Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Sage Choice logoLink to Sage Choice
. 2021 Feb 1;65(5):759–765. doi: 10.1177/0018720821990162

Effects of COVID-19 on Sense of Smell: Human Factors/Ergonomics Considerations

E Leslie Cameron 1, Per Møller 2, Keith S Karn 3,✉
PMCID: PMC7902264  PMID: 33517793

Abstract

Objective

We review the effects of COVID-19 on the human sense of smell (olfaction) and discuss implications for human-system interactions. We emphasize how critical smell is and how the widespread loss of smell due to COVID-19 will impact human-system interaction.

Background

COVID-19 reduces the sense of smell in people who contract the disease. Thus far, olfaction has received relatively little attention from human factors/ergonomics professionals. While smell is not a primary means of human-system communication, humans rely on smell in many important ways related to both quality of life and safety.

Method

We briefly review and synthesize the rapidly expanding literature through September 2020 on the topic of smell loss caused by COVID-19. We interpret findings in terms of their relevance to human factors/ergonomics researchers and practitioners.

Results

Since March 2020 dozens of articles have been published that report smell loss in COVID-19 patients. The prevalence and duration of COVID-19-related smell loss is still under investigation, but the available data suggest that it may leave many people with long-term deficits and distortions in sense of smell.

Conclusion

We suggest that the human factors/ergonomics community could become more aware of the importance of the sense of smell and focus on accommodating the increasing number of people with reduced olfactory performance.

Application

We present examples of how olfaction can augment human-system communication and how human factors/ergonomics professionals might accommodate people with olfactory dysfunction. While seemingly at odds, both of these goals can be achieved.

Keywords: olfaction, psychophysical methods, multi-modality displays, product design, universal design

Attempts to answer the question of how human factors/ergonomics professionals can help with the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic have focused primarily on clinical environments (see Gurses et al., 2020). In this article we take a different approach, considering patients after recovery from the most severe symptoms of the disease who may suffer a reduction in, or loss of, sense of smell (olfaction). We demonstrate the importance of olfaction in human perception and performance, and encourage the human factors/ergonomics community to become more aware of the importance of human olfaction and consider taking action in two disparate ways:

  • integrate olfaction into systems design as another means of human-system communication and

  • accommodate the increasing number of people with reduced smell function.

While these two goals may seem contradictory, we feel both are achievable and important. Olfaction can be used as another form of redundant sensory coding, just as we use multiple forms of visual, auditory, and tactile coding in human-system communication.

COVID-19 and Sense of Smell

At the time of submission of this review, dozens of studies had been published regarding smell loss in COVID-19 patients, with the earliest appearing in late March (Hopkins & Kumar, 2020) indicating that smell loss could be an early marker of the disease. Most of the data reported thus far come from self-report (e.g., Bagheri et al., 2020; Giacomelli et al., 2020; Lechien et al., 2020; Parma et al., 2020; Qiu et al., 2020; Speth et al., 2020; Yan et al., 2020), which is well known not to correlate with objective measures of smell function (Landis et al., 2003; Soter et al., 2008; Wehling et al., 2011). Microsmia—a subtle smell loss—often goes undetected, and even anosmia—complete smell loss—can go undetected. Thus, the extent of smell loss from COVID-19 may be underestimated (e.g., Tong et al., 2020). Indeed, one study that measured smell loss objectively found that 98% of COVID-19 patients had some smell loss although only 35% reported any smell dysfunction when asked (Moein, Hashemian, Mansourafshar, et al., 2020).

Although prevalence estimates have varied considerably, it is clear that many or even most COVID-19 patients have demonstrable smell loss. By mid-April 2020, the Center for Disease Control had officially listed “New loss of taste or smell” as a symptom of COVID-19 (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/symptoms-testing/symptoms.html).

