↓ Skip to main content

No Sensory Compensation for Olfactory Memory: Differences between Blind and Sighted People

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 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
No Sensory Compensation for Olfactory Memory: Differences between Blind and Sighted People
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, December 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02127
Pubmed ID
Authors

Agnieszka Sorokowska, Maciej Karwowski

Abstract

Blindness can be a driving force behind a variety of changes in sensory systems. When vision is missing, other modalities and higher cognitive functions can become hyper-developed through a mechanism called sensory compensation. Overall, previous studies suggest that olfactory memory in blind people can be better than that of the sighted individuals. Better performance of blind individuals in other-sensory modalities was hypothesized to be a result of, among others, intense perceptual training. At the same time, if the superiority of blind people in olfactory abilities indeed results from training, their scores should not decrease with age to such an extent as among the sighted people. Here, this hypothesis was tested in a large sample of 94 blind individuals. Olfactory memory was assessed using the Test for Olfactory Memory, comprising episodic odor recognition (discriminating previously presented odors from new odors) and two forms of semantic memory (cued and free identification of odors). Regarding episodic olfactory memory, we observed an age-related decline in correct hits in blind participants, but an age-related increase in false alarms in sighted participants. Further, age moderated the between-group differences for correct hits, but the direction of the observed effect was contrary to our expectations. The difference between blind and sighted individuals younger than 40 years old was non-significant, but older sighted individuals outperformed their blind counterparts. In conclusion, we found no positive effect of visual impairment on olfactory memory. We suggest that daily perceptual training is not enough to increase olfactory memory function in blind people.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 18%
Student > Master 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 5%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 16 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 8 21%
Computer Science 3 8%
Arts and Humanities 2 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 20 53%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 06 November 2019.
All research outputs
#15,058,613
of 26,409,992 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#13,521
of 35,348 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,766
of 451,801 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#264
of 530 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,409,992 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 35,348 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 451,801 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 530 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.