Odour psychology

ODOUR PSYCHOLOGY AROMATHERAPY:

TOWARDS

A SCIENTIFIC

EXPLANATION CHRISTINE

I A being.

study an odour in isolation meaning

in

analogy

often

does

as a whole

“process”.

It

surprising

might

research

be be

for

which

seeks

is the

and

to break

going

against

the

the

and Zucco

identiljr

is

physical

their physical and texture.

(1989)

suggest

to

our

1987).

function

to

of the

recognise

objects

odour

and

rather

than

in comparison

perception

(Engen,

In such a way, the odour and perceive 1985)

this

by our relatively poor odours

would

is .jusl

that we use to

everyday objects

and events. Social constructionists Gergen,

original

any

piece

What is required

of

a businessman,

the

environment temperature

sell

some

is the isolation

within

variables

(Wohlwill,

he could

and

rigor and control.

small pieces,

1,000

difficulties,

would argue that little is to

be gained from this as it lacks scientific

into

experimental

lighting,

(e.g. that

etc.)

construct

and interpretation 1970).

of

physical the

of odours

Variables

are broadly

suggest

conditions involving

odours need to constantly change in order to prevent habituation

(e.g. that to

as an original

This is, of course,

absurd,

but

defined as any conditions

that effect, or

are

phenomenon

influenced

under experimental

piece?

In

the

deconstruct investigation

qualities

could

odours

in

then,

isolation

the

environment

it.

that to study normal Lhe

isolaling

under it

from will reduce

and

in which

and

natural

the richness the

odour

is

However, to studying odours natural

environment

seeks as age,

such

temperalure “independent observed to

the

is not

an

to

the

control sex,

all

lighting,

etc. and manipulate

variable,

one

known

just

as

the

variable”. In this way, any

effects

can be said to be due

independent variable

variable.

The

is lhe measurable

for example

reaction

score on a depression

time

or

scale.

In terms of the effects of olfaction

1970).

an olfactory its

experimenter

effect,

and

investigation

environment context

contextually

In

situation,

variables

dependent

physical

(Wohlwill,

deconstructing

phenomenon

their

any

upon

reduce

are

upon

Therefore,

in

to ignore

validity of the research.

Attitudes

perceived.

to

under

to their

would

dependent social

then,

bestowed

argue

environment ecological

way

will serve

synergistic One

same

any phenomenon

by, the

investigation.

at what point does the work no longer assume the title and value of an original

such as colour

one piece of information identify

of the

is similar to the

make-up

ability to name

for

each one for $3 million

In terms of olfaction,

idea is supported

an

a

its

researchers

made

than the odour per

a primary

system

Ihis:

without

meaning

fallacies

research.

se. This, they contend, visual

A useful

is

Let’s say that this

Being

experimental

of

system is to identify the source

way that

it

that if he CUL the canvass

This

assumptions

of the odour rather

give

he realises

parts

that one of the primary functions olfactory

rale

work.

Picasso.

Richardson

purchases

down a

its effects.

some

about experimental

life.

used

Picasso for 53 million. Picasso’s

removes the

which

everyday

businessman

some of the issues that

and

surrounding

boundaries

its relevance to the practice OJaromatherapy.

as reductionist.

to explain

methods

that

investigated

into its constituent

paper explores

it

somewhat

methodologies

phenomenon

the

but

to assume

viewed

Reductionism in order

treat

as a continuing

can

typically

it

person,

therefore

aromatherapy

argue

qfresearch, and

Not

also views treatment

are

cons

contextual

individual

using

An aromatherapist researching the psychological effects of essential oil odours at Coventry University highlights some of the pros and

romatherapy is generally regarded as a holistic approach to health and well only

BROUGHAN

on context

dependent

and Ross (1989) examined under

these

memory,

and Herz (1997) effects

experimental

have

successfully conditions.

However, whilst these experiments ecological

Cann

hold

validity when the individual

is consciously

attending

to the stimuli,

Castle

(1999)

appraisal always

is not

conscious.

In

“novel”

situation

be aroused

the participant

provides

backdrop, system regardless

oscillate

between

into how much on

variables is

need

conditions

change

conditions,

variable.

can

such

measure

constant

appraisal

of

stimuli is maintained.

research

subject

bias

methods by

Participants too

characteristics defined

experiment

participant

that

to behave

way. Orne

issues

psychology

their

are often

often

on the

will

be

on

other

methodologies

interviews experiment expected

a

as

carefully

will be able to conceal outcomes

research, one is

faced with the fact that participants that

appraise

this

the

performance/response confounding

individual

design,

can not

eliminated

solely

Again, one

reduce suggest

into

interpreting

it

consideration

one

can

experiments

participants.

difficult to conceal independent

the presence

variable.

studies

of the

However,

if

are nai’ve, they will not be

may

also

whilst

can level; In this

acknowledges

the

of the sample selection, the to

Ihe

press

whilst one

representative

sufficiently

bias

under

investigation, a framework,

tools

as

structural

algorithms, of

how

observable

natural

environment.

releases

sample

behaviour

in

etc.,

those

individuals

replication 1968). reliability

will of

conditions

only

of age

who are to

(Allport,

indicate

certain producing

hypothesised

effects.

experimental

results

certain

The

validity

environment.

experimental

The

as a predictive

of its validity. If the evidence

fails

one

needs

then

to rc-examine

experimental

method

1972).

diverseness

They reflect

of

the

(Harre

&

do not, by their the richness

and

environment

in

setting.

