CoffeariumBeta
  1. Plant
  2. Farm
  3. Process
  4. Trade
  5. Roast
  6. Brew
  7. Cup
Science · Tasting

How we taste coffee

How taste, smell by two routes, and touch combine into the single impression we call flavour – and why cuppers smell, slurp and wait in a fixed order, and why people perceive the same cup differently.

Across the chain: Science

Source-checkedby Coffearium verification pass· Last source-checked 15 Oct 2026· Prepared with AI assistance· 19 sources (12 tier A)· 3 contested· Updated 15 Oct 2026
Reading depth
Contents
  • Flavour is a combined perception: the brain merges taste from the taste buds with smell that reaches the nose from the back of the mouth.2,4
  • A 2006 review of mammalian taste describes distinct receptor cells for five basic tastes: sweet, sour, bitter, salty and umami.5
  • Fragrance and aroma are smelled through the nostrils (orthonasal); flavour and aftertaste carry smell from the back of the mouth (retronasal).2
  • Mouthfeel – weight, texture and astringency – is a sense of touch, not a taste.2,8
  • Perception differs between people. In a 2018 genetic study, people predisposed to perceive caffeine as more bitter drank more coffee.14

Three senses in one sip#

What we call the flavour of a coffee is not one sense. In the SCA’s definition it combines the taste of the brew with smell that reaches the nose from inside the mouth.2 It is perceived as a single impression because the brain combines the different inputs.2 A coffee science textbook adds a third input: touch, temperature and irritation, carried by nerves in the mouth and nose.4 The three senses act at the same time and interact to create one perception.4

A 2015 review calls the perception of flavour perhaps the most multisensory of everyday experiences.6 In everyday language, all of this is often called “taste”.4 Coffearium keeps that word for the five basic tastes and uses “flavour” for the whole impression.

Taste: five basic qualities#

The sense of taste (gustation) works through the taste buds.2 Their receptor cells sit on the edges and front of the tongue. They are also found on the soft palate and in the throat.4 A 2006 review of mammalian taste describes distinct types of receptor cell for five basic tastes: sweet, sour, bitter, salty and umami.5

According to the textbook, sweet, bitter and umami substances bind to receptor proteins on the cell surface. Salty ions such as sodium pass through ion channels instead.4 In coffee, sourness is the basis of what cuppers call acidity: the SCA defines acidity as the sour taste of the brew.2 Bitterness comes from many compounds, and caffeine is only one of them.12,13

To train the five basic tastes, SCA Standard 103-2024 lists simple reference solutions. Examples are salt, citric acid, sugar and monosodium glutamate (MSG) in water, and a dark roast coffee for bitter.3 The amounts are in the Deep dive.

Smell by two routes#

Smell (olfaction) is detected by receptors in the roof of the nasal cavity.4,18 Odour molecules can reach them by two routes.2

  • Orthonasal. Through the nostrils, as we breathe in. This is how we sniff dry grounds or a fresh brew.2,18
  • Retronasal. From the back of the mouth into the nose, as we breathe out. This is how smell becomes part of flavour.2

Retronasal smell is easy to mistake for taste. Odours that enter the nose from behind are often perceived as coming from the mouth – an effect called oral referral.7 A green apple note in a coffee’s flavour, for example, is a retronasal smell, not a taste.2 The SCA therefore advises against fruit names for acidity, unless the cupper makes clear that the sour taste is meant.2

123456
  1. Orthonasal route. Vapour from the cup is drawn in through the nostrils. Fragrance and aroma are perceived this way.2,18
  2. Olfactory epithelium. The receptor surface in the upper part of the nose, reached by both routes.18
  3. Olfactory bulb. The part of the brain that processes the signals from the olfactory receptors.2,4
  4. Brew in the mouth. Dissolved substances reach the taste buds; volatiles are released.4
  5. Retronasal route. When breathing out, volatiles pass from the back of the mouth into the nose. They become part of flavour.2
  6. Throat. Remnants of the brew in the mouth and throat, after spitting or swallowing, give the aftertaste.2
The two routes by which coffee odours reach the nose. Our own drawing. Schematic, not to scale.

Touch, temperature and mouthfeel#

The third input is the somatosensory system. In the face and mouth, the trigeminal nerve carries touch, temperature and pain.4 Its free nerve endings also respond to chemicals, giving sensations such as cool, warm, burning, pungent or tingling.4

Cuppers describe the touch of coffee as mouthfeel. The SCA defines it as the brew’s weight and viscosity, its texture and other tactile properties such as astringency.2 It deliberately leaves out temperature.2 “Body” is the older word; the CVA widened it to include astringency and a metallic feel.2

Astringency is a drying, puckering feeling in the mouth.2,8 It is generally considered a tactile sensation detected by mechanoreceptors, not a taste.8 One proposed mechanism is tannins binding to proteins in saliva, but the mechanism is not yet well understood.8

Temperature changes the other senses too. According to the journal’s summary of a 2005 study, warming enhances perceived sweetness and bitterness.9 In a 2017 coffee study, a hotter brew released more volatile compounds.10

How the senses become flavour#

The inputs do not simply add up. Taste and smell influence each other.4 In a model study cited by the textbook, a caramel odour made a sugar solution taste sweeter and a citric acid solution less sour.4 Such effects work best when the smell and the taste fit together, for example a sweet smell with a sweet taste.4,7

The effect also runs the other way. In an espresso study, sugar or a sweetener raised the panel’s ratings for caramel aroma. They lowered the ratings for roasty and coffee-like aroma.16 The sweeteners have no smell, so the taste changed how the odour was perceived.16

TasteSmellTouchFlavourContext123456
  1. Taste. Taste receptor cells, mostly in taste buds, detect sweet, sour, bitter, salty and umami.4,5
  2. Smell. Odours reach the nose through the nostrils and from the back of the mouth.2
  3. Touch. The trigeminal nerve carries touch, warmth and chemical irritation; mouthfeel and astringency are touch.2,4,8
  4. Interaction. Smells can change perceived tastes, and tastes can change perceived smells.4,16
  5. Flavour. Perceived as one impression, because the brain combines the inputs.2
  6. Context. Memory, emotions, situation and culture shape what is finally perceived.4
The senses that combine into flavour. Our own drawing. Schematic, not to scale.

Perception goes beyond the senses. The textbook separates sensation, the physical response to a stimulus, from perception, the conscious experience.4 Hunger, memory, emotions, the situation and cultural habits all shape perception.4 This is why the SCA keeps information such as a coffee’s origin wholly separate from the sensory assessments.2

The cupper’s sequence#

Cupping splits the experience into parts, either along time or by sense.1,2 SCA Standard 102-2024 sets the order:1

  1. Fragrance. The smell of the dry grounds, sniffed through the nose.1,2
  2. Aroma. The smell of the brew, sniffed at the crust and again while the crust is broken.1,2
  3. Flavour. Once the brew has cooled to about 70 °C, the cupper slurps it so that it covers the tongue and palate.1 Taste and retronasal smell are judged together.2
  4. Aftertaste. What remains in the mouth and throat once the brew is spat out or swallowed, including how long it lasts.2
  5. Acidity, sweetness and mouthfeel. Assessed in the same liquoring rounds as flavour and aftertaste – at least three – as the coffee cools below body temperature.1
  6. Overall. A final impression that accounts for the whole experience.2

The order moves from orthonasal smell to the mouth. Slurping from a spoon helps vapour reach the nose from behind.2 Under the older SCA cupping protocol (2004), flavour and aftertaste were rated first in the mouth.1,17 According to a cupping textbook chapter, retronasal vapours are strongest while the coffee is hot.17 The words cuppers use for each section are explained under flavour language; the flavour wheel tool shows the descriptor families of the descriptive assessment.3

Why people perceive the same coffee differently#

Perception is personal. According to the textbook, how consumers relate to coffee is shaped by experience, culture and genetic heritage, among other factors.4 Bitterness is one example. A 2018 study used genetic data from the UK Biobank. People with gene variants that make caffeine taste more bitter drank more coffee.14 People more sensitive to two other bitter substances, quinine and PROP (propylthiouracil), drank less.14

Practice matters as well. In wine studies cited by the textbook, experts did not detect weaker odours than novices. They were better at picking out single odours in mixtures.4 People can learn to name odours better through practice and feedback.4 In a 2026 study, healthy adults who trained with four odours for 12 weeks showed changed brain responses to a trained odour.19

Adaptation and fatigue#

Senses tire. A smell that stays present soon seems weaker – a decrease that sets in relatively fast.15 A 2017 review calls the reduced response habituation and the nerve processes behind it adaptation.15 In tasting sessions, the textbook calls the result palate fatigue: after many samples, tasters become too tired and desensitised to judge accurately.4

