Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Olfactory Awareness and the Self-Reported Importance of Olfactory Information in Romantic Interest

  • Published:
Chemosensory Perception

Abstract

Introduction

Many people seem to be looking for similar attributes when searching for a potential romantic partner. Olfactory social cues can be important parts of the process, though there are individual differences as to their value. Gay men, for example, value scent less in selecting a romantic partner than do heterosexual men (White and Cunningham, Chemosens Percept 10:31–41, 2017). Is it possible that the relative importance of olfaction in mate selection is simply a natural consequence of being generally aware of odorants?

Method

The present study examined the relationship between odor awareness and odor importance in mating in two studies. Participants in each of the studies completed both the Romantic Interests Survey (Herz and Inzlich, Evol Hum Behav 23:359–364, 2002) and the Odor Awareness Survey (Smeets et al., Chem Senses 33:725–734, 2008). In the first study, 455 college-aged heterosexual individuals were surveyed, while in the second study, 453 individuals varying in sexual preference (142 heterosexual women, 161 heterosexual men, and 150 gay men) completed the questionnaires.

Results

Principle components analyses from both studies revealed two different components underlying scores on the RIS; one component best accounted for OAS scores. Regression analysis for both studies indicated that OAS scores predicted the first RIS principle component, but not the second one.

Conclusions

The value of odorants in selecting a romantic partner seems to reflect two different underlying attitudes. The first attitude values all aspects of the smell of a lover, while the second only finds it important that the lover does not smell badly. Odor awareness is related only to the first of these attitudes.

Implications

These findings suggest that odor awareness accounts for some of the attitudes concerning the value of odors in mate selection, but not all of them. Other factors, such as the need to avoid aversive stimuli, may also contribute to the relative importance of olfaction in selecting a partner.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agosta WC (1992) Chemical communication: the language of pheromones. W.H. Freeman and Company, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen C, Cobey KD, Havlíček J, Roberts SC (2016) The impact of artificial fragrances on the assessment of mate quality cues in body odor. Evol Hum Behav, 37(6):481–489.

  • Bowerman B, Koehler AB, O’Connell RT (2005) Forecasting, time series, and regression. Cengage Learning, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Brand G, Millot JL (2001) Sex differences in human olfaction: between evidence and enigma. Q J Exp Psychol B 54(3):259–270

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Buron E, Bulbena A, Pailhez G, Cabré AB (2011) The Spanish version of two olfactory scales: reliability and validity. Rev Psiquiatr Salud 4:187–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buss DM, Shackelford TK, Kirkpatrick LA, Larsen RJ (2001) A half century of mate preferences: the cultural evolution of values. J Marriage Fam 63:491–503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cain WS (1982) Odor identification by males and females: predictions vs performance. Chem Senses 7(2):129–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis MH (1983) Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. J Pers Soc Psychol, 44(1):113–126

  • Demattè ML, Endrizzi I, Biasioli F, Corollaro ML, Zampini M, Gasperi F (2011) Individual variability in the awareness of odors: demographic parameters and odor identification ability. Chem Percept 4:175–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12078-011-9103-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamond LM (2007) A dynamical systems approach to the development and expression of female same-sex sexuality. Perspect Psychol Sci 2:142–161

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Doty RL (2010) The great pheromone myth. JHU Press

  • Doty RL, Shaman P, Applebaum SL, Giberson R, Siksorski L, Rosenberg L (1984a) Smell identification ability: changes with age. Science 226(4681):1441–1443

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Doty RL, Shaman P, Dann M (1984b) Development of the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test: a standardized microencapsulated test of olfactory function. Physiol Behav 32:489–502

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Engen T (1982) The perception of odors. Academic Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Eysenck HJ (1967) The biological basis of personality. Thomas, Springfield

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferdenzi C, Coureaud G, Camos V, Schaal B (2008a) Human awareness and uses of odor cues in everyday life: results from a questionnaire study in children. Int J Behav Dev 32:422–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferdenzi C, Mustonen S, Tuorila H, Schaal B (2008b) Children’s awareness and uses of odor cues in everyday life: a Finland-France comparison. Chem Percept 1:190–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guttman L (1954) Some necessary and sufficient conditions for common factor analysis. Psychometricka 19:149–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haviland-Jones JM, McGuire TR, Wilson P (2016) Testing for individual differences in the identification of chemosignals for fear and happy: phenotypic super-detectors, detectors and non-detectors. PLoS One 11(5):e0154495

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Havlíček J, Saxton TK, Roberts SC, Jozifkova E, Lhota S, Valentova J, Flegr J (2008) He sees, she smells? Male and female reports of sensory reliance in mate choice and non-mate choice contexts. Personal Individ Differ 45:565–570

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herz RS, Inzlicht M (2002) Sex differences in response to physical and social factors involved in human mate selection: the importance of smell for women. Evol Hum Behav 23:359–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holt-Lunstad J, Smith TB, Layton JB (2010) Social relationships and mortality risk: a meta-analytic review. PLoS Med 7(7):e1000316

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Keverne EB (2005) Odor here, odor there: chemosensation and reproductive function. Nat Neurosci 81:1637–1638

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kouros-Mehr H, Pintchovski S, Melnyk J, Chen YJ, Friedman C, Trask B, Shizuya H (2001) Identification of non-functional human VNO receptor genes provides evidence for vestigiality of the human VNO. Chem Senses 26:1167–1174

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lippa RA (2007) The preferred traits of mates in a cross-national study of heterosexual and homosexual men and women: an examination of biological and cultural influences. Arch Sex Behav 36:193–208

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lübke K, Schablitzky S, Pause BM (2009) Male sexual orientation affects sensitivity to androstenone. Chemosens Percept 2:154–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lübke KT, Hoenen M, Pause BM (2012) Differential processing of social chemosignals obtained from potential partners in regards to gender and sexual orientation. Behav Brain Res 228:375–387

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McClintock MK, Jacob S, Zelano B, & Hayreh DJS (2001) Pheromones and vasanas: The functions of social chemosignals. In JA French, AC Kamil, & DW Leger (Eds) Vol. 47 of the Nebraska symposium on motivation. Evolutionary psychology and motivation pp. 75–112. Lincoln, NE, US: University of Nebraska Press

  • Mor N, Winquist J (2002) Self-focused attention and negative affect: a meta-analysis. Psychol Bull 128(4):638–662. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.128.4.638

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Navarrete-Palacios E, Hudson R, Reyes-Guerrero G, Guevara-Guzmán R (2003) Lower olfactory threshold during the ovulatory phase of the menstrual cycle. Biol Psychol 63(3):269–279

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nováková LM, Mrzílková RV (2016) Children’s exposure to odors in everyday contexts predicts their odor awareness. Chemosens Percept 9(2):56–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nováková L, Valentová JV, Havlíček J (2013) Olfactory performance is predicted by individual sex-atypicality, but not sexual orientation. PLoS One 8(11):e80234. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0080234

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Nováková L, Valentova JV, Havlíček J (2014) Engagement in olfaction-related activities is associated with the ability of odor identification and odor awareness. Chemosens Percept 7(2):56–67

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Peeters G, Czapinski J (1990) Positive-negative asymmetry in evaluations: The distinction between affective and informational negativity effects. Eur Rev Soc Psychol 1(1):33–60

  • Penn DJ, Oberzaucher E, Grammer K, Fischer G, Soini HA, Wiesler D et al (2007) Individual and gender fingerprints in human body odour. J R Soc Interface 41:331–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plailly J, Howard JD, Gitelman DR, Gottfried JA (2008) Attention to odor modulates thalamocortical connectivity in the human brain. J Neurosci 28(20):5257–5267

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Savic I, Berglund H, Lindström P (2005) Brain response to putative pheromones in homosexual men. Proc Natl Acad Sci, 102(20):7356–7361

  • Sergeant MJT, Davies MNO, Dickens TE, Griffiths MD (2005) The self-reported importance of olfaction during human mate choice. Sex Evol & Gend 73:199–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616660500173685

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smeets MAM, Schifferstein HNJ, Boelema SR, Lensvelt-Mulders G (2008) The odor awareness scale: a new scale for measuring positive and negative odor awareness. Chem Senses 33:725–734

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson RJ (2010) An initial evaluation of the functions of human olfaction. Chem Senses 35:3–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sucker K, Berresheim H, Ramcke-Krüll H, Schulze P, Brüning T, Bünger J (2010) Approach to characterize a sub-group susceptible to odour annoyance. Chem Eng Trans 23:99–104

    Google Scholar 

  • Survey Monkey (2015) SurveyMonkey audience for academics. Retrieved from http://help.surveymonkey.com/articles/en_US/kb/How-do-Academics-use-SurveyMonkey-Audience on August 19, 2015

  • Touhara K, Vosshall LB (2009) Sensing odorants and pheromones with chemosensory receptors. Annu Rev Physiol 71:307–332

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vaish A, Grossmann T, Woodward A (2008) Not all emotions are created equal: the negativity bias in social-emotional development. Psychol Bull 134(3):383–403. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.3.383

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Voyer D, Voyer SD, Saint-Aubin J (2017) Sex differences in visual-spatial working memory: a meta-analysis. Psychon Bull Rev 24(2):307–334

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Watson D, Clark LA (1984) Negative affectivity: the disposition to experience aversive emotional states. Psychol Bull 96:465–490. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.96.3.465

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • White TL, Cunningham C (2017) Sexual preference and the self-reported role of olfaction in mate selection. Chemosens Percept 10:31–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12078-017-9223-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witt M, Georgiewa B, Knecht M, Hummel T (2002) On the chemosensory nature of the vomeronasal epithelium in adult humans. Histochem Cell Biol 117:493–509

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wrzesniewski A, McCauley C, Rozin P (1999) Odor and affect: individual differences in the impact of odor on liking for places, things and people. Chemical Senses, 24(6):713–721.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors contributed to the present paper in different ways. The first and last authors (MV and TW) took part in the initial conceptualization of the work. The first author initiated data collection for study 1, and participated in its analysis. The third author (TW) initiated data collection for study 2, participated in interpretation of the data from both studies, and drafted the article. The second author (CC) analyzed the data from both studies and critically revised the manuscript. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Le Moyne College, 1419 Salt Springs Rd, Syracuse, NY, 13214, USA

    Michelle VanHatten, Caitlin Cunningham & Theresa L. White

Authors
  1. Michelle VanHatten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Caitlin Cunningham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Theresa L. White
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Theresa L. White.

Ethics declarations

Funding

This work was supported by Le Moyne College, in particular by the Student Research Fund and the Psychology Research Fund.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

All participants agreed to an Adult Informed Consent that had been approved by the local Institutional Research Board before beginning the study. The data for this survey was collected completely anonymously in that all IP addresses were stripped from the responses. Data was collected over secured, encrypted SSL/TLS connections to ensure that user data was safe in transit, secure, and available only to intended recipients.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

VanHatten, M., Cunningham, C. & White, T.L. Olfactory Awareness and the Self-Reported Importance of Olfactory Information in Romantic Interest. Chem. Percept. 12, 40–49 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12078-018-9248-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12078-018-9248-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation