Auditory modulation in odor discrimination: A neuropsychological approach within a cultural context

Öz

This study examines the relationship between auditory stimuli and odor discrimination performance within the framework of multisensory integration. The aim is to evaluate the effects of different background sounds during a cognitively demanding odor discrimination task and to determine whether these effects are associated with cognitive functions such as verbal memory and interference control. The study also discusses how auditory stimuli differing in verbal content and emotional valence may influence odor discrimination performance within the cultural and socio-environmental context of a Turkish sample. Twenty participants performed the Sniffin Sticks odor discrimination task under different auditory conditions, including silence, party noise, podcast, pleasant music, and unpleasant music. The findings showed statistically significant differences in odor discrimination performance among auditory conditions. Performance was highest under the silence condition, whereas the lowest performance was observed under the podcast condition. Verbal auditory content may increase cognitive load, whereas music with different emotional valence may influence memory-related olfactory processing. The findings highlight the need to consider environmental sound characteristics when examining cognitive abilities in multisensory contexts. From a cultural and social perspective, sensory integration processes may be related to individuals’ cultural environment and social noise norms. Future research combining neuroimaging techniques with comprehensive neurocognitive assessments could further clarify the mechanisms underlying auditory-olfactory integration.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Background sound
• cognition
• odor discrimination
• olfaction

Koku ayırt etmede işitsel modülasyon: Kültürel bağlamda nöropsikolojik bir yaklaşım

Öz

Bu çalışma, işitsel uyaranlar ile koku ayırt etme performansı arasındaki ilişkiyi çoklu duyusal bütünleşme çerçevesinde incelemektedir. Amaç, bilişsel açıdan zorlayıcı bir koku ayırt etme görevi sırasında farklı arka plan seslerinin performans üzerindeki etkisini değerlendirmek ve bu etkinin sözel bellek ile enterferans kontrolü gibi bilişsel işlevlerle ilişkisini belirlemektir. Çalışma ayrıca, işitsel uyaranların sözel içerik ve duygusal valans bakımından farklılaşmasının koku ayırt etme performansına nasıl yansıyabileceğini Türkiye örneklemi bağlamında kültürel ve sosyal çevresel değişkenlerle birlikte tartışmaktadır. Yirmi katılımcı; sessizlik, parti gürültüsü, podcast, hoş müzik ve hoş olmayan müzik gibi farklı işitsel koşullar altında Sniffin Sticks koku ayırt etme görevini yerine getirmiştir. Bulgular, işitsel koşullar arasında koku ayırt etme performansında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı farklar olduğunu göstermiştir. Özellikle sessizlik koşulunda elde edilen performans diğer işitsel ortamlara kıyasla daha yüksek çıkarken, en düşük performans podcast koşulunda gözlemlenmiştir. Sözel içerikli uyaranların bilişsel yükü artırabileceği, duygusal valansı farklılaşan müzik uyaranlarının ise bellekle ilişkili olfaktör işlemeyi etkileyebileceği düşünülmektedir. Bulgular, çoklu duyusal bağlamlarda bilişsel yetilerin incelenmesinde çevresel ses özelliklerinin dikkate alınmasının gerekliliğine işaret etmektedir. Kültürel ve sosyal açıdan değerlendirildiğinde, bireylerin duyusal bütünleşme süreçlerinin yetiştikleri kültürel çevre ve sosyal gürültü normlarıyla ilişkili olabileceği görülmektedir. Gelecekte yapılacak nörogörüntüleme ve kapsamlı nörobilişsel değerlendirme çalışmaları, işitsel-koku bütünleşmesinin altında yatan mekanizmaları daha ayrıntılı biçimde aydınlatabilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Arka plan sesi
• biliş
• koku ayırt etme
• olfaktör

Kaynakça

1. Açıkgöz Genç, A. D. (1995). Bellek ve dikkat fonksiyonlarını ölçen nöropsikolojik testlerin görgül ve istatistiksel yollardan değerlendirilmesi (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
2. Akgül, Ö., ve Uzgan, B. (2021). Chemosensory Pleasure Scale: Validity and reliability of Turkish version. Current Approaches in Psychiatry, 13, 73-83. DOI:10.18863/pgy.907774
3. Bartlett, D. (1996). Physiological responses to music and sound stimuli. In Handbook of music psychology (s. 343-385) içinde.
4. Bandura, A., ve Walters, R. H. (1977). Social learning theory (Vol. 1, s. 33-52) içinde. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-hall.
5. Belkin, K., Martin, R., Kemp, S. E., ve Gilbert, A. N. (1997). Auditory pitch as a perceptual analogue to odor quality. Psychological Science, 8(4), 340-342. DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997.tb00450.x
6. Bock, O. (2010). Sensorimotor adaptation is influenced by background music. Experimental Brain Research, 203(4), 737-741. DOI:10.1007/s00221-010-2289-0
7. Boesveldt, S., Verbaan, D., Knol, D. L., Visser, M., van Rooden, S. M., van Hilten, J. J., ... Berendse, H. W. (2008). A comparative study of odor identification and odor discrimination deficits in Parkinson’s disease. Movement Disorders, 23(14), 1984-1990. DOI:10.1002/mds.22155
8. Cassidy, G., ve MacDonald, R. A. (2007). The effect of background music and background noise on the task performance of introverts and extraverts. Psychology of Music, 35(3), 517-537. DOI:10.1177/0305735607076444

9. Cohen, S., Evans, G. W., Stokols, D., ve Krantz, D. S. (2013). Behavior, health, and environmental stress. Springer Science ve Business Media.
10. Cohen, A. (2001). Music as a source of emotion in film. P. N. Juslin ve J. A. Sloboda (Eds.), Music and emotion: Theory and research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
11. Crawford, H. J., ve Strapp, C. M. (1994). Effects of vocal and instrumental music on visuospatial and verbal performance as moderated by studying preference and personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 16(2), 237-245. DOI:10.1016/0191-8869(94)90162-7
12. Demattè, M. L., Sanabria, D., Sugarman, R., ve Spence, C. (2006). Cross-modal interactions between olfaction and touch. Chemical Senses, 31(4), 291-300. DOI:10.1093/chemse/bjj031
13. Deroy, O., Crisinel, A. S., ve Spence, C. (2013). Crossmodal correspondences between odors and contingent features: Odors, musical notes, and geometrical shapes. Psychonomic Bulletin ve Review, 20(5), 878-896. DOI:10.3758/s13423-013-0397-0
14. Doty, R. L. (2017). Olfactory dysfunction in neurodegenerative diseases: Is there a common pathological substrate? The Lancet Neurology, 16(6), 478-488. doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30123-0
15. Furnham, A., ve Allass, K. (1999). The influence of musical distraction of varying complexity on the cognitive performance of extroverts and introverts. European Journal of Personality, 13(1), 27-38. DOI:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0984(199901/02)13:1<27::AID-PER318>3.0.CO;2-R
16. Haberly, L. B., ve Price, J. L. (1977). The axonal projection patterns of the mitral and tufted cells of the olfactory bulb in the rat. Brain Research, 129(1), 152-157. DOI:10.1016/0006-8993(77)90978-7
17. Haehner, A., Chen, B., Espin, M., Haussmann, R., Matthes, C., Desser, D., ... Hummel, T. (2022). Training with odors impacts hippocampal thickness in patients with mild cognitive impairment. Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease, 88(2), 743-755. DOI:10.3233/JAD-220248
18. Hallam, S., ve Price, J. (1998). Can the use of background music improve behaviour and academic performance of children with emotional difficulties? British Journal of Special Education, 25(2), 88-91. DOI:10.1111/1467-8527.t01-1-00063
19. Hargreaves, D., MacDonald, R., ve Miell, D. (2012). Musical identities mediate musical development. G. McPherson ve G. Welch (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 1, s. 125-142) içinde. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20. Hedner, M., Larsson, M., Arnold, N., Zucco, G. M., ve Hummel, T. (2010). Cognitive factors in odor detection, odor discrimination, and odor identification tasks. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 32(10), 1062-1067. DOI:10.1080/13803391003683070
21. Ho, C., Mason, O., ve Spence, C. (2007). An investigation into the temporal dimension of the Mozart effect: Evidence from the attentional blink task. Acta Psychologica, 125(1), 117-128. DOI:10.1016/j.actpsy.2006.07.006
22. Hummel, T., Kobal, G., Gudziol, H., ve Mackay-Sim, A. (2007). Normative data for the “Sniffin’ Sticks” including tests of odor identification, odor discrimination, and olfactory thresholds: An upgrade based on a group of more than 3,000 subjects. European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, 264(3), 237-243. DOI:10.1007/s00405-006-0173-0
23. Hummel, T., Sekinger, B., Wolf, S. R., Pauli, E., ve Kobal, G. (1997). ‘Sniffin’ sticks’: Olfactory performance assessed by the combined testing of odor identification, odor discrimination and olfactory threshold. Chemical Senses, 22(1), 39-52. DOI:10.1093/chemse/22.1.39
24. Hygge, S. (2003). Classroom experiments on the effects of different noise sources and sound levels on long-term recall and recognition in children. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17(8), 895-914.
25. Jäncke, L., ve Sandmann, P. (2010). Music listening while you learn: No influence of background music on verbal learning. Behavioral and Brain Functions, 6, 3. DOI:10.1186/1744-9081-6-3
26. Karakaş, S. (2006). BILNOT battery handbook: Research and development studies for neuropsychological tests. Ankara: Eryılmaz Offset Matbaacılık Gazetecilik.
27. Kemp, S. E., ve Gilbert, A. N. (1997). Odor intensity and color lightness are correlated sensory dimensions. American Journal of Psychology, 110(1), 35-46. DOI:10.2307/1423639
