Dalton P, Wysocki C J, Brody M J, Lawley H J
Monell Chemical Senses Center, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 1997;69(6):407-17. doi: 10.1007/s004200050168.
Responses to volatile chemicals are often subjective and variable, both over time and across individuals. Although variability can derive from differences in individual olfactory sensitivity, the response to a chemical stimulus is also influenced by the complex environment surrounding the exposure, which can include the perceiver's cognitive state. To explore the role of cognitive bias in chemical exposures, we evaluated whether information about the consequences of exposure to acetone could influence ratings of odor and irritation during exposure and/or the frequency or intensity of reported health symptoms following exposure.
Ninety adults (mean age 33.7, range 25-64) with no history of occupational exposure to solvents, were exposed to 800 ppm acetone in a chamber for 20 min. To control for non-specific responses to the odor of acetone, the subjects were also exposed for 20 min to 200 ppm phenylethyl alcohol (PEA), a non-irritant volatile chemical that produces a distinct odor but does not elicit irritation in the vapor phase. Subjects were assigned to one of three groups (n = 30/group); each group was given either a positive, negative or neutral bias towards the consequences of exposure to the chemicals in the study. During exposure, subjects rated the intensity of odor and irritation; following exposure, they completed symptom questionnaires.
During the 20-min exposure to acetone, the positive bias group exhibited the most adaptation to its odor and the lowest perceived irritation; following exposure they reported the fewest health symptoms. In contrast, the negative bias group rated higher levels of odor intensity and, on average, reported the most over-all irritation; following exposure they reported significantly more health symptoms than the other groups, None of the demographic variables studied (e.g., age, gender, race, smoking status) were predictive of the response to odor or irritation. The perceived irritancy of acetone was well predicted by a linear combination of the perceived odor of acetone and perceived irritation for PEA (the nonirritant), r2 = 0.73.
The results provide strong evidence that both the perceived odor and cognitive expectations about a chemical can significantly affect how individuals respond to it. Moreover, because naive control subjects appear to exhibit extreme variation in their cognitive evaluations of chemical effects, there may be limited value in using non-exposed controls to assess the irritancy of chemicals for worker populations.
对挥发性化学物质的反应往往是主观的且因人而异,随时间和个体不同而变化。尽管个体差异可能源于嗅觉敏感度的不同,但对化学刺激的反应也会受到暴露周围复杂环境的影响,这可能包括感知者的认知状态。为了探究认知偏差在化学暴露中的作用,我们评估了有关丙酮暴露后果的信息是否会影响暴露期间对气味和刺激性的评级,以及/或者暴露后报告的健康症状的频率或强度。
90名无职业性溶剂暴露史的成年人(平均年龄33.7岁,范围25 - 64岁)在一个舱室内暴露于800 ppm的丙酮中20分钟。为了控制对丙酮气味的非特异性反应,受试者还暴露于200 ppm的苯乙醇(PEA)中20分钟,苯乙醇是一种无刺激性的挥发性化学物质,会产生独特气味但在气相中不会引起刺激。受试者被分为三组之一(每组n = 30);每组对研究中化学物质暴露的后果分别给予积极、消极或中性的偏差引导。在暴露期间,受试者对气味和刺激性的强度进行评级;暴露后,他们完成症状问卷。
在20分钟的丙酮暴露期间,积极偏差组对其气味的适应性最强,感知到的刺激性最低;暴露后他们报告的健康症状最少。相比之下,消极偏差组对气味强度的评级较高,平均而言,报告的总体刺激性最强;暴露后他们报告的健康症状明显多于其他组。所研究的人口统计学变量(如年龄、性别、种族、吸烟状况)均无法预测对气味或刺激性的反应。通过丙酮的感知气味和PEA(无刺激性物质)的感知刺激性的线性组合,可以很好地预测丙酮的感知刺激性,r2 = 0.73。
结果提供了有力证据,表明对化学物质的感知气味和认知预期都能显著影响个体对它的反应。此外,由于未接触过化学物质的对照受试者在对化学物质影响的认知评估中似乎表现出极大差异,对于工人人群,使用未暴露的对照来评估化学物质的刺激性可能价值有限。