Talk:Body odour and sexual attraction

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 January 2019 and 2 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Clminivini.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:12, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Suggested alterations

• This article covered a lot of useful information, with the use of subheadings making it easier to understand and adding good structure.
• I have added the template where citations may be useful to back up claims.
• The lead may be improved by giving a key definition with a general, very brief summary of what you will be talking about. The research you have mentioned could be cited to back up the relevant summary, rather than going into specifics at the start of the page.
• An addition to the MHC dissimilarity section could be to include how the preference for MHC dissimilar genes differ based on whether the women are in the fertile or infertile stages of their ovulatory cycle. You have mentioned that it differs based on whether the women are on hormonal contraception, so by adding information in relation to cycle stages it may add clarity to this point.

Good luck with the page! SarahH04 (talk) 17:04, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Comments

The following passage is quite a bold statement, and I think one would be hard pressed to find scientific evidence for this; "Part of this difference is caused by the different motives each gender holds for mating. Males, in order to pass on genes, subconsciously notice and are attracted to traits that indicate fertility in females, such as a voice of higher pitch, a specific hip-to-waist ratio, and a certain body odor. Evolutionarily, females have two main motives for mating: to pass on genes and to find a partner who can provide adequate support for herself and future offspring."

First of all, this passage contains a lot of unsupported claims, and the reasoning that follows it is also not as obvious nor certain as the statement would led the reader to believe. Provide sources or present it as contested. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.81.222.249 (talk) 21:30, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Suggestions for improvement

This article page could be better structured so that it is easier to understand. For example, a more general introduction rather than jumping in with lots of technical terms that may be confusing for the layperson. The first paragraph immediately refers to a few research studies, however it would be more effective to introduce some of the terms and then follow this with research findings.

Generally, some of the technical terms could have been defined more clearly from the start of the article, as it can be quite tough to read the first time round. For example, the definition in the first paragraph for HLA is very confusing and hard to understand.

In addition to this, some of the sentences used later in the article need further explanation as they are quite brief statements, for example: "Variations in MHC may allow the growth of certain organisms that influence body odor." - it is unclear what 'certain organisms' are being referenced to, and what affect these actually have on body odor and subsequent human sexual attraction.

Another important improvement is to add more citations as evidence for some of the claims made. For example, in the 'Scent and sexual attraction' paragraph, many claims are made without any evidence.

On a final note, this article could be improved with some visuals to break it up a bit. For example, some research graphs or tables to support the research mentioned.

Flocambridge (talk) 16:05, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

There is no mention of male homosexuality, and the strong subjective preference for lack of deodorant use, which seems to be, by fairly obvious observation in gay male pornography and gay male cruising website profiles), where human homosexual males express overtly their desire for strong smells and the presence of body hair. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.179.8.181 (talk) 19:54, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Planned group project

As part of a University 'Human Sexuality' psychology module, my group and I (Francessca alyse, EmmaOrton and Martharichards13) are planning on updating and adding to this article. We will consistently update the talk page with our plans before making any changes. TashK (talk) 13:17, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Bibliography sources

I have compiled a list of possible sources to use as part of the plans to update this page:

1) Sex differences in response to physical and social factors involved in human mate selection: The importance of smell for women

2) Human pheromones and sexual attraction

3) Human body odour, symmetry and attractiveness

4) Body odor quality predicts behavioral attractiveness in humans

5) Olfactory cues modulate facial attractiveness

TashK (talk) 14:20, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Bibliography

Bibliography of potential research to use in edit:

1. Darcin: a male pheromone that stimulates female memory and sexual attraction to an individual male's odour

2. MHC genes, body odours, and odour preferences

3. Manipulation of body odour alters men’s self-confidence and judgements of their visual attractiveness by women

4. Menstrual cycle variation in women's preferences for the scent of symmetrical men

5. The Scent of Genetic Compatibility: Sexual Selection and the Major Histocompatibility Complex

Martharichards13 (talk) 17:52, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Bibliography

Sources to explore:

1. Evidence for MHC-correlated perfume preferences in humans

2. Women's preference for dominant male odour: effects of menstrual cycle and relationship status

3. Odour-mediated sexual attraction in nabids (Heteroptera: Nabidae)

--EmmaOrton (talk) 18:26, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Bibliography

Sources to further research

1. Major histocompatibility complex genes, symmetry, and body scent attractiveness in men and women

2. Hormonal correlates of women's mid-cycle preference for the scent of symmetry

3. The scent of symmetry: a human sex pheromone that signals fitness?

Francesca alyse (talk) 22:04, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Change of title