Cupping rules allow for this. The SCA recommends at most six coffees per session, because more would be too demanding in attention and sensory fatigue.1,2 Spoons are rinsed in hot water before each cup so that one coffee is not carried over into the next.1,2 Cuppers spit the coffee out to avoid swallowing too much caffeine.1

Reference values#

Parameter Value Basis
Basic tastes Sweet, sour, bitter, salty, umami Review5
Taste reference, salty 0.20% sodium chloride solution SCA 103-20243
Taste reference, sour 0.04% citric acid solution SCA 103-20243
Taste reference, sweet 0.52% sucrose solution SCA 103-20243
Taste reference, umami 0.10% monosodium glutamate solution SCA 103-20243
Taste reference, bitter Dark roasted coffee (about Agtron #35) SCA 103-20243
Caffeine, detection threshold 1.2 ± 0.12 mM (mean, 33 people) One study11
Quinine hydrochloride, detection threshold 0.0083 ± 0.001 mM (same panel) One study11
Bitter receptors activated by caffeine Five human bitter taste receptors One study12
Start of liquoring Brew cooled to about 70 °C; at least three rounds until below body temperature SCA 102-20241
Coffees per cupping session Usually 3–6; at most 6 SCA 102-2024; CVA document1,2
Serving temperatures compared 31–62 °C, six levels; volatile release rose sharply above 40 °C One study10

The SCA references are meant to illustrate each taste quality, not to set intensities.2,3 Sour and sweet may also describe smells; the standard marks the solutions as gustative.3 Detection thresholds come from a single panel of young adults, mostly women, and are not coffee-specific.11

Receptors and coding#

Taste. Taste receptor cells sit mainly in taste buds within the papillae, on the edge and front of the tongue, the soft palate, the pharynx and the larynx.4 Sweet, bitter and umami compounds are detected by G-protein coupled receptors; sodium and other ions by ion channels.4 A 2006 review of mammalian taste describes the periphery as simple: distinct cell types with their own receptors, each tuned to one basic taste and wired to a fixed response.5 The coffee textbook chapter, citing work to 2009, still calls taste coding poorly understood and debated.4 Both views are listed under Contested.

Smell. Olfactory receptors sit on neurons, not on separate receptor cells as in taste.4 Each neuron carries one type of receptor; each receptor detects several odorants, and each odorant activates several receptor types.4 The perceived odour therefore depends on the combination of receptors activated.4 Neurons with the same receptor converge on the same glomerulus in the olfactory bulb, forming an odour map.4

Chemesthesis. Trigeminal endings in the nasal and oral lining detect dissolved chemicals as well as touch and heat.4 Most odorants also activate the trigeminal nerve, but at higher concentrations than the olfactory system.4 Studies cited by the textbook suggest that trigeminal activation contributes to perceived odour intensity.4

Retronasal smell and oral referral#

The two routes differ in more than direction. A 2016 review defines oral referral as the mislocalisation of food odours to the mouth.7 For orthonasal aroma it reports referral modulated by taste intensity; for retronasal odours the congruency of the odour–taste pairing is key.7 The more congruent the pair, the more likely both are bound together as one flavour object and localised to the mouth.7 Many researchers believe it contributes to the widespread confusion about which sense supplies which part of flavour.7

This has a practical side in cupping. Fragrance and aroma are purely orthonasal, flavour and aftertaste are mixed, and acidity is gustative.2 The CVA descriptive form therefore keeps separate check-all-that-apply (CATA) lists for orthonasal notes, retronasal notes and main tastes.2,3 The SCA’s olfactory category examples are meant to be smelled orthonasally, for training and alignment.2

Taste–smell interactions in coffee#

Odour-induced taste enhancement depends on congruency. A caramel odour enhanced the sweetness of sucrose and suppressed the sourness of citric acid in a 1999 study cited by the textbook; incongruent or novel odours can suppress taste intensity.4 The chapter suggests, without coffee data, that a fruity aroma could raise perceived acidity and roasted notes could add to bitterness.4

Coffee data exist for the reverse direction. In a 2008 espresso study, 10% sucrose and an equally sweet 0.0143% sucralose raised caramel ratings to a similar extent and lowered roasty and coffee-like ratings.16 Malty ratings did not change. Neither sweetener changed the measured concentrations of the associated odorants.16 The authors read this as taste affecting odour perception.16 As of June 2024, whether coffee’s own sweetness is a taste or such a cross-modal effect was under study.2

Temperature and perception#

Nature’s summary of a 2005 study calls it well known that warming enhances perceived sweetness and bitterness.9 The study offers a possible molecular explanation: TRPM5, an ion channel that opens when sweet, bitter and umami receptors are activated, is itself activated by heat.9 Coffee studies disagree on how bitterness changes as a cup cools; the entry on serving temperature compares them.

In a 2017 study, one Bourbon Caturra coffee was served at six temperatures from 31 to 62 °C.10 Volatile release mostly followed the van’t Hoff principle and rose sharply above 40 °C; aliphatic ketones, alkylpyrazines, some furans and pyridines rose most at 50 °C and above.10 Sour, tobacco and sweet notes were associated with servings at 31–44 °C. Servings at 50–62 °C had stronger overall intensity and more roasted and bitter notes.10 The authors suggest that the changing volatile profiles could explain some of the sensory differences.10 The CVA likewise has tasters assess the coffee over several rounds as it cools.1

Bitterness: more than caffeine#

Caffeine is bitter, but it is a minor part of coffee’s bitterness, according to a roasting chemistry chapter.13 The chapter names chlorogenic acid lactones and phenylindanes, both formed in roasting, as important bitter compounds; perceived bitterness rises with roast degree.13 A 2020 receptor study supports the picture of many contributors. Caffeine activates five human bitter taste receptors.12 Two bitter receptors, TAS2R43 and TAS2R46, responded to mozambioside, a bitter compound found in coffee, with much higher sensitivity than to caffeine.12 The coffee diterpenes cafestol and kahweol and the compound bengalensol activated the same receptors.12 Kahweol also reduced the response to mozambioside, so some compounds may damp others.12

Thresholds alone do not predict how bitter something tastes. In a 2007 study, detection threshold and above-threshold intensity correlated positively for PROP, negatively for quinine and not at all for caffeine.11

Genetics of bitter perception#

The 2018 UK Biobank study used Mendelian randomisation: gene variants linked to bitter perception served as natural experiments.14 The variant for PROP lies in the bitter receptor gene TAS2R38 on chromosome 7; those for caffeine and quinine lie in a cluster of bitter receptor genes on chromosome 12.14 Higher perceived intensity of caffeine went with a higher risk of being a heavy coffee drinker, defined as more than 4 cups a day (odds ratio 1.207).14 Higher perceived intensity of PROP and quinine went with lower coffee intake.14 The authors suggest that coffee drinkers acquire a taste for caffeine through learned positive reinforcement, that is, its stimulating effect.14 They conclude that bitter perception is causally associated with drinking bitter beverages, and that further research is needed to validate the effects.14

Liking and sensitivity are not the same. The textbook reports a European study that split consumers into groups preferring low, intermediate or intense coffee bitterness.4 In a chocolate milk study it cites, groups that rejected bitterness at different levels had the same bitter detection threshold.4

Expertise and training#

Sensory experts are relied on for discrimination and description, but the evidence is mixed. In the wine studies the textbook reviews, experts and novices had the same detection thresholds for 1-butanol and for tannin and alcohol.4 Experts were better at discriminating single odours in mixtures and at triangle tests, which the authors link to exposure.4 Odour identification improves with practice and feedback; that alone does not make people better at communicating about odours.4

The 2026 training study enrolled 94 healthy young adults; 75 completed it.19 Twelve weeks of training twice a day with rose, clove, lemon and eucalyptus odours shortened cortical response latencies to the rose odour (phenylethyl alcohol), but not to two other stimuli, hydrogen sulphide and carbon dioxide; a placebo group showed no change.19 The authors call the changes odour-specific.19 Detection thresholds and identification were measured, but the abstract opened for this entry reports no result for them.19

Adaptation in detail#

A 2017 review separates habituation – the decreased behavioural response created by repeated exposure – from adaptation, the neural processes behind that decrease.15 Habituation to odours, a decrease in intensity, is relatively fast, and adaptation occurs more quickly at higher brain levels than at the periphery.15 Difference tests such as the triangle test need many repetitions for statistical validity, which exposes assessors to palate fatigue.4 In sensory testing, the textbook recommends coded samples in random or balanced order, repetitions and individual assessment to limit bias.4

