Aphantasia Logo
Back to all research
Aphantasia Logo

Building awareness and understanding of aphantasia through research, education, and community support.

About

  • What is Aphantasia?
  • What is Hyperphantasia?
  • Take Assessment
  • Getting Started
  • Newsletter
  • About Us
  • Contact

Community

  • Premium Membership
  • Find support
  • Discussions
  • Events
  • Visualize

For Professionals

  • Overview
  • Free Introduction
  • Counselor Training
  • Educator Training
  • List Your Practice
  • Pricing & Bundles

Resources

  • Articles & Stories
  • Videos & Interviews
  • Aphantasia Course
  • FAQs

Research

  • Research Library
  • Participate in Studies
  • Recruitment Services

© 2026 Aphantasia Network. All rights reserved.

  • Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
Aphantasia Logo
Back to all research
Aphantasia Logo

Building awareness and understanding of aphantasia through research, education, and community support.

About

  • What is Aphantasia?
  • What is Hyperphantasia?
  • Take Assessment
  • Getting Started
  • Newsletter
  • About Us
  • Contact

Community

  • Premium Membership
  • Find support
  • Discussions
  • Events
  • Visualize

For Professionals

  • Overview
  • Free Introduction
  • Counselor Training
  • Educator Training
  • List Your Practice
  • Pricing & Bundles

Resources

  • Articles & Stories
  • Videos & Interviews
  • Aphantasia Course
  • FAQs

Research

  • Research Library
  • Participate in Studies
  • Recruitment Services

© 2026 Aphantasia Network. All rights reserved.

  • Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
Ask AI About This Paper
Ask AI About This Paper

Olfactory imagery: A review

DOI: 10.3758/bf03196369
Tags:
Measurement & Assessment
Stevenson, R. J., & Case, T. I. (2005). Olfactory imagery: a review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12(2), 244–264. doi:10.3758/bf03196369

Abstract

Olfactions unique cognitive architecture, the apparently inconsistent evidence favoring imagery, and its difficulty of evocation have led some to conclude

Authors

  • Richard J. Stevenson1
  • Trevor I. Case1

Olfactory imagery: A review

DOI: 10.3758/bf03196369
Tags:
Measurement & Assessment
Stevenson, R. J., & Case, T. I. (2005). Olfactory imagery: a review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12(2), 244–264. doi:10.3758/bf03196369

Abstract

Olfactions unique cognitive architecture, the apparently inconsistent evidence favoring imagery, and its difficulty of evocation have led some to conclude

Authors

  • Richard J. Stevenson1
  • Trevor I. Case1
Aphantasia Logo

What This Study Is About

This research explores whether people can truly "picture" smells in their minds, a concept known as olfactory imagery. While most people are familiar with visual imagery (seeing with the "mind's eye"), the researchers investigated if we possess a "mind's nose" and why it seems so much harder for people to describe or conjure up scents compared to sights or sounds.

How They Studied It

This paper is a comprehensive review of many different studies rather than a single experiment. The researchers analyzed data from hundreds of participants across various types of research, including:
  • Psychophysical tests: Comparing how people rate the intensity of real smells versus imagined ones.
  • Brain scans: Looking at whether the same parts of the brain light up when smelling a rose and when just imagining its scent.
  • Clinical reports: Examining cases of "phantom smells" (hallucinations) in people with certain medical conditions.
  • Questionnaires: Asking people to rate the vividness of their mental images across different senses.

What They Found

The researchers discovered that olfactory imagery is real and functions very similarly to actual smelling. When people imagine a scent, their brains process information in a way that mimics physical perception—for example, imagining a strong scent can actually make it harder to detect a faint real one. However, they found that language is a major "bottleneck." Because the parts of our brain responsible for smell and the parts responsible for language are not well-connected, people often struggle to name or describe the scents they are successfully imagining.

What This Might Mean

This suggests that while many people believe they are "scent blind" in their minds (a form of aphantasia affecting smell), they might actually have the ability but lack the words to access it. It implies that olfactory imagery is a skill that can be improved with training. However, the study also notes that because we rely so heavily on verbal labels to "find" a memory, the difficulty in naming smells makes them feel much more elusive than visual memories.

One Interesting Detail

The researchers found that "sniffing" actually helps the imagination. People are significantly better at conjuring a mental scent if they physically mimic the act of sniffing while trying to imagine it, as this physical action helps trigger the brain's olfactory processing centers.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain errors. Always refer to the original paper for accuracy.
Most-Cited Researchers
Top 10 researchers by number of papers published in Aphantasia
1

Joel Pearson

35
2

Merlin Monzel

30
3

Adam Zeman

20
4

Rebecca Keogh

17
5

Martin Reuter

16
6

Juha Silvanto

14
7

Paolo Bartolomeo

11
8

Carla Dance

10
9

Jianghao Liu

9
10

Fraser Milton

9
Recruit the largest aphantasia cohort on earth

97.4K+ users & subscribers across the imagery spectrum, plus 1.5M+ survey responses in our dataset. Skip the recruitment bottleneck and run your study with the community we've built for a decade.

Partner with us