The duration of smell loss in COVID-19 patients is still under investigation, but available data suggest that recovery typically occurs, if not completely, within days or weeks (Hopkins et al., 2020; Lee et al., 2020; Moein, Hashemian, Tabarsi, et al., 2020). Given the duration of the pandemic, no studies have yet been able to establish the long-term effects of COVID-19 on smell loss. Anecdotal evidence suggests that for some people, smell loss may be long-lasting (see, for example, posts at: https://www.facebook.com/groups/AbScentCovid19/). Even when recovery of function occurs, a later post-recovery parosmia—distortion of the perception of odors—has also been reported (Burges Watson et al., 2020).

Upper respiratory viral infections (“common colds”) are one of the primary triggers for permanent smell loss (Hawkes & Doty, 2009). Given that smell loss is a symptom of COVID-19 and that self-report may significantly underestimate the extent of the issue, the scale of the pandemic means that at any given time, many people will experience deficiencies in their sense of smell. Furthermore, even if persistent olfactory dysfunction affects only a small percentage of COVID-19 survivors, there may be a substantial number left with long-term smell deficits (Soler et al., 2020).

Functions of Smell

Widespread loss of smell due to COVID-19 has increased awareness of how critical the chemical senses are to human behavior. Personal responses to such losses range from minor annoyance to major devastation; consider the end of a career for a chef.

Because humans rely so heavily on vision and audition, a majority of perceptual research over the past 100 years has focused on these senses. Similarly, both research and applied human factors/ergonomics work has focused on visual and auditory displays to engage these primary senses and facilitate human-system interaction. Human factors/ergonomics practitioners also exploit other sensory modalities such as vibro-tactile sense, kinesthesia, proprioception, and vestibular senses, but in less overt ways. For example, a driver may rely on kinesthesia and proprioception to learn the locations of controls in a car and rely on tactile sensation to discriminate between two differently shaped controls.

On the other hand, olfaction has generally received less attention from human factors/ergonomics professionals, aside from a mention in introductory textbooks of the addition of methyl mercaptan to natural gas, which is odorless and almost impossible to detect by itself. The important functions that olfaction plays in basic human behavior are often less obvious than those of vision and audition and therefore less appreciated. We rely on smell in important ways that relate to both quality of life and safety. Stevenson (2010) identified three classes of smell function—those related to ingestion (e.g., enjoyment of food, eating a well-balanced diet, avoiding unsafe foods), avoiding environmental hazards (e.g., gas leaks, fires), and social communication (e.g., recognizing kin). Furthermore, familiar, expected odors make us “feel at home” whereas novel, unexpected odors detected in well-known environments, make us uneasy (Köster et al., 2014). Although rarely acknowledged, olfactory problems are associated with a variety of negative outcomes (Erskine & Philpott, 2020; Miwa et al., 2001). Age-related deficits in smell function explain why many elderly persons complain that food lacks flavor and a disproportionate number die in accidental gas poisonings. These chemosensory deficits have been implicated in increased risk related to hazards such as food poisoning, fire, nutritional deficiencies, and hazardous chemical exposure (Santos et al., 2004 for a review, see Schiffman, 1997).

The sense of smell interacts with other sensory systems (see De Luca & Botelho, 2019 for a review). For example, the combination of smell and taste underlies flavor and our experience of food. Indeed, it is common for people to believe they have a taste loss when they are actually experiencing smell loss (Hawkes & Doty, 2009). Odors can be used to increase attentiveness and performance on a visual task requiring sustained attention (vigilance) without increasing stress (Dember et al., 1995; Warm et al., 1991). Though not a contributing factor to motion sickness, unpleasant smells, are perceived as even more unpleasant; and pleasant smells, more pleasant after motion-induced sickness (Paillard et al., 2014). Smell also plays an important role in emotional state (Herz, 2002; Hofer et al., 2020). The multi-billion-dollar fragrance and perfume industry speaks to the strength of the emotional effects of scents.

Olfaction in System Design

Now that COVID-19 has awakened us to the fragility of our sense of smell, and given the important functions that olfaction serves, here we consider some possible ways in which human factors/ergonomics professionals could be thinking about olfaction. First, we address ways in which olfaction can be further harnessed as a means of human-system interaction and second, we address ways to accommodate people’s olfactory dysfunction. While these two goals may conflict at times, we feel that both are achievable.

