New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Bad Smells Impair Learning

Our senses have difficulty parsing stimuli linked to a negative event

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Performance usually improves with practice, but not if training is a rotten time. A new study shows that people’s ability to identify noises declines when the sounds are paired with putrid smells—a phenomenon that may allow our brain to detect danger more quickly.

In a study published in May in Nature Neuroscience, neurobiologist Rony Paz of the Weizmann Institute of Science in Rehovot, Israel, and his colleagues exposed volunteers to auditory tones presented with no other stimuli or immediately followed by a rancid or fragrant odor delivered through a nose mask.

After this training session, the subjects were played a series of tone pairs—notes of very similar or identical frequencies—and asked whether the tones in each pair were the same or different. The subjects became better at distinguishing tones similar to those that had been presented alone or with a pleasant scent. But their ability to discriminate tones resembling those linked to a foul stench worsened—an effect that persisted one day later.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Such sensory confusion could be an adaptation that allows our defenses to rapidly mobilize. “This likely made sense in our evolutionary past,” Paz says. “If you’ve previously heard the sound of a lion attacking, your survival might depend on a similar noise sounding the same to you.”

SA Mind Vol 22 Issue 5This article was published with the title “Bad Smells Impair Learning” in SA Mind Vol. 22 No. 5 (), p. 14
doi:10.1038/scientificamericanmind1111-14b

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe