Olfactory Sexual Inhibition and the Westermarck Effect

Overview

Journal Hum Nat

Specialties Psychology
Social Sciences

Date 2015 Jul 21

PMID 26193096

Citations 4

Authors

M A Schneider

L Hendrix

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The Westermarck effect (sexual inhibition among individuals raised together) is argued to be mediated olfactorily. Various animals, including humans, distinguish among individuals by scent (significantly determined by MHC genotype), and some avoid cosocialized associates on this basis. Possible models of olfactory mechanisms in humans are evaluated. Evidence suggests aversions develop during an early sensitizing period, attach to persons as much as to their scents, and are more powerful among females than among males. Adult to child aversions may develop similarly, but more likely result from stimulus generalization. This hypothesis accords with current evidence and yields testable predictions (e.g., anosmia will prevent inhibition) that, should they be supported, will conclusively ground the Westermarck effect in a biological mechanism.

Citing Articles

Olfaction scaffolds the developing human from neonate to adolescent and beyond.

Schaal B, Saxton T, Loos H, Soussignan R, Durand K Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2020; 375(1800):20190261.

PMID: 32306879 PMC: 7209940. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2019.0261.

Body odours as a chemosignal in the mother-child relationship: new insights based on an human leucocyte antigen-genotyped family cohort.

Schafer L, Sorokowska A, Sauter J, Schmidt A, Croy I Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2020; 375(1800):20190266.

PMID: 32306871 PMC: 7209942. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2019.0266.

Bonding, postpartum dysphoria, and social ties : A speculative inquiry.

Crouch M Hum Nat. 2015; 13(3):363-82.

PMID: 26192928 DOI: 10.1007/s12110-002-1020-7.

If I could just stop loving you: anti-love biotechnology and the ethics of a chemical breakup.

Earp B, Wudarczyk O, Sandberg A, Savulescu J Am J Bioeth. 2013; 13(11):3-17.

PMID: 24161170 PMC: 3898540. DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2013.839752.

References

Porter R, Cernoch J, Balogh R . Odor signatures and kin recognition. Physiol Behav. 1985; 34(3):445-8. DOI: 10.1016/0031-9384(85)90210-0. View

Yamaguchi M, Yamazaki K, Beauchamp G, Bard J, Thomas L, Boyse E . Distinctive urinary odors governed by the major histocompatibility locus of the mouse. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1981; 78(9):5817-20. PMC: 348873. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.78.9.5817. View

Yamazaki K, Beauchamp G, Wysocki C, Bard J, Thomas L, Boyse E . Recognition of H-2 types in relation to the blocking of pregnancy in mice. Science. 1983; 221(4606):186-8. DOI: 10.1126/science.6857281. View

Wedekind C, Furi S . Body odour preferences in men and women: do they aim for specific MHC combinations or simply heterozygosity?. Proc Biol Sci. 1997; 264(1387):1471-9. PMC: 1688704. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.1997.0204. View

Beauchamp G, Yamazaki K, Bard J, Boyse E . Preweaning experience in the control of mating preferences by genes in the major histocompatibility complex of the mouse. Behav Genet. 1988; 18(4):537-47. DOI: 10.1007/BF01065520. View

Wallace P . Individual discrimination of humans by odor. Physiol Behav. 1977; 19(4):577-9. DOI: 10.1016/0031-9384(77)90238-4. View

Wedekind C, Seebeck T, Bettens F, Paepke A . MHC-dependent mate preferences in humans. Proc Biol Sci. 1995; 260(1359):245-9. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.1995.0087. View

Apanius V, Penn D, Slev P, Ruff L, Potts W . The nature of selection on the major histocompatibility complex. Crit Rev Immunol. 1997; 17(2):179-224. DOI: 10.1615/critrevimmunol.v17.i2.40. View

Mott A, Leopold D . Disorders in taste and smell. Med Clin North Am. 1991; 75(6):1321-53. DOI: 10.1016/s0025-7125(16)30391-1. View

10.

Yamazaki K, Beauchamp G, Kupniewski D, Bard J, Thomas L, Boyse E . Familial imprinting determines H-2 selective mating preferences. Science. 1988; 240(4857):1331-2. DOI: 10.1126/science.3375818. View

11.

Seemanova E . A study of children of incestuous matings. Hum Hered. 1971; 21(2):108-28. DOI: 10.1159/000152391. View

12.

Yamazaki K, Boyse E, Mike V, Thaler H, Mathieson B, Abbott J . Control of mating preferences in mice by genes in the major histocompatibility complex. J Exp Med. 1976; 144(5):1324-35. PMC: 2190468. DOI: 10.1084/jem.144.5.1324. View

13.

Beauchamp G, Yamazaki K, Boyse E . The chemosensory recognition of genetic individuality. Sci Am. 1985; 253(1):86-92. DOI: 10.1038/scientificamerican0785-86. View

14.

Potts W, Manning C, Wakeland E . Mating patterns in seminatural populations of mice influenced by MHC genotype. Nature. 1991; 352(6336):619-21. DOI: 10.1038/352619a0. View

15.

Scheidel W . Brother-sister marriage in Roman Egypt. J Biosoc Sci. 1997; 29(3):361-71. DOI: 10.1017/s0021932097003611. View

16.

Van Toller C, Wood N, Lombard J, Dodd G . Skin conductance and subjective assessments associated with the odour of 5-alpha-androstan-3-one. Biol Psychol. 1983; 16(1-2):85-107. DOI: 10.1016/0301-0511(83)90056-x. View

17.

Eklund A . The effect of early experience on MHC-based mate preferences in two B10.W strains of mice (Mus domesticus). Behav Genet. 1997; 27(3):223-9. DOI: 10.1023/a:1025658013443. View

18.

Penn D, POTTS W . How do major histocompatibility complex genes influence odor and mating preferences?. Adv Immunol. 1998; 69:411-36. DOI: 10.1016/s0065-2776(08)60612-4. View

19.

Hedrick P, Black F . HLA and mate selection: no evidence in South Amerindians. Am J Hum Genet. 1997; 61(3):505-11. PMC: 1715963. DOI: 10.1086/515519. View

20.

Russell D . The prevalence and seriousness of incestuous abuse: stepfathers vs. biological fathers. Child Abuse Negl. 1984; 8(1):15-22. DOI: 10.1016/0145-2134(84)90045-0. View