Smell: An Additional Channel of Human-System Communication

Since about 2010 there has been a small but steady increase in applied research on “multiple sensorial media” known as “mulsemedia” (see, for example, Ghinea et al., 2014; Kannan & Andres, 2010). Mulsemedia systems involve at least three senses (Ghinea et al., 2014)—increasingly including smell—as opposed to “multimedia” systems that typically integrate just audio and visual displays.

There is a long, but intermittent history of using smell as a means of communication between systems and human users, starting with the scent of roses delivered to audiences while watching a film of the Rose Bowl in 1906 (Logino, 1999 as cited in Kaye, 2001). The consideration of smell as an additional channel of human-system interaction is on the rise for both entertainment and productivity (e.g., Maggioni et al., 2018). For a review of the technology associated with olfactory interfaces and related human factors issues see Yanagida (2008).

Here we present some possible ways to integrate smell as an additional channel of communication in system design.

  • Some odors are known to have a calming effect and can be used in stressful environments, such as emergency department waiting rooms. For example, pleasant, familiar odors reduce perceived stress and peripheral nervous system activity (Calvi et al., 2020; Glass & Heuberger, 2016; Joussain et al., 2014). These effects depend on learned associations (e.g., Christoffersen & Schachtman, 2016). Such effects might cause people to perceive dental treatment as more painful when they smell the typical eugenol (clove) odor in a dental clinic (Robin et al., 1999). Using other odors to mask this odor might reduce anxiety and pain of dental visits.

  • Odors can influence consumer behavior, such as in scent marketing. Car dealerships exploit the “new car smell,” hotel chains employ distinctive scents, and many fashion shops use fragrances to influence customers’ behavior. Teerling et al. (1992) found that some odors, added to the ventilation systems of clothing stores in low concentrations, resulted in longer customer visits and had a positive effect on sales. Likewise, Holland et al. (2005) found that people exposed to a citrus-scented cleaning product demonstrated both increased mental access to the concept of cleaning and increased cleaning behavior. Although beyond the scope of this review, some research has suggested that odors can influence behavior even when presented at a level below conscious awareness (De Luca & Botelho, 2019; Li et al., 2007).

  • Smells could be used to guide people with dementia around a memory care institution in which they live. Visual signage, which relies on reading and visual and semantic memory, might not work well for these people. Smells could be used by residents to help them find their own corridors by using characteristic smells for each corridor. This technique could also be used to guide blind people to a corridor or room.

  • Smells can help to “set the stage” for various tasks for groups of mentally disabled people. For example, food odors from the kitchen can be used to help prepare people for mealtime by setting up expectations and generating the appetite and cephalic responses that prepare the digestive system. Chlorine odor has been used in a Dutch residential facility to set the stage for changing into a swimsuit before a trip to the swimming pool (E.P. Köster, personal communication, June 25, 2020).

All of the above effects hold great potential for human factors applications.

Accommodating People With Smell Dysfunction

Human factors/ergonomics professionals strive to consider all potential users of systems that we help design. We are trained to accommodate people with a wide range of anthropometric dimensions and physical, visual, auditory, and cognitive abilities. Given the smell loss that many people will experience as a result of COVID-19, and the risk of harm that comes with this loss, we are now called upon to consider how the human factors/ergonomics community might help. We can increase awareness of deficits in smell function and the implications it has for safety and quality of life. Many people are unaware of their olfactory deficits. So, in many cases, just being made aware or reminded of olfactory deficits may allow people to cope more effectively with their sensory losses. Here are some avenues for exploration in which we may be able to help people cope more directly with olfactory deficits:

  • Increase reminders both within the devices themselves and in public service announcements to check batteries in smoke detectors to make up for decreases in sensitivity to smelling smoke.

  • Increase size and contrast of expiration dates or provide other salient, visual indications when food is spoiled.

  • Increase prominence of nutrition labels (see Goldberg et al., 1999) and awareness of nutrient intake to compensate for nutritional inadequacies associated with the loss of smell.

  • Recruit people with olfactory dysfunction when conducting usability studies on systems where smell is used as a means of human-system communication.

