RESUMO
Semantic description of odors is a cognitively demanding task. Learning to name smells is, however, possible with training. This study set out to examine how improvement in olfactory semantic knowledge following training reorganizes the neural representation of smells. First, 19 nonexpert volunteers were trained for 3 days; they were exposed (i) to odorants presented without verbal labels (perceptual learning) and (ii) to other odorants paired with lexicosemantic labels (associative learning). Second, the same participants were tested in a brain imaging study (fMRI) measuring hemodynamic responses to learned odors presented in both the perceptual and associative learning conditions. The lexicosemantic training enhanced the ability to describe smells semantically. Neurally, this change was associated with enhanced activity in a set of heteromodal areas-including superior frontal gyrus-and parietal areas. These findings demonstrate that odor-name associative learning induces recruitment of brain areas involved in the integration and representation of semantic attributes of sensory events. They also offer new insights into the brain plasticity underlying the acquisition of olfactory expertise in lay people. Hum Brain Mapp 38:5958-5969, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Assuntos
Encéfalo/fisiologia , Aprendizagem/fisiologia , Odorantes , Percepção Olfatória/fisiologia , Semântica , Vocabulário , Adulto , Encéfalo/diagnóstico por imagem , Mapeamento Encefálico , Circulação Cerebrovascular/fisiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética , Masculino , Plasticidade Neuronal/fisiologia , Testes Neuropsicológicos , Psicolinguística , Reconhecimento Psicológico/fisiologiaRESUMO
Odor names refer usually to "source" object categories. For example, the smell of rose is often described with its source category (flower). However, linguistic studies suggest that odors can also be named with labels referring to categories of "practices". This is the case when rose odor is described with a verbal label referring to its use in fragrance practices ("body lotion," cosmetic for example). It remains unknown whether naming an odor by its practice category influences olfactory neural responses differently than that observed when named with its source category. The aim of this study was to investigate this question. To this end, functional MRI was used in a within-subjects design comparing brain responses to four different odors (peach, chocolate, linden blossom, and rose) under two conditions whereby smells were described either (1) with their source category label (food and flower) or (2) with a practice category label (body lotion). Both types of labels induced activations in secondary olfactory areas (orbitofrontal cortex), whereas only the source label condition induced activation in the cingulate cortex and the insula. In summary, our findings offer a new look at olfactory perception by indicating differential brain responses depending on whether odors are named according to their source or practice category.
Assuntos
Córtex Cerebral/fisiologia , Neuroimagem Funcional/métodos , Idioma , Percepção Olfatória/fisiologia , Adulto , Formação de Conceito/fisiologia , Feminino , Neuroimagem Funcional/instrumentação , Giro do Cíngulo/fisiologia , Humanos , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética , Masculino , Córtex Pré-Frontal/fisiologia , Distribuição Aleatória , Adulto JovemRESUMO
Olfaction is characterized by a salient hedonic dimension. Previous studies have shown that these affective responses to odors are modulated by physicochemical, physiological, and cognitive factors. The present study examined expertise influenced processing of pleasant and unpleasant odors on both perceptual and verbal levels. For this, performance on two olfactory tasks was compared between novices, trainee cooks, and experts (perfumers and flavorists): Members of all groups rated the intensity and pleasantness of pleasant and unpleasant odors (perceptual tasks). They were also asked to describe each of the 20 odorants as precisely as possible (verbal description task). On a perceptual level, results revealed that there were no group-related differences in hedonic ratings for unpleasant and pleasant odors. On a verbal level, descriptions of smells were richer (e.g., chemical, olfactory qualities, and olfactory sources terms) and did not refer to pleasantness in experts compared to untrained subjects who used terms referring to odor sources (e.g., candy) accompanied by terms referring to odor hedonics. In conclusion, the present study suggests that as novices, experts are able to perceptually discriminate odors on the basis of their pleasantness. However, on a semantic level, they conceptualize odors differently, being inclined to avoid any reference to odor hedonics.