We are planning to change the title of this page from 'Body odor and human sexual attraction' to 'Body Odour and Sexual Attraction' as this will allow us to include information about animal (mammals/insects) body odour and sexual attraction. TashK (talk) 12:20, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Changes to 'FA and scent' section

I will be editing and expanding the 'FA and scent' section of this article, which will include changing the title of the section to 'Body Odour and Fluctuating Asymmetry'. TashK (talk) 13:04, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Class Project Review

1. I think more could be said about why women would be at an evolutionary advantage to prefer the men with different MHC genes to their own. Also the statement "It has been found that women prefer men with differing MHC genes from themselves, creating an ideal biological match. " is uncited, as is " An evolutionary explanation as to why women are more attracted to men with differing MHC genes, is that these genes are a combination of both parents' genes which leads to a stronger immune system." So, citations would be useful here.
2. Similarly, citations are needed for this section: " The smell they produced differs between sexes and individuals. Studies have shown that the perceived attractiveness of a woman body odour is positively correlated with their physical attractiveness and body symmetry. These bodily variations are also affected by the menstrual cycle."
3. The link to this citation is broken: "Heterozygosity of HLA can also be detected through scent: in this case, heterozygosity confers greater ability to recognize a wider variety of antigens.[17]"
4. You could expand this point: "The same attraction is not held by males for heterozygous females." - Is there a theoretical explanation of why this is the case, for instance?
5. Copy-edited article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shannonf94 (talk • contribs) 19:09, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Shannonf94 (talk) 13:13, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review

1. I would suggest that a paragraph preceding the current first paragraph should be written. The introduction paragraph as it stands is slightly hard to read as is very science based. I would suggest a light introduction to the subject as a whole which would then lead on to the more technical topics.
2. Also as mentioned in the review above there are a few sweeping statements which lack references. Although these points fit well into the topic I would suggest that, at least until empirical evidence is found to back the statements up, that they should be omitted all together.
3. The section on Human Biology is very clear and structured well. It is easy, as a novice to the topic, to comprehend and follow. This was really good!
4. The topic Body Odor and Menstrual Cycle Changes is very scientific and backed up with a plethora of research which makes the information easy to trust. I would suggest that you apply this vigilance to the rest of the article.
5. In general this was a good read and I will be using the structural prowess from this article in my own!!

Also I have changed some grammar and sentences structures in order to aid with the continuity of the article. Lupet123 (talk) 11:17, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review and Copy Edit

A good start to the page, with a solid introduction into the background behind the topic. Also, there are a good number of links to related topics for readers to further understand the topic. There are also definitions of words that are not as well known, such as ‘human leukocyte antigen’, which a lot of people may not know. The selection of references used throughout the page help to outline the vast amount of research within this field of work.

The ‘scent and HLA’ paragraph is very technical, so maybe some extra explanation or simpler wording would help clarify what is being talked about for ease of understanding.

For one of your paragraphs, you have mentioned ‘heterozygosity’, but I can’t seem to see a definition on the page, so adding that might be useful for those new to the subject area.

Overall, the content of this new page fits well with the article and ties in useful and relevant information and references for understanding of the topic.

I have also copy-edited some of the grammar and sentences on the page.

Smandalia (talk) 16:07, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review

The article is quite informative and the titles are well arranged. However, i think it would useful to the reader if the introduction to the article is more clear. Instead moving straight into what research found, maybe inform the reader about the direction this article will take so the reader can decide whether this is the information they are looking for or not. The citations under the heading "scent and sexual attraction" need to be clarified, i suppose this will develop in time as this page is still under construction. Other information under other headings are well cited. Good effort and well done in developing an informative page. Psunds1993 (talk) 12:39, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review, Suggestions

The article covers a lot of information and past studies are used well to support claims.

There are a few areas which could be improved upon, namely citations. There are a few claims that do not have citations such as the last one made in regards to MHC about how artificial scents erase natural scent and thus hinder the detection of genetically compatible partners.

While the use of studies does support the claims made, there is too much detail about certain studies that is unnecessary as it doesn't contribute to the understanding of the claim. Specifically, the study that confirms female attraction to males with MHC alleles different from their own, has details regarding its procedure (such as how long the males wore the shirts) which could be omitted without hindering understanding. Severu (talk) 09:11, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review

Overall, the article seems to be heading in the right direction, there is a very broad range of scientific information concerning body odour in many contexts, giving it a well rounded perspective on the subject.

