JP2017036930A - Fragrance evaluation method, information processing device, and program - Google Patents

Abstract

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To provide a fragrance evaluation method, an information processing device, and a program.SOLUTION: The fragrance evaluation method comprises: selecting one or more evaluation factors among an intensity of comfortableness of a mental event recollected by a subject who smells a fragrance, an importance of the mental event, a clarity of contents of the mental event, a clarity of time information of the mental event, an influence of the mental event, an information amount of feeling information of the mental event, and an evaluation factor for an intensity of the reminiscent feeling of the mental event at S102; presenting questions about the mental event recollected by smelling the fragrance to the subject who smells the fragrance at S104; and acquiring the user's responses as numerical values at S106.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 1

Description

  The present invention relates to a scent evaluation method, an information processing apparatus, and a program.

  In general, when a person smells a scent, the person is reminded of some mental event. A mental event means a change in brain activity before and after it is recalled. For example, mental events recalled by humans include autobiographical memory and semantic memory. Autobiographical memory is memory about a person's past events, such as personal experiences and memories. Thus, “the scented person recalls autobiographical memory” means that the scented person recalls something about his past events. On the other hand, the semantic memory is a memory about general knowledge and information representing the meaning of things. Therefore, “the person who smelled the scent recalls the semantic memory” means that the person has some kind of image (color, lightness, sweetness, tenderness, luxury, etc.) and things (such as the source of the scent). Means to recall.

  Research has been conducted on a method for specifically grasping what kind of emotional events a consumer is reminded by the scent of a product and the scent attached to the product. This is because the product provider wants to grasp whether or not a mental event assumed to be recalled by the consumer by attaching a specific scent is actually recalled by the consumer. For example, Patent Document 1 discloses a method of capturing colors imaged with respect to a scent. Patent Document 2 enumerates sensory or emotional rating items that express mental events, and evaluates whether or not the subject felt the characteristics indicated by each rating item, thereby reminiscent of mental A method for specifically representing a representation is disclosed.

  Here, the mental representation caused by the fragrance is complex and includes various elements, so even if it appears that the same mental event is recalled in the response to the assessment item, the truth is May be different. For example, suppose that two people who smelled the same scent recalled a light pink color image. In this case, one person clearly recalls the light pink cherry blossoms, while the other person does not know what the flower is, but feels it has some kind of flower scent, and pink is the typical color of the flower. It is possible to think of a color vaguely. Also, for example, suppose that two people sniff the same perfume and commonly recall memories of an adult woman. In this case, one person feels uncomfortable when he remembers an episode with his aunt, who was not good at it, and the other person does not remember a particular person, but a vaguely gentle adult female. It can happen that you feel relaxed.

  In such a situation, even if a product is given a scent assuming that a specific mental event is recalled, the satisfaction of the product or the scent may change depending on the individual.

JP 2008-225238 A JP 2001-174450 A Japanese Patent No. 5580634

Shinsuke Yamamoto, “Characteristics of Unintentional Recollection of Autobiographical Memory by Odors: A Diurnal Examination of Proust Phenomenon”, Cognitive Psychological Studies, 6 (1), pp. 65-73, 2008 Willander J., Larsson M, "Smell your way back to childhood: Autobiographical odor memory", Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13 (2), pp. 240-244, April 2006 Herz, R.S., Schooler, J.W, `` A naturalistic study of autobiographical memories evoked by olfactory and visual cues: Testing the Proustian hypothesis '', American Journal of Psychology, 115 (1), pp. 21-32, 2002 Koichi Sato, “Functions and Recollection Characteristics of Autobiographical Memory”, Bulletin of Faculty of Education, Gunma University, Humanities and Social Sciences, Volume 56, pp. 333-357, 2007 Takahashi M., Shimizu H, "Do you remember the day of your graduation ceremony from junior high school ?: A factor structure of the Memory Characteristics Questionnaire", Japanese Psychological Research, 49 (4), pp. 275-281, 2007 November Chu, S., Downes, J.J., "Odour-evoked autobiographical memories: Psychological investigations of Proustian phenomena", Chemical Senses, 25 (1), pp. 111-116, 2000 Herz, R.S., Cupchik, G.C. "An experimental characterization of odor evoked memories in humans", Chemical Senses, 17 (5), pp. 519-528, 1992. Kyosuke Yamamoto, Yukimasa Nomura, “Effects of naming of scent cues, emotional arousal, and pleasure-discomfort on recall of autobiographical memory”, Cognitive Psychological Studies, 7 (2), pp. 127-135, 2010 Kyosuke Yamamoto, Koji Toyoda, “Effects of emotions evoked by smell cues on recall of autobiographical memories”, Bulletin of Nara University of Education, 60 (1), pp. 35-39, 2011 Shinsuke Yamamoto, “Effects of linguistic information on recall of autobiographical memory by odor cues”, Osaka Sangyo University, Human Environment Studies, 13, pp. 1-13, 2014

  Therefore, the present inventor has come to consider that in order to grasp the characteristics of a scent, it is important to grasp what kind of characteristics a mental event recalled by the scent has for an individual. Non-Patent Document 1 describes 1) various episodes that are remembered by presenting various fragrances, and describes or dictates in detail what episodes were remembered and when they were remembered. ) It discloses a method of collecting information by analyzing the collected information through procedures such as recording a mental event reminiscent of fragrance in daily life in a diary for a long period of time. However, in the method of Non-Patent Document 1, in order to analyze the information according to the purpose and grasp the meaning and characteristics for the remembered person, a procedure such as conducting a detailed interview and having the subject go back to the memory is required. In addition, it requires much time and labor. In addition, based on what criteria the large amount of descriptive data that differs from person to person is aggregated depends on the experience and skill of the experimenter or an independent judgment, and it is difficult to uniformly evaluate the fragrance.