  • Use objective measures of olfactory function when employees are recovering from smell loss to determine when they are able to return to work where sense of smell is critical for task performance (e.g., gas line maintenance, food production/quality control).

  • Provide other indicators (e.g., visual) as reminders to launder soiled clothes and change diapers.

  • Provide visual or auditory indicators that a mechanical device is overheating or malfunctioning in other ways that might normally be detected by smell.

  • Provide visual indicators that chemicals such as chlorine are reaching unhealthy levels (either too high or too low) in a swimming pool or water treatment system.

  • Improve surgical devices by providing visual and auditory feedback to surgeons who no longer can smell burning tissue or other relevant smells.

  • Provide more salient visual indicators on gas stoves to indicate when they are on and releasing gas, make gas stove valves less susceptible to accidental activation (Pollack, 2019), and encourage people to use electronic gas detectors (Wogalter & Laughery, 2011).

  • Develop a gauge to measure spiciness of food.

This is not intended as an exhaustive list. Rather we encourage readers to consider these and other ways that human factors/ergonomics professionals can help guide user interface design to accommodate COVID-19 patients who have lost their sense of smell.

Measuring Sense of Smell

There are many reasons that human factors/ergonomics professionals may need to assess a person’s sense of smell. Here are some examples:

  • Screening participants for usability testing of a medication delivery system in which smell indicates a leak.

  • Determining if a mine worker is fit for work in an underground environment in which an odor is added to ventilation air to signal emergency evacuation.

  • Testing to determine the appropriate strength of an odor intended to elicit a specific response in a new system design.

There are a number of commercially available, objective tests to assess sense of smell, but by far the most commonly used tests are the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test, UPSIT (Doty et al., 1984) from Sensonics (www.sensonics.com) and the Screening 12 Test kit from Burghart (https://smelltest.eu/en/burghart-sniffin-sticks-burghart-smelltests/). We encourage use of objective measures of smell function whenever possible, given that self-report is unreliable.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the COVID-19 pandemic is causing significant loss of smell in many people. The scale of the pandemic means that at any given time, many people will experience deficiencies in their sense of smell, and some may experience permanent dysfunction. We encourage the human factors/ergonomics professional community to (1) be aware of the importance of the sense of smell for human behavior and of the COVID-19-related deficits in smell function, (2) consider how smell deficits impact users of products and systems that we help develop, (3) consider ways to accommodate people with such sensory disabilities, and (4) consider new ways of using smell as an additional channel of human-system communication.

Key Points

  • COVID-19 is known to reduce the olfactory sense (smell) in people who contract the disease. The duration of the loss is not well characterized at this time, but some may experience permanent dysfunction in the sense of smell.

  • Human factors/ergonomics professionals should be aware of the increased number of people with olfactory dysfunction and consider ways to accommodate them.

  • While the sense of smell is not commonly thought of as a primary means of human-system communication, we rely on smell in many important ways that relate to both quality of life and safety.

  • Olfaction has received relatively little attention from human factors/ergonomics professionals. Product research and development teams have just begun to tap into the sense of smell to augment human system communication.

Author Biographies

E. Leslie Cameron is Professor of Psychological Science at Carthage College where she runs an active Perception lab with undergraduate co-investigators. Her main research interest is in how pregnancy affects olfaction. She earned a PhD in Psychology from the University of Rochester in 1995.

Per Møller is a scientific consultant and visiting professor at the University of Padova, Italy. He was previously an associate professor at the University of Copenhagen, Denmark. He earned his PhD in Cognitive Science from the University of Rochester in 1992.

Keith S. Karn is founder and principal consultant of Human Factors in Context LLC, in Philadelphia, PA, and previously led user research and design teams at Bresslergroup, Design Science, Xerox, and Kodak. He received his PhD in Psychology from the University of Rochester in 1995 and degrees in Ergonomics and Systems/Industrial Engineering at North Carolina State and Penn State.