However, the vast amount of technical language across the whole article may look intimidating for a layman or just the average reader. For instance, the individual ideas in the 'Scent and HLA' section could be expanded upon for further understanding.

I edited the grammar of this sentence as it did not make sense:

Before: 'Research has also shown that the scent of low FA person is universally more attractive'

After: 'Research has also shown that the scent of a person with lower levels of FA is universally more attractive'.

I would suggest rewording of this sentence as it is very closely paraphrased with the abstract of the original article and structured in a way that makes it confusing to understand:

"Fluctuating Asymmetry (FA) is a type of biological asymmetry, which refers to the extent to which small random deviations occur in perfectly bilaterally paired structures and hence cause a deviation from perfect symmetry in such structures."

The Body Odour and Sexual Attraction in Animals section is a well-researched and great natural addition to the page.

Lilli4nch (talk) 17:50, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review - November 2016

Hi, this is my peer review of the article with a few suggestions for improvement!

Overall, this is a strong article with a nice in-depth overview of the subject. I particularly like the sections “Body odour in female selection” and “Body odour and sexual attraction in animals” – the sub-headings break up the text making information easy to locate. The text is informative, in a fluent wiki-style and the sources used support your explanations well. There are a few minor suggestions for further improvement that you may wish to consider:

In the “Human biology” section, when referring to “HLA” and “MHC” in the introduction, it could be helpful if you defined them here rather than in the sub-sections. This gives the reader an overview and makes it easier to understand what you are alluding to in the coming paragraphs. Further terms such as “heterozygosity of MHC”, and “rare alleles for MHC” could either be explained with just a sentence or linked to relevant pages to gain a further understanding (there is a wiki page ‘Zygosity’ that explains heterozygosity for example). The two-sections however, do explain these terms well.

In the “Body odour and menstrual cycle changes” section you may wish to add a graph from one of the journal articles referenced (e.g. Miller and Maner, 2011) showing the relation between a woman’s scent during menstrual cycle changes and a male’s mating behaviour. In “Body odour and fluctuating asymmetry” again, this section could maybe benefit from an image/graph corresponding to your findings relating to the menstrual cycle and attraction to symmetrical faces.

In “Women body odour is a potential cue for ovulation” the way you have written this section seems a little like an essay. You could remove the in-text citations; a footnote reference is sufficient. The language used can also be a bit clumsy and can be simplified. For example, “Singh & Bronstad (2001),[21] differed to Thornhill & Gangestad (1999),[42] claimed that odours perceived from a female in follicular phase were actually more pleasant and sexier than odours perceived from that female in the luteal phase.” This could maybe just say “Research shows that odours perceived from a female in her follicular phase were found to be more pleasant and attractive than odours perceived from that female in the luteal phase.” You could also link follicular and luteal phase and explain how these differ. Consider re-wording “Furthermore, Miller & Maner (2009)[45] indicated that males’ testosterone level is associated with females' reproduction fertility.” To “A male’s testosterone level is associated with a female’s reproductive fertility”. The title “Women body odour is a potential cue for ovulation” could maybe be changed to “Body odour as a cue for ovulation” – we can assume it is a woman’s from the ovulation

“Body odour and sexual attraction in animals” is a very strong section. The layout and writing style is non-biased and refers to research correctly. With the other sections, you could link terms like this section does and try to incorporate some more sub-headings.

Overall, this is a great contribution to Wikipedia and very interesting!Kirivictoria (talk) 12:58, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your feedback! We have changed the structure of the 'Biology' section, such that MHC and HLA are defined before the subsections. Links have also been added to more specialised topics which will help readers fully understand. We have incorporated a graph of the menstrual cycle, so that the most fertile period is highlighted, as well as the typical ovulation pattern. In- text citations have been removed to keep information concise and factual, and the overall grammatical structure has been improved to ensure easy comprehension. Thank you for helping improve this page! Simi95 (talk) 22:02, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review 2 - November 2016

Hi, overall this article gives a clear overview of the effect of body odour and sexual attraction. I just have a few modification suggestions that you may find helpful:

Introduction The introduction provides a concise overview of the topic area, yet is clear to understand to any individual. However, could you perhaps link terms such as 'reproductive success' and 'genetic quality' to other wiki pages to aid understanding? Also, where you have said "Research indicates that body odour also affects the sexual attraction of insects and mammals" - do you have a citation you could put here, to indicate that there is evidence for this?

