4.5 Article

Odor discrimination in children aged 4a euro 12 years

期刊

CHEMICAL SENSES
卷 47, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/chemse/bjac005

关键词

odor discrimination; olfactory experience; development; olfaction; developmental psychology

资金

  1. National Science Center Poland OPUS grant [2020/37/B/HS6/00288]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Olfactory discrimination is a crucial ability for children and its development is less influenced by age when it comes to enantiomeric odor pairs compared to common odor pairs.
Olfaction is functional at birth and newborns use their sense of smell to navigate their environment. Yet, certain chemosensory abilities are subject to experience and develop with age. It has been argued that odor discrimination is a key ability enabling organisms to capture and distinguish odors occurring in the environment to further identify them and formulate a behavioral response. Yet, the development of odor discrimination abilities has been overlooked in the literature, with few attempts to investigate developmental changes in odor discrimination abilities independent of verbal abilities and olfactory experience. Here, building on these attempts, we propose a novel approach to studying the development of odor discrimination abilities by utilizing odor enantiomersa euro pairs of odorous molecules of identical chemical and physical features, but differing in optical activity. We hypothesized that discrimination of enantiomeric odor pairs in children and adolescents would be less prone to age effects than discrimination of pairs of common odors due to their encoding difficulty and their limited exposure in common olfactory experience. We examined olfactory discrimination abilities in children aged 4a euro 12 years with regard to three common odor pairs and five enantiomeric odor pairs. The study protocol eliminated verbal and cognitive development bias, resulting in diminished age advantage of the older children in discrimination of enantiomers as compared to common odors.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据