor-induced into whether pleasant and unpleasant odors affect the reac-
behavior. When it is assumed that opposite hedonic tion time via the same mechanisms (modifications of the
valences induced opposite or different modifications in arousal level) or different mechanisms. The time of expo-
mood and physiological states, different hypotheses could sure of the subject to the ambient odor, as well as the impor-
explain the present findings: tance of the perceived intensity also appear to be
fundamental topics for further investigation.
Pleasant odors would counter the negative reactions asso-
ciated with the stress induced by the experimental situa- The authors express their thanks to Evelyne Thommen for
tion (the subjects were asked to react as quickly as her help with data analysis.
possible) and would reduce the adverse effects of stress
on task performance. Unpleasant odors would increase [1] Alaoui-IsmaIli, E., Vernet-Maury, E., Dittmar, A.,
the arousal level and consequently would also improve Delhomme, G. and Chanel, J., Odor hedonics: connection
the performances of the subjects. Two opposite psycho- with emotional response estimated by autonomic para-
meters, Chem. Senses, 22 (1997) 237248.
biological effects on the subjects would give the same [2] Baron, R.A. and Bronfen, M.I., A whiff of reality: empirical
result for the final behavior observed. evidence concerning the effects of pleasant fragrances on
As noted by Baron and Bronfen [2], exposure to a salient work-related behavior, J. Appl. Soc. Psychol., 24 (1994)
odor in an experimental situation in a laboratory is in 11791203.
some way a relatively novel and surprising event. Thus, [3] Baron, R.A. and Thomley, J., Positive affect as a potential
mediator of the effects of pleasant fragrances on task
it is possible that some effects obtained stemmed from performance and helping, Environ. Behav., 26 (1994) 766
such a novelty and presumably heightened the arousal it 784.
produced. This would also be in agreement with Schach- [4] Brand, G., La lateralisation olfactive chez lhomme: revue
ter and Singer [19] who argued that all emotions were de la litterature, Neurophysiol. Clin., 29 (1999) 495506.
associated with undifferentiated autonomic arousal. [5] Brand, G. and Millot, J.L., Sex differences in human olfac-
tion: between evidence and enigma, Q. J. Exp. Psychol., 54
(2001) 259270.
In some cases, studies have shown an increase in the time [6] Ehrlichman, H. and Bastone, B., Olfaction and emotion, In
needed to carry out the tasks. The looking time of slides of M.J. Serby and K.I. Chobor (Eds.), Science of Olfaction,
babies or chocolate items was found to be longer in odor SpringerVerlag, New York, 1992, pp. 410438.
conditions (chocolate or baby powder) than in a no-odor [7] Ehrlichman, H., Brown Kuhl, S., Zhu, J. and Warrenburg, S.,
Startle reflex modulation by pleasant and unpleasant odors
condition [11]. It can be asked if this result could be due in a between-subjects design, Psychophysiology, 34 (1997)
to a greater involvement of the subjects in the task in the 726729.
odor conditions. A similar interpretation can be put forward [8] Gilbert, A., Knasko, S. and Sabini, J., Sex differences in task
concerning the study of Roberts and Williams [16] who performance associated with attention to ambient odor,
found an increase in time taken by subjects to visualize Arch. Environ. Health, 52 (1997) 195199.
[9] Henderson, L. and Dittrich, W.H., Preparing to react in the
phrases when they smell chamomile oil compared with an absence of uncertainty: new perspectives on simple reac-
inert placebo, although the authors interpreted their results tion time, Br. J. Psychol., 89 (1998) 531554.
in terms of a sedative effects of chamomile. [10] Kirk-Smith, M.D. and Booth, D.A., Chemoreception in
The results failed to show any significant differences human behaviour: experimental analysis of the social
when the procedure implied a reaction to an acoustic stimu- effects of fragrances, Chem. Senses, 12 (1987) 159166.
[11] Knasko, S.C., Pleasant odors and congruency: effects on
lus, but not to a visual one. It can be thought that the influ- approach behavior, Chem. Senses, 20 (1995) 479487.
ence of an ambient odor is less obvious when the task is [12] Lorig, T.S., The application of electroencephalographic
more complex. Otherwise, it could be noted that simple techniques to the study of human olfaction: a review and
reactions have distinctive characteristics that set them tutorial, Int. J. Psychophysiol., 36 (2000) 91104.
apart from choice reactions [9]. An alternative hypothesis [13] Ludvingson, H.W. and Rottman, T., Effects of ambient
odors of lavender and cloves on cognition, memory, affect
can be proposed involving habituation or some learning and mood, Chem. Senses, 14 (1989) 525536.
effect due to the absence of counterbalanced task order to [14] Manley, C.H., Psychophysiological effect of odor, Crit. Rev.
explain the lack of a significant difference in the last task. Food Sci. Nutr., 33 (1993) 5762.
82 J.-L. Millot et al. / Neuroscience Letters 322 (2002) 7982

[15] Millot, J.L. and Brand, G., Effects of pleasant ambient odors [20] Spangenberg, E.R., Crowley, A.E. and Henderson, P.W.,
on human voice pitch, Neurosci. Lett., 297 (2001) 6163. Improving the store environment: do olfactory cues affect
[16] Roberts, A. and Williams, J.M., The effects of olfactory evaluations and behaviors? J. Marketing, 60 (1996) 6780.
stimulation on fluency, vividness of imagery and asso- [21] Travis, F. and Tecce, J.J., Effects of distracting stimuli on
ciated mood: a preliminary study, Br. J. Med. Psychol., 65 C.N.V. amplitude and reaction time, Int. J. Psychophysiol.,
(1992) 197199. 31 (1998) 4550.
[17] Romine, J.J., Bush, A.M. and Geist, C.R., Lavender [22] Van Toller, S., Emotion and the brain, In S. Van Toller and
aromatherapy in recovery from exercise, Percept. Mot. G.H. Dodd (Eds.), Perfumery: The Psychology and Biology
Skills, 88 (1999) 756758. of Fragrance, Chapman and Hall, London, 1988, pp. 121
[18] Savic, I., Processing of odours signals in humans, Brain 146.
Res. Bull., 54 (2001) 307312. [23] Warm, J.S., Dember, W.N. and Parasuranam, R., Effects of
[19] Schachter, S. and Singer, J., Cognitive, emotional and olfactory stimulation on performance and stress in a visual
physiological determinants of emotional states, Psychol. sustained attention task, J. Soc. Cosmet. Chemists, 12
Rev., 69 (1962) 378399. (1991) 112.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen