The existence of graded structure in fruit and flower odour categories and its stability in different cultures is examined. Groups of students from France, the United States, and Vietnam performed a typicality rating task, a similarity judgment task, a membership verification task, a recognition memory task, a familiarity rating task, and a free identification task using a set of 40 odorants (20 fruit odorants and 20 flower odorants). Overall, our results demonstrate that fruit and flower odour categories possess graded structure. Moreover, principal component analyses of the data revealed the implication of typicality in a variety of cognitive tasks where typical odours receive a preferential processing compared to atypical ones. Finally, our results suggest that typicality can be predicted to a certain extent by experiential knowledge but that other determinants play a role in odour category structure. Altogether, this study confirms that graded structure is a universal property of categories and suggests that universals and cultural specifics can both constrain the emergence of odour category structures.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbdiH, 2007“Signal detection theory”, in Encyclopedia of Measurement and Statistics Ed. SlakindN J (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage)
2.
AshcraftM H, 1978“Property norms for typical and atypical items from 17 categories: A description and discussion”Memory & Cognition6227–232
3.
Aubaile SallenaveF, 2000“Odeurs en alimentation dans quelques sociétés de Méditerranée: premiers résultats d'une enquête sur perception et reconnaissance”Bulletin et Mémoire de la Société d'Anthropologie de Paris12373–395
4.
BailensonJ NShumM SAtranSMedinD LColeyJ D, 2002“A bird's eye view: biological categorization and reasoning within and across cultures”Cognition841–53
5.
BallesterJ, 2004Mise en évidence d'un espace sensoriel et caractérisation des marqueurs relatifs à l'arôme des vins issus du cépage ChardonnayPhD Thesis, Université de Bourgogne, Dijon, France
6.
BarsalouL W, 1985“Ideas, central tendency, and frequency of instantiation as determinants of graded structure in categories”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition11629–654
7.
BarsalouL W, 1987“The instability of graded structure: implications for the nature of concepts”, in Concepts and Conceptual Development: Ecological and Intellectual Factors in Categorization Ed. NeisserU (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) pp 101–140
8.
BartlettJ CHurrySThorleyW, 1984“Typicality and familiarity of faces”Memory & Cognition12219–228
9.
BerlinBKayP, 1969Basic Color Terms: Their Universality and Evolution (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press)
10.
BurnettR CMedinD LRossN OBlokS V, 2005“Ideal is typical”Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology593–10
11.
ChivaM, 1993“L'amateur de durian”, in La Gourmandise: Délices d'un Péché Ed. N'DiayeC (Paris: Editions Autrement) pp 90–96
12.
ChreaC, 2005Odeurs et Catégorisation: A la Recherche d'Universaux OlfactifsPhD thesis, Université de Bourgogne, Dijon, France
13.
ChreaCValentinDSulmont-RosséCMaiH LNguyenD HAbdiH, 2004“Culture and odor categorization: agreement between cultures depends upon the odors”Food Quality and Preference15669–679
14.
ChreaCValentinDSulmont-RosséCNguyenD HAbdiH, 2005“Semantic, typicality and odor representation: A cross-cultural study”Chemical Senses3037–49
15.
CohenJ DMacWhinneyB MFlattMProvostJ, 1993“PsyScope: An interactive graphic system for designing and controlling experiments in the psychology laboratory using Macintosh computers”Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers25257–271
16.
DistelHAyabe-KanamuraSMartínez-GómezMSchickerIKobayakamaTSaitoSHudsonR, 1999“Perception of everyday odors—correlation between intensity, familiarity and strength of hedonic judgement”Chemical Senses24191–199
17.
DuboisD, 1997“Cultural beliefs as nontrivial constraints on categorization: Evidence from colors and odors”Behavioral and Brain Sciences20188
18.
DuboisDRoubyC, 2002“Names and categories for odors: the veridical label”, in Olfaction, Taste, and Cognition Eds RoubyCSchaalBDuboisDGervaisRHolleyA (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) pp 47–66
19.
EngenT, 1982The Perception of Odors (New York: Academic Press)
20.
HamptonJ A, 1979“Polymorphous concepts in semantic memory”Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior18441–461
21.
HamptonJ AGardinerM M, 1983“Measures of internal structure: A correlational analysis of normative data”British Journal of Psychology74491–516
22.
HeiderE R, 1972“Universals in color naming and memory”Journal of Experimental Psychology9310–20
23.
HolleyA, 1996“Actualités des recherches sur la perception olfactive”Psychologie Française41207–215
24.
IssanchouSValentinDSulmontCDegelJKösterE P, 2002“Testing odor memory: Incidental versus intentional learning, implicit versus explicit memory”, in Olfaction, Taste, and Cognition Eds RoubyCSchaalBDuboisDGervaisRHolleyA (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) pp 211–230
25.