Again,

In

the

evidence and

measures

of no

world is both

experimental

one must interpret

on

this

basis

other

are necessary.

which we live. Whilst some may criticise studies

the

way,

realism,

“real-world”

I emphasise;

complex

il is the

experimental

that gives it external

as such

the

this

experimental

reflect

interpretations

the

or

developed.

by surroundings for their artificiality

to

reflect “real-world” findings,

hypotheses

have also been

in the

value of an

adequately

which

experiments

by

or predict

variables

variable

tool is a measure

of

is determined

of certain

independent

the

experimental

there is no need for mundane

very nature,

the

evidence

of an experiment

This

natural

give up an hour or so of their time.

criticised

and

be assumed from the successful

the way in which they reflect

but

in the research

cannot

the effects

a more

in terms

The validity of experimental

to

status, one will still

interested

Laboratory

to

these

with each other

affect

by

of participants

may obtain

and socio-economic only attract

can attempt

of sample

cohort

local

of

groups/conditions

issue

the

one

assignment

the study. One

address

design

at another

one

individuals

of

from

to conditions.

control

effects

by deconstructing

provide

interact

provides

the

methods

suffer

experimental

randomness

Secord,

it is very

the phenomenon but

validity. designed

only of

variables

this

and questionnaires.

when

is to use naiiie

stimuli,

is not

be

As with any investigation sensory

problem

it must

results. One such control in

involving

participants

this effect, that

the

not evidence

variables

with

bias to a much lesser extent.

through

carefully

made

of experimental

that of allocation

again,

be

this

Observational

the

therefore,

musl

but also interviews

way,

of

and

caution.

interest

representative

generalisation

and

to

Whilst if

entirely and therefore

taken

olfactory

unique

be

population

widening

their

sample.

carefully

predictions

will

this is not a

methodology.

experimental would

-

variable

experimental planned,

siluation affect

will

experiments

the participants but are often

is

experimental

that gives it ecological of

the

into its

It

of

series

was

evidence

whereby

environment.

concrete

opportunity

it would to assume

is “reconstructed”

facilitate

not

within

of the study.

In all psychological cognitively

the

A

about

of analysis

will

can

designed

level

interpretation

undergraduate

who show enough

limitations

questionnaires.

and

Furthermore,

such

basic

such

reflect

characteristics

and

for all other

good experimental

and predictive

However,

concerning

this

through

similar

demand

nature.

independent

However,

equations

this is a valid criticism, raised

an

Individuals

selection

about

variable.

sufficient;

of By

of that variable and the

to come and take part in an experiment

validity.

bc

that

evidence

encounter very

volunteers

university Accordingly,

internal

the method’s

research

be

the

the demand bY of the experiment, thus

characteristics reducing

can

the in a

criticises

participants

that

influenced

Whilst

bias

or react

(1962)

use of experimental basis

are

as those features

one

be nai’ve of any researcher

natural

based Demand

just

interpretation Many

equally

strength

variables one can infer something

requires

of an individual.

are not randomly selected

operationally

manipulating

dependent

the

might

the

variable whilst controlling

In other beliefs

is

methodology.

the relationship

effect

one

this

can have

how much

can

that

phenomenon

students.

certain

insight

as expectation,

behaviour

in

in

and reflect

in which

or unconscious

the olfactory

an

experimental

involving

to constantly

“environment”

conscious

of

of

a usefttl

suggestibility

observed

the effects

these effects

the dependent one

argue

aware of the odour. In this

order to prevent habituation the

it can provide

198Oa)

is

and suggestibility

under some experimental

(Allport,

it

Whilst

to minimalise

demand characteristics

and

the individual

effects of the

variable.

important

words,

dis-habituation,

of whether

way, experimental odours

dynamic olfactory

and

consciously

sensory

and

independent

others

individual’s

will

habituation

of other

a rich

the

will

of “novel”

in an environment

the presence

stimuli

a

by the presence

However,

where

aware of the hypothesised

that cognisant

environment

laboratory odours.

suggests

of the

validity

compensatory The

natural

and fluid, and

the significance

of

experimental

findings

in a way that

reflects the plasticity of an unstable often unpredictable

and

environment.

examine any

whether

effect

cognition; and

processing

oils this current

framework

no reason why aromatherapy using

investigated controlled

examines

affecting

observable

personality,

appraisal This

research

so long as the all

the

behatiour,

mood,

cognitive 1991).

rigorously

experiments

research

there is

cannot be

will

ensure

remains

the

ecologically

valid,

to

of essential in

light

The first question

of

essential

oils have

the effect

we might

expect

(i.e. does

measures

participant out

a

arousal?). emotional,

cognitive

task

Oil

and

A

Oil

B

laboratory measure

can be used as a predictive in a person’s environment.

present,

and

question

is

No

oil

present.

whether

with the hypothesised

phenomena

under

experimental

a process

scrutiny.