28. Koelsch, S., Fritz, T., Cramon, V. Y., Müller, K., ve Friederici, A. D. (2006). Investigating emotion with music: An fMRI study. Human Brain Mapping, 27(3), 239-250. DOI:10.1002/hbm.20180
29. Konečni, V. J. (1982). Social interaction and musical preference. In D. Deutsch (Ed.), The psychology of music (s. 497-516) içinde. New York: Academic Press.
30. Larsson, M., Nilsson, L. G., Olofsson, J. K., ve Nordin, S. (2004). Demographic and cognitive predictors of cued odor identification: Evidence from a population-based study. Chemical Senses, 29(6), 547-554. DOI:10.1093/chemse/bjh059
31. LeCompte, D. C., Neely, C. B., ve Wilson, J. R. (1997). Irrelevant speech and irrelevant tones: The relative importance of speech to the irrelevant speech effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23(2), 472-483.
32. Maric, Y., ve Jacquot, M. (2013). Contribution to understanding odour-colour associations. Food Quality and Preference, 27(2), 191-195. DOI:10.1016/j.foodqual.2012.05.001
33. Murphy, C. (2019). Olfactory and other sensory impairments in Alzheimer disease. Nature Reviews Neurology, 15(1), 11-24. DOI:10.1038/s41582-018-0097-5
34. Oldham, G. R., Cummings, A., Mischel, L. J., Schmidtke, J. M., ve Zhou, J. (1995). Listen while you work? Quasi-experimental relations between personal-stereo headset use and employee work responses. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80(5), 547-564. DOI:10.1037/0021-9010.80.5.547
35. Radocy, R., ve Boyle, J. (2012). Psychological foundations of musical behavior. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas Publisher.
36. Rauscher, F. H., Shaw, G. L., ve Ky, K. N. (1993). Music and spatial task performance. Nature, 365(6447), 611. DOI:10.1038/365611a0
37. Rey, A. (1958). L’examen clinique en psychologie [The clinical examination in psychology]. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
38. Russell, J. A. (2003). Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion. Psychological Review, 110(1), 145-172. DOI:10.1037/0033-295X.110.1.145
39. Seo, H. S., Gudziol, V., Hähner, A., ve Hummel, T. (2011). Background sound modulates the performance of odor discrimination task. Experimental Brain Research, 212(2), 305-314. DOI:10.1007/s00221-011-2729-5
40. Seo, H. S., ve Hummel, T. (2011). Auditory-olfactory integration: Congruent or pleasant sounds amplify odor pleasantness. Chemical Senses, 36(3), 301-309. DOI:10.1093/chemse/bjq129
41. Seo, H. S., Lohse, F., Luckett, C. R., ve Hummel, T. (2014). Congruent sound can modulate odor pleasantness. Chemical Senses, 39(3), 215-228. DOI:10.1093/chemse/bjt070
42. Sorokowska, A., Sorokowski, P., ve Hummel, T. (2014). Cross-cultural administration of an odor discrimination test. Chemosensory Perception, 7(2), 85-90. DOI:10.1007/s12078-014-9169-0
43. Spence, C. (2011). Crossmodal correspondences: A tutorial review. Attention, Perception, ve Psychophysics, 73(4), 971-975. DOI:10.3758/s13414-010-0073-7
44. Stein, B. (Ed.). (2012). The new handbook of multisensory processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
45. Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18(6), 643-662. DOI:10.1037/h0054651
46. Urdapilleta, I., Giboreau, A., Manetta, C., Houix, O., ve Richard, J. F. (2006). The mental context for the description of odors: A semantic space. European Review of Applied Psychology, 56(4), 261-271. DOI:10.1016/j.erap.2005.09.013
47. Wang, F., Jin, J., Wang, J., He, R., Li, K., Hu, X., ... Li, C. (2020). Association between olfactory function and inhibition of emotional competing distractors in major depressive disorder. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 6322. DOI:10.1038/s41598-020-63416-7
48. Yerkes, R. M., ve Dodson, J. D. (1908). The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit-formation. Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 18(5), 459–482
49. Ylias, G., ve Heaven, P. C. (2003). The influence of distraction on reading comprehension: A Big Five analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 34(6), 1069-1079. DOI:10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00096-X
50. Zhao, J. B., Wang, Y. L., Ma, Q. W., Zhao, J. B., Zhang, X. Y., ve Zou, L. Q. (2019). The Chemosensory Pleasure Scale: A new assessment for measuring hedonic smell and taste capacities. Chemical Senses, 44(7), 457-464. DOI:10.1093/chemse/bjz040