JamesonK AAlvaradoN, 2003“Differences in color naming and color salience in Vietnamese and English”Color Research & Application28113–138
26.
JohansenM KPalmeriT J, 2002“Are there representational shifts during category learning?”Cognitive Psychology45482–553
27.
KiranSThompsonC K, 2003“Effect of typicality on online category verification of animate category exemplars in aphasia”Brain and Language85441–450
28.
LawlessH T, 1989“Exploration of fragrance categories and ambiguous odors using multidimensional scaling and cluster analysis”Chemical Senses14349–360
29.
LawlessH TGlatterSHohnC, 1991“Context-dependent changes in the perception of odor quality”Chemical Senses16349–360
30.
LesschaeveIIssanchouS, 1996“Effects of panel experience on olfactory memory performance: Influence of stimuli familiarity and labelling ability of subjects”Chemical Senses21699–709
31.
LightL LKayra-StuartFHollanderS, 1979“Recognition memory for typical and unusual faces”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory5212–228
32.
LinP-JSchwanenflugelP, 1995“Cultural familiarity and language factors in the structure of category knowledge”Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology26153–168
33.
LinP-JSchwanenflugelP JWisenbakerJ M, 1990“Category typicality, cultural familiarity, and the development of category knowledge”Developmental Psychology26805–813
34.
LymanB JMcDanielM A, 1986“Effects of encoding strategy on long-term memory for odors”Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology38753–765
35.
LynchE BColeyJ DMedinD L, 2000“Tall is typical: Central tendency ideal dimensions, and graded category structure among tree experts and novices”Memory & Cognition2841–50
36.
McCloskeyM, 1980“The stimulus familiarity problem in semantic memory research”Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior19485–502
37.
MacmillanNCreelmanC, 1991Detection Theory: A User's Guide (New York: Cambridge University Press)
38.
MaltB CSmithE E, 1982“The role of familiarity in determining typicality”Memory & Cognition1069–75
39.
MervisC BCatlinJRoschE, 1976“Relationships among goodness-of-example, category norms, and word frequency”Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society7283–284
40.
MervisC BPaniJ R, 1980“Acquisition of basic object categories”Cognitive Psychology12496–522
41.
PangbornR M, 1975“Cross-cultural aspects of flavor preferences”Food Technology2934–36
42.
PeskinMNewellF N, 2004“Familiarity breeds attraction: Effects of exposure on the attractiveness of typical and distinctive faces”Perception33147–157
43.
RabinM DCainW S, 1984“Odor recognition: familiarity, identifiability, and encoding consistency”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition10316–325
44.
RatneshwarSBarsalouL WPechmannCMooreM, 2001“Goal-derived categories: The role of personal and situational goals in category representations”Journal of Consumer Psychology10147–157
45.
RobersonDDavidoffJDaviesI, 2000“Color categories are not universal: Replication and new evidence from a stone-age culture”Journal of Experimental Psychology: General129369–398
46.
RoschE H, 1973“On the internal structure of perceptual and semantic categories”, in Cognitive Development and the Acquisition of Language Ed. MooreT E (New York: Academic Press)
47.
RoschE, 1975“Universals and cultural specifics in human categorization”, in Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Learning Eds BrislinRBochnerSLonnerW (New York: Halstead Press) pp 117–206
48.
RoschE, 1978“Principles of categorization”, in Cognition and Categorization Eds RoschELloydB B (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates) pp 27–48
49.
RoschEMervisC B, 1975“Family resemblances: Studies in internal structure of categories”Cognitive Psychology7573–605
50.
SchwanenflugelP JReyM, 1986“The relationship between category typicality and concept familiarity: Evidence from Spanish- and English-speaking monolinguals”Memory & Cognition14150–163
51.
SmithE EShobenE JRipsL J, 1974“Structure and process in semantic memory: A featural model for semantic decisions”Psychological Review81214–241
52.
SmithJ DMindaJ P, 2002“Distinguishing prototype-based and exemplar-based processes in dot-pattern category learning”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition28800–811
53.
StormsGDe BoeckPRutsW, 2001“Categorization of novel stimuli in well-known natural concepts: A case study”Psychonomic Bulletin & Review8377–384
54.
SulmontCIssanchouSKösterE P, 2002“Selection of odorants for memory tests on the basis of familiarity, perceptual complexity, pleasantness, similarity and identification”Chemical Senses27307–317
55.
TverskyA, 1977“Features of similarity”Psychological Review84327–352
56.
UenoY, 1993“Cross-cultural study of odor perception in Sherpa and Japanese people”Chemical Senses18352–353
57.
VokeyJ RReadJ D, 1992“Familiarity, memorability, and the effect of typicality on the recognition of faces”Canadian Journal of Psychology42489–495
58.
WardT BScottJ, 1987“Analytic and holistic modes of learning family-resemblance concepts”Memory & Cognition1542–54