Biology The two sections on MHC and HLA are described extremely well and are clear to the reader. However, it may be useful to define these terms in the introduction or before this section, to help comprehension. Here, be careful of the paragraph structures, it can sound like an essay at times - perhaps use the studies only in citations and focus on the overall results/conclusions in the sentences. Where you have mentioned "heterozygosity of MHC, and rare alleles for MHC" - are there any pages you could link these to? It may be useful to explain what genotype means, or link the term to its wiki page. MHC section "hetrozygotic" - is this meant to be Heterozygotic? This may just be my lack of understanding, however I was not entirely sure what as meant by a 'rare HLA allele'

Menstrual Cycle I think you could just title this section 'Menstrual Cycle' as it is clear that it will link to the overall body odour page. This also goes for the sections regarding fluctuating asymmetry, ovulation, female selection and sexual selection in animals. I think it would be helpful to link specific words to their wiki pages, for example 'luteal', 'fertility', 'follicular', 'olfaction' "Hormonal fluctuation across the menstrual cycle explains temporal variation in women’s judgment of the attractiveness of members of the opposite sex as the psychological processes that shape the formation and maintenance of human romantic relationships are influenced by variation in hormonal levels" - could link this to the menstrual cycle page or maybe give the hormonal changes specifically? Oral contraceptives: what hormones are they high in?

Fluctuating Asymmetry Good section overall, however consider linking specific words/terms to other wiki pages. Also perhaps include examples of what the 'environmental and genetic stressors' are to ensure understanding.

Concordance This section begins a little confusing and is hard to interpret; this may be helped by using links to other pages in addition to giving clear definitions of terms.

Women body odour is a potential cue for ovulation The title is a little long and could be shortened to give the overall idea. For example the inclusion of 'women' is not necessary as the section is regarding ovulation. This section relies a lot on research studies - this evidence base is great, however it is important to follow wiki guidelines regarding structure, to ensure it does not sound the same as a normal essay. Try to remain objective 'this might be' - try to stick to facts to avoid controversy.

Body odour in female selection Link words/terms to their related wiki pages. Last paragraph - there is a lot of text without citations: do you have any evidence to back this up?

Body odour and sexual attraction in animals This is my favourite section: it is very clear and detailed, and also follows wiki guidelines extremely well. Everything in this section is well explained.

Species Specificity This section has a promising start, however is there any extended information on the animals e.g. bees, and how does this work?

Overall Overall I really enjoyed reading through this article and found the sections on animals and biology particularly interesting. This is a great contribution to wiki! CADudley (talk) 19:48, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi thank you for your feedback! We have edited the introduction to include a brief definition of the topic, and linked specific topics to their Wikipedia pages. We have also ensured information provided is reinforced by research evidence. In the 'Biology' section, the structure has been rearranged to define MHC and HLA first. This way, readers can understand the concept of the topic before learning detailed information. There are also additional links to Wikipedia pages across the article for further readings. This includes a direct link to the menstrual cycle, to inform readers of specialised information on hormonal contraceptives and peaks in fertility. The structure of the 'Concordance' section has been grammatically changed to ensure easy comprehension. Titles have been made more concise and names of researchers have been removed from the text and cited, to remain objective. Thank you for helping to improve this page! Simi95 (talk) 21:41, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Peer review

• Overall really informative.

You did really well to keep things scientific but accessible for all readers. Scientific terminology was well explained.

I would recommend adding in some info-graphics or some pictures to break up the text a bit more.

• May be the lay out may be needs a slight re-think? Some titles are a little long and could potentially be subheadings under more general titles.

For example 'Women body odour is a potential cue for ovulation' - could this come under the menstrual cycle?

Also body odour in female selection contains a sex differences sub paragraph which is a little confusing as the overall title suggests this is about females - may be just have the title as 'body odour and mate selection'?

• I really like the section about body odour and animals

A way to add value here may be to have a section about primates? - as they are so closely linked (genetically) to humans - it would be interesting to see from an evolutionary perspective how we differ or are similar to them.

• I really enjoyed reading this article and I think it is a great contribution to the topic of body odour in sexual attraction. JosephineRN28 (talk) 20:27, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi thank you for your feedback! We have added pictures into the text, and edited the lay out to ensure the information is easily accessible. We have also changed the titles to be more concise, and incorporated subheadings such that the correct information is under each heading. Thank you for helping improve this page!Simi95 (talk) 21:07, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Peer review for the University of Warwick Human Sexuality course

Hello,

I think this is a reasonably well done Wikipedia article, congratulations! It is very professionally written. However, there are several areas of the article that could see some improvements. • In the "concordance in mating selection between human pheromones and facial attraction" and “women's body odour is a potential cue for copulation" portion, the referencing style explicitly mentioning the names of researchers is uncommon. The names of the researchers could be erased, and citations per the wiki guidelines should be enough.

• The citations are not linked to the pages of the journal articles/books that you pulled the information from. This is very important. I highly recommend switching to visual editing, then cite using the “cite” button. You only need to copy and paste the article site link to the little box that appears, then it does the citing automatically and with a link to the journal article page.

• One of the titles of the section in the article seems a little bit bulky, and a full statement, namely “women’s body odour is a potential cue for ovulation”. A more concise section title would be better.

• Overall across the sections there is a general lack of links to articles. Links help readers navigate the Wiki site a little easier and would really enrich the article by visibly showing a connection to other concepts and articles on Wikipedia. For example, the term "olfactor cues" in the "sex differences" sub-section in the "Body odour in female selection" paragraph.

• The grammar of the “Concordance in mating selection between human pheromones and facial attraction” part was at times incorrect. If the problems mentioned above could be considered I think the article could probably be even better. Oli1023 (talk) 20:20, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Oli1023

Hi thank you for your feedback! We have removed the names of researchers in the text, to abide by Wikipedia guidelines. We have also linked the citations to the journal articles. In regards to the titles, we have changed them to be more concise. We have also added more links to Wikipedia pages allowing users to read further on specific topics. The text in 'Concordance in mating selection between human pheromones and facial attraction' has been edited for grammatical changes. Thanks for helping improve the page!Simi95 (talk) 20:59, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

More additions to the page

After looking through some of the suggested articles to include. I have a general idea of what should be included in the introduction of this article, making it easier for the viewer to understand about the topic rather than jumping into complicated details. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clminivini (talk • contribs) 19:17, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Adding new content soon...

I am going to be adding new content regarding the topic soon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clminivini (talk • contribs) 19:20, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi all! I am going to be adding and correcting some things not he page that I added! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clminivini (talk • contribs) 00:16, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi all! I added some new content to the page that made it more clear for a reader to understand the topic without having much background on body odor and its connection with attraction. Clminivini (talk) 02:32, 16 April 2019 (UTC)Clminivini

Hetero- and Cis- normativity abounds in this article

At many points in this article, heterosexual attraction between cisgender individuals appears as not only the main context for sexual attraction, but as the sole context worth discussing.

If this corresponds to a lack of research of other contexts of sexual attraction, it is still worth mentioning that body odour plays a role there too, even if it has been the topic of less scientific research. 45.45.93.70 (talk) 19:53, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Agreed, too much of the article focuses around the attraction of females towards males, or vice versa, though that may be a bias in the cited studies. The article definitely needs good sources on same-sex attraction in particular. Gharren (talk) 14:54, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Pheromones research

Hi, Is there evidence that pheromones in humans do in fact exist? I thought it's yet to be proven.

The paragraph makes it seem as if it's a fact: Pheromones are chemical messengers produced and emitted by the body that contribute significantly to interpersonal attraction. The two types of pheromones include signal and primer, each playing a distinct role in human behavior. Signal pheromones act as attractants and repellents; they are classified as short-term behavioral pheromones. Primer pheromones produce long term changes in human behavior and hormone production. The vomeronasal organ is used to detect the pheromones of others. Pheromones emitted from sweat glands play a role in sexual attraction, sexual repulsion, mother–infant bonding, and menstrual cycles.

But these are all just assumptions to my knowledge? Please correct me if I am wrong!

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3987372/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4375873/ Rchitralla (talk) 07:13, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Your impression of the state of the literature is correct: the contentions that pheromones play a role in human behaviour comparable to their significance in other mammal species has not been empirically validated.

That’s not to say it’s been disproven — but the studies invoked in support of this theory are psychological studies regarding the relationship between sexual attraction and “body odour” — a far weaker claim than the pheromone hypothesis.

Finally, it’s worth noting that many proposed pheromone-based mechanisms were introduced in order to explain the existence of a phenomenon that is itself unsupported by the empirical literature: so-called “menstrual synchrony”. Foxmilder (talk) 12:20, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Odour (British spelling) vs. Odor (American Spelling)

The conventions of a particular variety of English should be followed consistently within a given article. see MOS:ENGVAR MOS:CONSISTENT

Since the title of the article uses "Odour" and the majority of cases within the article use "odour" we should be consistent and use the British spelling throughout the article. I've reverted some recent changes back to "odour".  • Bobsd •  (talk) 16:54, 26 August 2024 (UTC)