ORCID iD

Keith S. Karn https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0523-727X

References

  1. Bagheri S. H., Asghari A., Farhadi M., Shamshiri A. R., Kabir A., Kamrava S. K., Jalessi M., Mohebbi A., Alizadeh R., Honarmand A. A., Ghalehbaghi B., Salimi A., Dehghani Firouzabadi F., Firouzabadi D. (2020). Coincidence of COVID-19 epidemic and olfactory dysfunction outbreak in Iran. Medical Journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran, 34, 62. 10.34171/mjiri.34.62 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Burges Watson D. L., Campbell M., Hopkins C., Smith B., Kelly C., Deary V. (2020). Altered smell and taste: Anosmia, parosmia and the impact of long Covid-19. Medrxiv: The Preprint Server for Health Sciences. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Calvi E., Quassolo U., Massaia M., Scandurra A., D’Aniello B., D’Amelio P. (2020). The scent of emotions: A systematic review of human intra- and interspecific chemical communication of emotions. Brain and Behavior, 10, e01585. 10.1002/brb3.1585 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Christoffersen G. R. J., Schachtman T. R. (2016). Electrophysiological CNS-processes related to associative learning in humans. Behavioural Brain Research, 296, 211–232. 10.1016/j.bbr.2015.09.011 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. De Luca R., Botelho D. (2019). The unconscious perception of smells as a driver of consumer responses: A framework integrating the emotion-cognition approach to scent marketing. AMS Review, Advance online publication. 10.1007/s13162-019-00154-8 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  6. Dember W. N., Warm J. S., Parasuraman R. (1995). Olfactory stimulation and sustained attention. In Gilber A. N. (Ed.), Compendium of olfactory research. Explorations in aromachology: Investigating the sense of smell and human response to odours, 1982–1994 (pp. 39–46). Kendall Hunt. [Google Scholar]
  7. Doty R. L., Shaman P., Dann M. (1984). Development of the University of Pennsylvania smell identification test: A standardized microencapsulated test of olfactory function. Physiology & Behavior, 32, 489–502. 10.1016/0031-9384(84)90269-5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Erskine S. E., Philpott C. M. (2020). An unmet need: Patients with smell and taste disorders. Clinical Otolaryngology, 45, 197–203. 10.1111/coa.13484 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Ghinea G., Timmerer C., Lin W., Gulliver S. (2014). Mulsemedia: State of the art, perspectives, and challenges. ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications, 11, Article 17. 10.1145/2617994 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  10. Giacomelli A., Pezzati L., Conti F., Bernacchia D., Siano M., Oreni L., Rusconi S., Gervasoni C., Ridolfo A. L., Rizzardini G., Antinori S., Galli M. (2020). Self-reported olfactory and taste disorders in patients with severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 infection: A cross-sectional study. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 71, 889–890. 10.1093/cid/ciaa330 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Glass S. T., Heuberger E. (2016). Effects of a pleasant natural odor on mood: No influence of age. Natural Product Communications, 11, 1555–1559. 10.1177/1934578X1601101033 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Goldberg J. H., Probart C. K., Zak R. E. (1999). Visual search of food nutrition labels. Human Factors, 41, 425–437. 10.1518/001872099779611021 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Gurses A. P., Tschudy M. M., McGrath-Morrow S., Husain A., Solomon B. S., Gerohristodoulos K. A., Kim J. M. (2020). Overcoming COVID-19: What can human factors and ergonomics offer? Journal of Patient Safety and Risk Management, 25, 49–54. 10.1177/2516043520917764 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Hawkes C., Doty R. L. (2009). The neurology of olfaction. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  15. Herz R. S. (2002). Influences of odors on mood and affective cognition. In Rouby C., Schaal B., Dubois D., Gervais R., Holley A. (Eds.), Olfaction, taste, and cognition (pp. 160–177). Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  16. Hofer M. K., Chen F. S., Schaller M. (2020). What your nose knows: Affective, cognitive, and behavioral responses to the scent of another person. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29, 617–623. 10.1177/0963721420964175 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  17. Holland R. W., Hendriks M., Aarts H. (2005). Smells like clean spirit. Psychological Science, 16, 689–693. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Hopkins C., Kumar N. (2020). Loss of sense of smell as marker of COVID-19 infection 2020. https://www.entuk.org/sites/default/files/files/Loss%20of%20sense%20of%20smell%20as%20marker%20of%20COVID.pdf [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  19. Hopkins C., Surda P., Whitehead E., Kumar B. N. (2020). Early recovery following new onset anosmia during the COVID-19 pandemic – an observational cohort study. Journal of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery, 49, 1–6. 10.1186/s40463-020-00423-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Joussain P., Rouby C., Bensafi M. (2014). A pleasant familiar odor influences perceived stress and peripheral nervous system activity during normal aging. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 113. 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00113 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Kannan R., Andres F. (2010). Digital library for mulsemedia content management [Conference session]. Proceedings of the International Conference on Management of Emergent Digital EcoSystems, 275-276. Bangkok, Thailand.
  22. Kaye J. N. (2001). Symbolic olfactory display [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. [Google Scholar]
  23. Köster E. P., Møller P., Mojet J. (2014). A “Misfit” Theory of Spontaneous Conscious Odor Perception (MITSCOP): reflections on the role and function of odor memory in everyday life. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 64. 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00064 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Landis B. N., Hummel T., Hugentobler M., Giger R., Lacroix J. S. (2003). Ratings of overall olfactory function. Chemical Senses, 28, 691–694. 10.1093/chemse/bjg061 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Lechien J. R., Chiesa-Estomba C. M., De Siati D. R., Horoi M., Le Bon S. D., Rodriguez A., Dequanter D., Blecic S., El Afia F., Distinguin L., Chekkoury-Idrissi Y., Hans S., Delgado I. L., Calvo-Henriquez C., Lavigne P., Falanga C., Barillari M. R., Cammaroto G., Khalife M., Saussez Set al. (2020). Olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions as a clinical presentation of mild-to-moderate forms of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19): A multicenter European study. European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, 277, 2251–2261. 10.1007/s00405-020-05965-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Lee Y., Min P., Lee S., Kim S. W. (2020). Prevalence and duration of acute loss of smell or taste in COVID-19 patients. Journal of Korean Medical Science, 35, e174. 10.3346/jkms.2020.35.e174 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Li W., Moallem I., Paller K. A., Gottfried J. A. (2007). Subliminal smells can guide social preferences. Psychological Science, 18, 1044–1049. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.02023.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Maggioni E., Cobden R., Dmitrenko D., Obrist M. (2018). Smell-O-Message: Integration of olfactory notificationsinto a messaging application to improve users’ performance [Conference sesion]. Proceedings of the 20th ACM International Conference on Multimodal Interaction, 45–54.
  29. Miwa T., Furukawa M., Tsukatani T., Costanzo R. M., DiNardo L. J., Reiter E. R. (2001). Impact of olfactory impairment on quality of life and disability. Archives of Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery, 127, 497–503. 10.1001/archotol.127.5.497 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Moein S. T., Hashemian S. M., Mansourafshar B., Khorram-Tousi A., Tabarsi P., Doty R. L. (2020). Smell dysfunction: A biomarker for COVID-19. International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology, 10, 944–950. 10.1002/alr.22587 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Moein S. T., Hashemian S. M., Tabarsi P., Doty R. L. (2020). Prevalence and reversibility of smell dysfunction measured psychophysically in a cohort of COVID‐19 patients. International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology, 10, 1127–1135. 10.1002/alr.22680 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Paillard A. C., Lamôré M., Etard O., Millot J.-L., Jacquot L., Denise P., Quarck G. (2014). Is there a relationship between odors and motion sickness? Neuroscience Letters, 566, 326–330. 10.1016/j.neulet.2014.02.049 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Parma V., Ohla K., Veldhuizen M. G., Niv M. Y., Kelly C. E., Bakke A. J., Cooper K. W., Bouysset C., Pirastu N., Dibattista M., Kaur R., Liuzza M. T., Pepino M. Y., Schöpf V., Pereda-Loth V., Olsson S. B., Gerkin R. C., Rohlfs Domínguez P., Albayay J., Kaur Ret al. (2020). More than Smell-COVID-19 is associated with severe impairment of smell, taste, and Chemesthesis. Chemical Senses, 45, 609–622. 