  Therefore, a method for evaluating the characteristics of a mental event recalled by a scent based on a certain index or standard and grasping the characteristics of the scent based on the evaluation can be considered. In patent document 2, the nature of a fragrance is evaluated by a sensory or emotional item, and then the overall preference is asked. Thereby, for example, even when a “sour” image is caused by a scent, it is possible to determine whether the sour is preferable or unfavorable. In patent document 3, it has mentioned selecting the fragrance which should be attached | subjected to a product on the basis of evaluation of the favorableness of the episode caused by the fragrance, and the arousal degree (strength of the sensation caused). Even in academic research, the chronological information of episodes recalled by fragrance (when you recalled memories) (Non-patent document 2), the emotional strength of episodes (Non-patent document 3), etc. The contents and characteristics are taken up, and the contents and evaluation are examined. However, any of these methods has only taken up some characteristics of the mental events recalled by the fragrance, and it is difficult to say that the characteristics of the fragrance can be accurately analyzed by these methods.

  If it is not limited to scents, for example, mental events recalled by teaching to “remember and remember the junior high school graduation ceremony” will be evaluated by items consisting of multiple factors that cover its characteristics. Questionnaires have been constructed (Non-Patent Documents 4 and 5). However, since the mental event recalled by the subject is limited to a specific one, the characteristics of the mental event recalled by the subject cannot be comprehensively grasped. Moreover, it is known that fragrance recognition has characteristics different from those of other sensations. For example, it is known that a mental event recalled by a scent is more emotional and often causes an early childhood event than a mental event recalled by vision or language (Non-Patent Documents). 2, 3, 6). Therefore, if the method for evaluating the characteristics of the mental event recalled by other senses is used as the method for evaluating the characteristics of the mental event recalled by the scent, the accuracy of the evaluation becomes low.

  The present invention has been made in view of the above problems. An object of the present invention is to provide a technique for accurately grasping characteristics of a scent for a person by a uniform method.

  The fragrance evaluation method of the present invention includes (1) a plurality of evaluation factors for evaluating fragrance, the strength of pleasant emotion of a mental event recalled by a user who smelled the fragrance, and the importance of the mental event The clarity of the content of the mental event, the clarity of the time information of the mental event, the impact of the mental event, the amount of sensory information of the mental event, and the nostalgia of the mental event A selection step of selecting any one or more evaluation factors from a plurality of evaluation factors including strength, and (2) a mental mind recalled by smelling the scent to a user who smelled the scent About an event, a question presenting step for presenting a question regarding each of the selected evaluation factors, (3) an acquisition step for acquiring the user's answer to the question as a numerical value, and (4) each of the selected evaluation factors Using the answer obtained, Serial having a characteristic presentation step of presenting the characteristic information indicating for each of the evaluation factors of the characteristics possessed by the scent to the user.

  The information processing apparatus of the present invention is (1) a plurality of evaluation factors for evaluating a scent, the intensity of pleasant emotion of a mental event recalled by a user who smelled the scent, the importance of the mental event, Clarity of content of the mental event, clarity of time information of the mental event, influence of the mental event, amount of information of sensory information of the mental event, and a strong sense of nostalgia of the mental event Selection means for selecting any one or more evaluation factors from among a plurality of evaluation factors including (2) a mental event recalled by smelling the scent to a user who smelled the scent A question presenting means for presenting a question regarding each of the selected evaluation factors, (3) an obtaining means for obtaining the user's answer to the question as a numerical value, and (4) obtained for each of the selected evaluation factors. Using the given answer to the user Having a characteristic presenting means for presenting the characteristic information representing the characteristics possessed by the scent for each of the evaluation factors Te.

  The program of this invention is a program which makes a computer perform each step of the fragrance evaluation method of this invention.

  ADVANTAGE OF THE INVENTION According to this invention, the technique which grasps | ascertains precisely the characteristic which a fragrance has for a person with a uniform method is provided.

