A “Misfit” Theory of Spontaneous Conscious Odor Perception (MITSCOP): reflections on the role and function of odor memory in everyday life

Abstract

Our senses have developed as an answer to the world we live in (Gibson, 1966) and so have the forms of memory that accompany them. All senses serve different purposes and do so in different ways. In vision, where orientation and object recognition are important, memory is strongly linked to identification. In olfaction, the guardian of vital functions such as breathing and food ingestion, perhaps the most important (and least noticed and researched) role of odor memory is to help us not to notice the well-known odors or flavors in our everyday surroundings, but to react immediately to the unexpected ones. At the same time it provides us with a feeling of safety when our expectancies are met. All this happens without any smelling intention or conscious knowledge of our expectations. Identification by odor naming is not involved in this and people are notoriously bad at it. Odors are usually best identified via the episodic memory of the situation in which they once occurred. Spontaneous conscious odor perception normally only occurs in situations where attention is demanded, either because the inhaled air or the food smell is particularly good or particularly bad and people search for its source or because people want to actively enjoy the healthiness and pleasantness of their surroundings or food. Odor memory is concerned with novelty detection rather than with recollection of odors. In this paper, these points are illustrated with experimental results and their consequences for doing ecologically valid odor memory research are drawn. Furthermore, suggestions for ecologically valid research on everyday odor memory and some illustrative examples are given.

From mood to food and from food to mood: A psychological perspective on the measurement of food-related emotions in consumer research

“…Nevertheless, for such memories to arise it is necessary that the food experience is sufficiently similar to the original experience. Even slight changes in a common food, such as the addition of another spice or a change in texture, will readily be consciously detected and lead to pleasant surprise or may disturb the intimate memories and evoke feelings of disappointment and dissatisfaction, instead of the upcoming pleasant reminiscences raised when the food is conform to our expectations (Köster et al, 2014). Strangely enough the role of memory is almost always neglected in food-related consumer research, although it is probably much more important than the first impression experiences that are commonly investigated.…”

“…Nevertheless, these influences are probably much weaker than the ones that are based on experiences in earlier eating situations and carry the emotional content of these earlier occasions usually with them. In fact, there is ample evidence that we do not remember the food we ate earlier with precision, but are immediately reminded of the earlier situation in which we ate it (its ambiance or the company we ate it with) or we note deviations from it as a surprise and warning: "attention, not encountered before in the same or a similar situation" (Köster et al, 2014;Morin-Audebrand et al, 2012). In a preliminary study on the "memorability" of foods -the spontaneous occurrence of food memories in non-eating situations -the present authors also obtained indications that the emotions related to the eating situations and not the properties of the food itself raise such spontaneous memories, even though the latter may have contributed to the emotional colour of the former.…”

Satisfaction, satiation and food behaviour

“…Interoception is closely connected to the fundamental workings of the chemical senses which, as opposed to the other senses, act as gate keepers of what is 'outside' and what is 'inside' the body. Interoceptive food studies might bring studies of the chemical senses forward by focusing more on the ecological roles of these senses, as opposed to the tendency of looking for similarities between vision and olfaction, for example [28 ]. Finally, it is worth noting that neuroimaging studies of other pleasures than eating (sex, drugs, monetary gains) have shown that many of the same neural networks are active during experience of the different types of pleasures, suggesting that humans are endowed with a unitary pleasure system.…”

Demystifying wine tasting: Cognitive psychology's contribution

“…For example, Koster, Moller, and Mojet (2014) published data showing that olfactory-induced influences (i.e., observed behaviour change associated with an odour) affect us even when we are not consciously aware of either the presence of the odour or its effect on our behaviour. In other words, we may not be able to articulate or even identify the odour-related influences behind the way in which we appreciate or judge a wine.…”