Typically,

design has often failed to

do the latter, but has developed research the

good

phenomena

By using

so that

these

effects

should and

carefully

component

and examined.

essential

oils

methods,

chosen

using

which

are

the

true

to reflect

nature of the oils in the environment. Experimental confined

methods

to measurement

physiological

are of

components.

also enables

psychological

pur-ely Careful

us to investigate

and cultural

that are central

not

influences

to our understanding

of aromatherapy.

decrease

field is currently scientific

manner

acceptable

being carried

be

The aims of the research

controlled

a series of

experiments

to

example

time

question

conditions

in

consist

to

that

response, response.

will be

changes

a soft-wired

A hard-

response

will be

factors such

that direct

be

so

present

indirect various

chemical not

effects

individual

differences effect.

the

is

and major

(1968) the

hypothesis. 59: 395-406. The

open

theory. Journal

o/

61: 301-

A. and Ross, D.A. (1989)

stimuli

such

?? Castle,

P.

Engen,

in of

Un$uDlished

(1999)

T. (1986)

?? Gergen,

of Warwick,

K.G.

R.

The

and

cue

M.T.

(1962)

Implications

derived

research

hypnosis.

Memory

memory.

psychotherapy

current

of

odor-based

2.5: 375-380.

Orne,

o For

Social

The effects

on

context-dependent and Cognition

P.F.

of

Blackwell. (1997)

distinctiveness

on

the

from

nature

of

American Journal of Psychiatry

118: 1097-1103. ?? Richardson,

L.M. (1989)

J.T.E.

Cognition

and

Zucco,

and olfaction:

a

eview. Psychological Bulletin 105: 352k60. Stainton

lempstead:

a

York:

Secord,

Explanation

?? Herz, R.S.

as

that

The So&l

(198.5)

of the Person. New

?? Harre,

(1972)

xploration

likely

The biology of

Springer-Verldg.

by and

have

cues

Experimentia 42: 2 11-328.

olfaction.

Explaining

beliefs will

as context

American Journal

memory.

Psychology 102: 91-102.

o

contrast,

mediated

factors

learning, it

as to

By

will be

and

effects

is present,

subject

psychological

significant

long

differences.

personality,

by

such as arousal,

It is assumed

individual

a

and beliefs.

is

or

and

G.W. (1960)

Behaviour. Oxford:

and a

mediated

by psychological

as expectations

this

human

any such

of two components:

or direct

response

mediated

Olfactory

which

we will endeavour

soft-wired or indirect

whereas

ofPsychology

a

aims

under

the hypothesis

physiological

British Journal

Construction

the second question,

wired

D.A. simultaneity movement

o

arousal

oils have an effect. To answer

effects

factor,

UK.

the

expectation,

aromatherapists

are twofold. First to conduct rigorously

out in a

that will hopefully

to both

and scientists.

in this

reaction

second

hard-wired

Allport,

perceptual

to be a relaxant,

explore

to test

0

Phenomenal

Doctoral Thesis. University

task.

appropriate work

So for

are

effect

essential

will

University

measures

physiological

increase

cognitive

that At Coventry

oil.

oil, thought

The

tools we cnn examine

of

experimental

design

of a particular lavender

tools by which to deconstruct

parts can be identified the

of the

The

physiological,

and emotional

and reconstructing

common

of independent

factors.

?? Cann,

consistent

we need

best

310.

cognitive,

oils

by a single

interrelated

oils

may be

AFnormal and Social Psychology

To

deconstructing

explained

or by a manifold

of

as a good

of essential

This

system in personality

establish the true nature of the effect of essential

of the effect

?? Allport,

using experimental methods in a

or cluster

that can be classified

an individual.

three

present,

examine the gfects of essential oils

that the results obtained

on

all research

This

a factor

is a

to carry

under

by using these tools we can

meaning

personality

will be taken. Each

will be required

conditions:

To

and

factors.

aims to identify predictor

to be addressed

particular

oil increase

beliefs,

are interactive or whether there single factor underpinning

psychological

is whether

cognitive

It is unclear, at this stage, whether expectations,

factors

such as

that

Second

explained

do this, physiological,

Rogers,

time

theories.

factors and

of

reaction

speed.

peppermint

emotions, (Stainton

be

have

aspects

how the effects

can

current

oils

selected

for example

investigate

Within

essential

on

o

Rogers,

Health

rsychology. 103-312.

W.

Harvester

an

Hemel

Wheatsheaf.

J.F.

discipline

(1991)

Illness:

diversity.

of

Wohlwill,

,merging

and

(1970)

The

of environmental

American

Psychologist 25: