ReviewCognitive research: principles and implications2022
A three-factor benefits framework for understanding consumer preference for scented household products: psychological interactions and implications for future development.
Review in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cultural sensitivity and patient-centered care regarding incense and candle smoke emissions.Frontiers in allergy · 2026Article
- Volatile Essential Oils from Different Tree Species Influence Scent Impression and Physiological Response.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Extracts from Wheat, Maize, and Sunflower Waste as Natural Raw Materials for Cosmetics: Value-Added Products Reaching Sustainability Goals.Pharmaceutics · 2024Article
- Nocturnal exposure to a preferred ambient scent does not affect dream emotionality or post-sleep core affect valence in young adults.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Release of Volatile Cyclopentanone Derivatives from Imidazolidin-4-One Profragrances in a Fabric Softener Application.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Humans have deliberately scented their environment for purpose or pleasure for millennia. In the contemporary marketplace most consumers prefer and purchase scented versions of common household products. However, the drivers of this consumer preference have not been elucidated. To explain the attraction to scent in household products we propose a novel three-factor framework, comprising functional benefits (malodor mitigation, base odor coverage, freshening), in-use experience benefits (cleanliness, efficacy, pleasure), and emotional benefits (increasing in confidence, mood and nostalgia). To support this framework, we present new data from a market research survey on US consumer purchasing habits and attitudes towards home cleaning, laundry, and air freshening products. Further substantiating our framework, a focused review of olfactory psychological science illustrating the central role of scent in cognition, wellbeing, motivated behavior, and social behavior, as well as sensory marketing research highlights the benefits and implications of scent in consumer household products. Based on our three-factor framework we go on to discuss the potential for scent to influence health and raise issues to consider (such as potential negative responding to fragranced products). We conclude by showcasing new opportunities for future research in olfactory science and on scented household products that can advance the positive impacts of scent.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.