The present study reports normative ratings for 200 food and non-food odors. One hundred participants rated odors across measures of verbalisability, perceived descriptive ability, context availability, pleasantness, irritability, intensity, familiarity, frequency, age of acquisition, and complexity. Analysis of the agreement between raters revealed that four dimensions, those of familiarity, intensity, pleasantness, and irritability, have the strongest utility as normative data. The ratings for the remaining dimensions exhibited reduced discriminability across the odor set and should therefore be used with caution. Indeed, these dimensions showed a larger difference between individuals in the ratings of the odors. Familiarity was shown to be related to pleasantness, and a non-linear relationship between pleasantness and intensity was observed which reflects greater intensity for odors that elicit a strong hedonic response. The suitability of these data for use in future olfactory study is considered, and effective implementation of the data for controlling stimuli is discussed.
We examine item-specific olfactory proactive interference (PI) effects and undertake comparisons with verbal and non-verbal visual stimuli. Using a sequential recent-probes task, we show no evidence for PI with hard-to-name odours (Experiment 1). However, verbalisable odours do exhibit PI effects (Experiment 2). These findings occur despite above chance performance and similar serial position functions across both tasks. Experiments 3 and 4 apply words and faces, respectively, to our modified procedure, and show that methodological differences cannot explain the null finding in Experiment 1. The extent to which odours exhibit analogous PI effects to that of other modalities is, we argue, contingent on the characteristics of the odours employed.
Addressing the biodiversity crisis requires renewed collaborative approaches. Large carnivores are ambassador species, and as such they can aid the protection of a wide range of species, including evolutionarily distinct and threatened ones, while being popular for conservation marketing. However, conflicts between carnivores and people present a considerable challenge to biodiversity conservation. Our cross disciplinary essay brings together original research to discuss key issues in the conservation of large carnivores as keystone species for biodiversity rich, healthy ecosystems. Our findings suggest the need to promote coexistence through challenging ‘wilderness’ myths; to consider coexistence/conflict as a continuum; to include varied interest groups in decision making; to address fear through positive mediated experiences, and to explore further partnerships with zoos. As wide-reaching institutions visited by over 700 million people/year worldwide, zoos combine knowledge, emotion and social context creating ideal conditions for the development of care towards nature, pro-environmental behaviors and long-term connections between visitors and carnivores. Based on current research, we provide evidence that large carnivores and zoos are both powerful catalysts for public engagement with biodiversity conservation, recognizing barriers and suggesting future ways to collaborate to address biodiversity loss.
This study, conducted over a four-year period at Chester Zoo in the UK, sought to evaluate the impact on visitor behavior and interpretation use that a transition from second- to third-generation zoo exhibit might affect. Visitors spent more time in the newer exhibit (even when allowing for relative floor area) and visitor time budgets suggest a high degree of visitor interaction with different exhibit elements. Specific interpretive elements were analyzed in detail, using quasi-quantitative methods in addition to more standard timing and tracking measures. From this, a proportional relationship between time and visitor engagement is proposed. Areas that were highlighted as under-performing during evaluation were retrofitted with simple, but highly visible, instructional signage and this was found to increase the proportion of visitors that stopped, and how long they stopped in a significant way.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.