10.1093/chemse/bjaa041 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Pollack J. (2019). Kitchen range fires and explosions: Usability versus safety. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 63, 568–572. 10.1177/1071181319631473 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  35. Qiu C., Cui C., Hautefort C., Haehner A., Zhao J., Yao Q., Zeng H., Nisenbaum E. J., Liu L., Zhao Y., Zhang D., Levine C. G., Cejas I., Dai Q., Zeng M., Herman P., Jourdaine C., de With K., Draf J., Zhang Det al. (2020). Olfactory and gustatory dysfunction as an early identifier of COVID-19 in adults and children: An international multicenter study. Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, 163, 714–721. 10.1177/0194599820934376 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Robin O., Alaoui-Ismaïli O., Dittmar A., Vernet-Maury E. (1999). Basic emotions evoked by eugenol odor differ according to the dental experience. A neurovegetative analysis. Chemical Senses, 24, 327–335. 10.1093/chemse/24.3.327 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Santos D., Reiter E. R., DiNardo L. J., Costanzo R. M. (2004). Hazardous events associated with impaired olfactory function. Archives of Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery, 130, 317–319. 10.1001/archotol.130.3.317 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Schiffman S. S. (1997). Taste and smell losses in normal aging and disease. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 278, 1357–1362. 10.1001/jama.1997.03550160077042 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Soler Z. M., Patel Z. M., Turner J. H., Holbrook E. H. (2020). A primer on viral-associated olfactory loss in the era of COVID-19. International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology, 10, 814–820. 10.1002/alr.22578 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Soter A., Kim J., Jackman A., Tourbier I., Kaul A., Doty R. L. (2008). Accuracy of self-report in detecting taste dysfunction. The Laryngoscope, 118, 611–617. 10.1097/MLG.0b013e318161e53a [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Speth M. M., Singer-Cornelius T., Oberle M., Gengler I., Brockmeier S. J., Sedaghat A. R. (2020). Olfactory dysfunction and sinonasal symptomatology in COVID-19: Prevalence, severity, timing, and associated characteristics. Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, 163, 114–120. 10.1177/0194599820929185 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Stevenson R. J. (2010). An initial evaluation of the functions of human olfaction. Chemical Senses, 35, 3–20. 10.1093/chemse/bjp083 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Teerling A., Nixdorf R. R., Köster E. P. (1992). The effect of ambient odours on shopping behavior. Chemical Senses, 17, 886. [Google Scholar]
  44. Tong J. Y., Wong A., Zhu D., Fastenberg J. H., Tham T. (2020). The prevalence of olfactory and gustatory dysfunction in COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, 163, 3–11. 10.1177/0194599820926473 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Warm J. S., Dember W. N., Parasuraman R. (1991). Effects of olfactory stimulation on performance and stress in a visual sustained attention task. Journal of the Society of Cosmetic Chemists, 42, 199–210. [Google Scholar]
  46. Wehling E., Nordin S., Espeseth T., Reinvang I., Lundervold A. J. (2011). Unawareness of olfactory dysfunction and its association with cognitive functioning in middle aged and old adults. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 26, 260–269. 10.1093/arclin/acr019 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Wogalter M. S., Laughery K. R. (2011). Failure to detect gas leaks: Forensic human factors considerations. Ergonomics in Design, 19, 21–23. 10.1177/106480461140099 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  48. Yan C. H., Faraji F., Prajapati D. P., Boone C. E., DeConde A. S. (2020). Association of chemosensory dysfunction and COVID-19 in patients presenting with influenza-like symptoms. International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology, 10, 806–813. 10.1002/alr.22579 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Yanagida Y. (2008). Olfactory interfaces. In Kortum P. (Ed.), HCI beyond the GUI: Design for Haptic, speech, olfactory, andother nontraditional interfaces (pp. 267–290). Elsevier. [Google Scholar]

Articles from Human Factors are provided here courtesy of SAGE Publications

RESOURCES