↓ Skip to main content

The Influence of Odors on Time Perception

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Influence of Odors on Time Perception
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00181
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jean-Louis Millot, Lucie Laurent, Laurence Casini

Abstract

The effect of an olfactory stimulation on the perception of time was investigated through two different experiments based on temporal bisection tasks. In experiment 1, the durations to be classified as either short or long were centered on 400 ms while in Experiment 2 there were centered on 2000 ms. The participants were different in the two experiments (36 subjects in each one). In each experiment, half of the subjects learnt the anchor durations when smelling an unpleasant odor (decanoic acid) and the other half when smelling no odor. After the learning phase, both groups were tested with and without odor. The results showed opposite effects depending on the duration range. The subjects underestimated the time in the presence of the unpleasant odor in the short duration range while they overestimated it in the long duration range. The results have been discussed in the framework of the pacemaker-counter clock model and a potential emotional effect induced by the odor on the subjective time perception has also been considered.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 97 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 14%
Researcher 12 12%
Student > Master 11 11%
Student > Bachelor 10 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 8 8%
Other 25 25%
Unknown 19 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 44 44%
Neuroscience 10 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Arts and Humanities 3 3%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 19 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 October 2016.
All research outputs
#6,004,280
of 22,844,985 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#8,513
of 29,853 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,815
of 297,953 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#206
of 520 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,844,985 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,853 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 297,953 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 520 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.