Open questions#

  • Coffee sweetness. As of June 2024, the SCA was researching whether coffee sweetness is gustatory or a cross-modal effect of sweet-smelling compounds, and promises a more concise definition.2
  • Acidity character. The SCA notes that there are no sensory references for terms such as “juicy” or “bright” acidity, and that organic acid solutions can mislead.2
  • Coffee-specific thresholds. No study opened for this entry measured detection thresholds for coffee’s main bitter compounds in brewed coffee rather than in water.
  • Training and cupping. No study opened for this entry tested whether smell training improves cupping results.

Key studies#

Ong et al., 2018 – Bitter genes and coffee intake. Using UK Biobank data and gene variants for bitter perception as instruments, the authors tested whether perceiving caffeine, quinine or PROP as more bitter changes beverage intake. Stronger caffeine perception went with heavier coffee drinking; stronger quinine and PROP perception with less.

Scientific Reports 8, 16414 · doi:10.1038/s41598-018-34713-z

Steen et al., 2017 – Serving temperature and flavour. One coffee was tasted and its headspace analysed at six temperatures between 31 and 62 °C. Volatile release rose sharply above 40 °C; cooler cups read more sour and sweet, hotter ones more roasted and bitter.

Food Chemistry, 61–68 · publication record

Lang et al., 2020 – Many compounds behind coffee’s bitterness. Cell assays with human bitter receptors, sensory tests and modelling showed that mozambioside activates TAS2R43 and TAS2R46 with much higher sensitivity than caffeine, and that bengalensol, cafestol and kahweol act on the same receptors. Kahweol, a weak activator, reduced the response to mozambioside.

Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 68(24), 6692–6700 · doi:10.1021/acs.jafc.0c01373

Chiralertpong et al., 2008 – Sweetness changes espresso aroma. Espresso was sweetened with sucrose or an equally sweet dose of sucralose. Both raised caramel ratings and lowered roasty and coffee-like ratings without changing the measured odorants, a case of taste altering odour perception.

Chemosensory Perception 1(2), 147–152 · record

Keast and Roper, 2007 – Thresholds and bitterness. Thirty-three people gave detection thresholds and intensity curves for caffeine, quinine and PROP. A low threshold did not reliably mean stronger bitterness above threshold, and the relation differed by compound.

Chemical Senses 32(3), 245–253 · doi:10.1093/chemse/bjl052

Contested
  • How taste is coded: a 2006 review describes distinct receptor cells for each basic taste, working as dedicated sensors5; a 2017 coffee science textbook chapter calls the mechanisms of taste coding poorly understood and still debated.4
  • Taste references: the June 2024 CVA document gives 0.15% sodium chloride, 0.015% citric acid, 1.0% sucrose and 1.0% monosodium glutamate as qualitative taste references2; SCA Standard 103-2024 gives 0.20%, 0.04%, 0.52% and 0.10%.3 The standard is the later and normative text.
  • Sweetness in coffee: the SCA stated in June 2024 that research was under way to establish whether it is gustatory or a cross-modal effect of sweet-smelling compounds.2 A textbook chapter cites a model study in which a caramel odour raised the sweetness of a sugar solution4; in an espresso study, added sweeteners changed aroma ratings instead.16
Share or cite this entry

