The version presented here may differ from the published version or, version of record, if you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher's version. Please see the 'permanent WRAP url' above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription.
Although the view that women's olfactory abilities outperform men's is taken for granted, some studies involving large samples suggested that male and female olfactory abilities are actually similar. To address this discrepancy, we conducted a meta-analysis of existing studies on olfaction, targeting possible sex differences. The analyzed sample comprised
n
= 8 848 (5 065 women and 3 783 men) for olfactory threshold (as measured with the Sniffin Sticks Test; SST),
n
= 8 067 (4 496 women and 3 571 men) for discrimination (SST),
n
= 13 670 (7 501 women and 6 169 men) for identification (SST), and a total sample of
n
= 7 154 (3 866 women and 3 288 men) for works using University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT). We conducted separate meta-analyses for each aspect of olfaction: identification, discrimination and threshold. The results of our meta-analysis indicate that women generally outperform men in olfactory abilities. What is more, they do so in every aspect of olfaction analyzed in the current study. However, the effect sizes were weak and ranged between
g
= 0.08 and
g
= 0.30. We discuss our findings in the context of factors that potentially shape sex differences in olfaction. Nevertheless, although our findings seem to confirm the “common knowledge” on female olfactory superiority, it needs to be emphasized that the effect sizes we observed were notably small.
The neural plasticity of the olfactory system offers possibilities of treatment in terms of stimulation of the sense of smell, and different studies have suggested effectiveness of smell training, i.e., daily exposition to certain odors. To obtain reliable and precise estimates of overall treatment benefit on the olfactory function, we meta-analyzed the effects of smell training reported in 13 previous studies. We analyzed the smell training effectiveness across three different olfactory abilities, smell identification, discrimination and threshold for odor detection. We found a significant, positive effect of olfactory training for all olfactory abilities, with large effects of training on identification, discrimination and TDI-score and small-to-moderate effect in the case of threshold for odor detection. Interestingly, the pattern of results differed across Sniffin Sticks subtests depending on the origin of participants smell disorder, and the smell training duration influenced its effectiveness in the case of identification and the TDI score. Although the exact mechanism of olfactory recovery following the smell training still requires further investigation, our meta-analysis showed that such training should be considered an addition or alternative to existing smell treatment methods.
Considerable research has examined human mate preferences across cultures, finding universal sex differences in preferences for attractiveness and resources as well as sources of systematic cultural variation. Two competing perspectives—an evolutionary psychological perspective and a biosocial role perspective—offer alternative explanations for these findings. However, the original data on which each perspective relies are decades old, and the literature is fraught with conflicting methods, analyses, results, and conclusions. Using a new 45-country sample ( N = 14,399), we attempted to replicate classic studies and test both the evolutionary and biosocial role perspectives. Support for universal sex differences in preferences remains robust: Men, more than women, prefer attractive, young mates, and women, more than men, prefer older mates with financial prospects. Cross-culturally, both sexes have mates closer to their own ages as gender equality increases. Beyond age of partner, neither pathogen prevalence nor gender equality robustly predicted sex differences or preferences across countries.
The currently presented large dataset (n = 1,422) consists of results that have been assembled over the last 8 years at science fairs using the 16-item odor identification part of the “Sniffin’ Sticks”. In this context, the focus was on olfactory function in children; in addition before testing, we asked participants to rate their olfactory abilities and the patency of the nasal airways. We reinvestigated some simple questions, e.g., differences in olfactory odor identification abilities in relation to age, sex, self-ratings of olfactory function and nasal patency. Three major results evolved: first, consistent with previously published reports, we found that identification scores of the youngest and the oldest participants were lower than the scores obtained by people aged 20–60. Second, we observed an age-related increase in the olfactory abilities of children. Moreover, the self-assessed olfactory abilities were related to actual performance in the smell test, but only in adults, and self-assessed nasal patency was not related to the “Sniffin’ Sticks” identification score.
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.