Cameron E Leslie, Köster E P, Møller Per
Department of Psychological Science, Carthage College, 2001 Alford Park Drive, Kenosha, WI 53140, USA.
Helmholtz Institute, University of Utretch, Wildforsterweg 4A, 3881NJ Putten, The Netherlands.
Brain Sci. 2021 Aug 29;11(9):1146. doi: 10.3390/brainsci11091146.
Memory for odors is believed to be longer-lasting than memory for visual stimuli, as is evidenced by flat forgetting curves. However, performance on memory tasks is typically weaker in olfaction than vision. Studies of odor memory that use forced-choice methods confound responses that are a result of a trace memory and responses that can be obtained through process of elimination. Moreover, odor memory is typically measured with common stimuli, which are more familiar and responses may be confounded by verbal memory, and measure memory in intentional learning conditions, which are ecologically questionable. Here we demonstrate the value of using tests of memory in which hit rate and correct rejection rate are evaluated separately (i.e., not using forced-choice methods) and uncommon stimuli are used. This study compared memory for common and uncommon odors and pictures that were learned either intentionally (Exp. 1) or incidentally (Exp. 2) and tested with either a forced-choice or a one-stimulus-at-a-time ("monadic") recognition task after delays of 15 min, 48 h or 1 week. As expected, memory declined with delay in most conditions, but depended upon the particular measure of memory and was better for pictures than odors and for common than uncommon stimuli. For common odors, hit rates decreased with delay but correct rejection rates remained constant with delay. For common pictures, we found the opposite result, constant hit rates and decreased correct rejection rates. Our results support the 'misfit theory of conscious olfactory perception', which highlights the importance of the detection of novelty in olfactory memory and suggests that olfactory memory should be studied using more ecologically valid methods.
气味记忆被认为比视觉刺激记忆更持久,平缓的遗忘曲线就证明了这一点。然而,嗅觉方面的记忆任务表现通常比视觉方面要弱。使用强制选择法进行的气味记忆研究混淆了由痕迹记忆产生的反应和通过排除过程获得的反应。此外,气味记忆通常用常见刺激来测量,这些刺激更熟悉,反应可能会因言语记忆而混淆,并且是在有意学习条件下测量记忆,这在生态学上是有问题的。在此,我们展示了使用分别评估命中率和正确拒斥率(即不使用强制选择法)并使用不常见刺激的记忆测试的价值。本研究比较了对常见和不常见气味及图片的记忆,这些气味和图片是有意(实验1)或无意(实验2)学习的,并在延迟15分钟、48小时或1周后用强制选择或一次一个刺激(“单一刺激”)识别任务进行测试。正如预期的那样,在大多数情况下,记忆随延迟而下降,但这取决于记忆的具体测量方式,对图片的记忆比对气味的记忆更好,对常见刺激的记忆比对不常见刺激的记忆更好。对于常见气味,命中率随延迟而下降,但正确拒斥率随延迟保持不变。对于常见图片,我们得到了相反的结果,命中率保持不变,正确拒斥率下降。我们的结果支持“有意识嗅觉感知的不匹配理论”,该理论强调了在嗅觉记忆中检测新奇性的重要性,并表明应该使用更符合生态学效度的方法来研究嗅觉记忆。