Sources

  1. A/BSpecialty Coffee Association (2024). SCA Standard 102-2024 Coffee Value Assessment: Sample Preparation and Tasting Mechanics. Specialty Coffee Association.
  2. A/BSpecialty Coffee Association (writing team Fernández-Alduenda, M.; Ionescu, K. E.; Giuliano, P.; Rugolo, J.; Delrue, R.) (2024). A System to Assess Coffee Value: Understanding the Specialty Coffee Association’s Coffee Value Assessment (June 2024). Specialty Coffee Association.
  3. A/BSpecialty Coffee Association (2024). SCA Standard 103-2024 Coffee Value Assessment: Descriptive Assessment. Specialty Coffee Association.
  4. BThomas, E.; Puget, S.; Valentin, D.; Songer, P. (2017). Sensory Evaluation – Profiling and Preferences. In: Folmer, B. (ed.), The Craft and Science of Coffee, Academic Press, ch. 18, pp. 419–456. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-803520-7.00018-9 · other copies
  5. AChandrashekar, J.; Hoon, M. A.; Ryba, N. J. P.; Zuker, C. S. (2006). The receptors and cells for mammalian taste. Nature 444(7117), 288–294. doi:10.1038/nature05401 · other copies
  6. ASpence, C. (2015). Multisensory flavor perception. Cell 161(1), 24–35.
  7. ASpence, C. (2016). Oral referral: On the mislocalization of odours to the mouth. Food Quality and Preference 50, 117–128.
  8. AWang, M.; Septier, C.; Brignot, H.; Martin, C.; Canon, F.; Feron, G. (2022). Astringency Sensitivity to Tannic Acid: Effect of Ageing and Saliva. Molecules 27(5), 1617. doi:10.3390/molecules27051617 · other copies
  9. ATalavera, K.; Yasumatsu, K.; Voets, T.; Droogmans, G.; Shigemura, N.; Ninomiya, Y.; Margolskee, R. F.; Nilius, B. (2005). Heat activation of TRPM5 underlies thermal sensitivity of sweet taste. Nature 438(7070), 1022–1025. doi:10.1038/nature04248 · other copies
  10. ASteen, I.; Stolzenbach Wæhrens, S.; Agerlin Petersen, M.; Münchow, M.; Bredie, W. L. P. (2017). Influence of serving temperature on flavour perception and release of Bourbon Caturra coffee. Food Chemistry, 61–68.
  11. AKeast, R. S. J.; Roper, J. (2007). A complex relationship among chemical concentration, detection threshold, and suprathreshold intensity of bitter compounds. Chemical Senses 32(3), 245–253. doi:10.1093/chemse/bjl052 · other copies
  12. ALang, T.; Lang, R.; Di Pizio, A.; Mittermeier, V. K.; Schlagbauer, V.; Hofmann, T.; Behrens, M. (2020). Numerous Compounds Orchestrate Coffee’s Bitterness. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 68(24), 6692–6700. doi:10.1021/acs.jafc.0c01373 · other copies
  13. BPoisson, L.; Blank, I.; Dunkel, A.; Hofmann, T. (2017). The Chemistry of Roasting – Decoding Flavor Formation. In: Folmer, B. (ed.), The Craft and Science of Coffee, Academic Press, ch. 12, pp. 273–309. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-803520-7.00012-8 · other copies
  14. AOng, J.-S.; Hwang, D. L.-D.; Zhong, V. W.; An, J.; Gharahkhani, P.; Breslin, P. A. S.; Wright, M. J.; Lawlor, D. A.; Whitfield, J.; MacGregor, S.; Martin, N. G.; Cornelis, M. C. (2018). Understanding the role of bitter taste perception in coffee, tea and alcohol consumption through Mendelian randomization. Scientific Reports 8, 16414. doi:10.1038/s41598-018-34713-z · other copies
  15. APellegrino, R.; Sinding, C.; de Wijk, R. A.; Hummel, T. (2017). Habituation and adaptation to odors in humans. Physiology and Behavior 177, 13–19. doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2017.04.006 · other copies
  16. AChiralertpong, A.; Acree, T. E.; Barnard, J.; Siebert, K. J. (2008). Taste-Odor Integration in Espresso Coffee. Chemosensory Perception 1(2), 147–152.
  17. BLingle, T. R.; Menon, S. N. (2017). Cupping and Grading – Discovering Character and Quality. In: Folmer, B. (ed.), The Craft and Science of Coffee, Academic Press, ch. 8, pp. 181–203. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-803520-7.00008-6 · other copies
  18. BFolmer, B.; Blank, I.; Hofmann, T. (2017). Crema – Formation, Stabilization, and Sensation. In: Folmer, B. (ed.), The Craft and Science of Coffee, Academic Press, ch. 17, pp. 399–417. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-803520-7.00017-7 · other copies
  19. APieniak, M.; Mai, Y.; Mignot, C.; Oleszkiewicz, A.; Hummel, T. (2026). Olfactory training selectively modifies cortical responses to odors in healthy adults. Cerebral Cortex 36(2), bhag009. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhag009 · other copies

Tier A · authoritative · B · trade and expert · C · general. Supporting quotes for every source are in the data version of this entry. If a publisher’s site refuses access, try the doi link or “other copies”.

Suggest a change

On How we taste coffee. Tell us what you would change and why. A source that supports it helps most.