3 is a flowchart illustrating a flow of a scent evaluation method according to Embodiment 1; It is a figure which illustrates the reply format of a Likert scale format. It is a figure which illustrates the reply format of a VAS format. It is a figure which illustrates a 2 choice response format. It is a figure which illustrates the characteristic information (characteristic information) which shows the numerical value of the answer obtained about each evaluation factor. It is a figure which illustrates a mode that characteristic information is shown with a radar chart. It is a figure which illustrates a mode that characteristic information is shown with a bar graph. It is a figure which illustrates a mode that the bar graph of FIG. 7 is divided into the above-mentioned three groups and presented. It is a block diagram which illustrates the information processor which performs each step of the fragrance evaluation method concerning Embodiment 1. It is a block diagram which illustrates the hardware constitutions of the computer which implement | achieves information processing apparatus. It is a 1st figure which shows the result of a factor analysis about these 21 items. It is the 2nd figure which shows the result of a factor analysis about these 21 items. It is the 3rd figure which shows the result of a factor analysis about these 21 items. It is a figure which shows the question shown by experiment. It is a 1st table | surface showing the result of having carried out the factor analysis of the answer obtained by experiment. It is a 2nd table | surface showing the result of having carried out the factor analysis of the answer obtained by experiment. It is a 1st figure which shows the calculated correlation coefficient. It is a 2nd figure which shows the calculated correlation coefficient. It is a figure showing the result of the comparison by the average value of a reply, and t test. 6 is a flowchart illustrating a flow of a scent evaluation method according to a second embodiment. It is a block diagram which illustrates the information processor which performs each step of the fragrance evaluation method concerning Embodiment 2. It is the 1st figure which illustrates characteristic information presented about a group constituted by a plurality of subjects. It is the 2nd figure which illustrates characteristic information presented about a group constituted by a plurality of subjects. It is a figure which illustrates the flow of the process which sets the information processing apparatus utilized in order to implement the fragrance evaluation method which concerns on an Example. It is a flowchart which illustrates the flow of a process of the fragrance evaluation method which concerns on an Example. It is a figure which shows the alerting sentence displayed in an Example. It is a figure which illustrates the message which an information processor displays in S418. It is a figure which shows the characteristic information of each group in a table format. It is a figure which illustrates the presentation apparatus which shows a scent to a test subject.

  Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings. In all the drawings, the same reference numerals are given to the same components, and the description will be omitted as appropriate.

[Embodiment 1]
FIG. 1 is a flowchart illustrating the flow of a fragrance evaluation method 100 according to the first embodiment. The fragrance evaluation method 100 of the first embodiment includes a selection step S102, a question presentation step S104, an acquisition step S106, and a characteristic presentation step S108. The selection step S102 is a step of selecting any one or more evaluation factors from a plurality of evaluation factor candidates used for fragrance evaluation. Candidates for evaluation are: (1) the intensity of the pleasant emotion of the mental event recalled by the scented subject, (2) the importance of the mental event, and (3) the clarity of the content of the mental event. Gender, (4) clarity of time information of the mental event, (5) influence of the mental event, (6) information content of sensory information of the mental event, and (7) of the mental event. Includes the strength of nostalgia. The question presenting step S104 is a step of presenting a question regarding the evaluation factor selected in the selecting step S102 to the subject who smelled the scent about the mental event conceived by smelling the scent. Acquisition step S106 is a step of acquiring the user's answer to the question presented in question presentation step S104 as a numerical value. The characteristic presentation step S108 is a step of presenting characteristic information using the answers obtained for each selected evaluation factor. If necessary, the evaluation factors (1) to (7) are (1) strength of pleasant emotion, (2) importance, (3) clarity of content, and (4) clarity of time information, respectively. Abbreviation, (5) influence, (6) amount of sensory information, and (7) strength of nostalgia.

  Each of the above steps may be performed manually, by a computer operated manually, or by a computer that operates automatically. When a certain step is performed manually, the step is performed by, for example, a person (hereinafter, a practitioner) who performs the scent evaluation method 100 of the present embodiment with an arbitrary subject as an opponent. The description of the configuration of the computer that executes each step of the fragrance evaluation method 100 will be made after the description of each step.

<About selection step S102>
The selection step S102 is a step of selecting any one or more evaluation factors from a plurality of evaluation factor candidates used for fragrance evaluation. Selection of an evaluation factor may be performed manually, may be performed by a computer operated manually, or may be performed automatically by a computer. When performed manually, the result of selecting the evaluation factor may be recorded on an analog medium such as a paper medium, or may be recorded on a digital medium such as a storage device. When recorded on a digital medium, the practitioner or the like inputs to the computer which evaluation factor has been selected. Note that the evaluation factor may be selected randomly or based on some rule.

  As described above, the evaluation factor candidates are (1) strength of pleasant emotion, (2) importance, (3) clarity of content, (4) clarity of time information, (5) influence, 6) Information amount of sensory information, and (7) Intensity of nostalgia. Here, the evaluation factors selected in the selection step S102 include at least one of the above (1) to (7). Hereinafter, each of these evaluation factors will be described.

<< (1) Strength of Pleasure >>
The intensity of pleasant emotion related to the mental event recalled by the scent is an evaluation factor that indicates how pleasant the mental event recalled to the subject by the scent is for the subject. For example, the intensity of the emotional emotional emotion is: (a) how pleasant the scent smelled is in relation to the recalled mental event; (b) the overall impression of the recalled mental event. Or (c) an indicator such as how many times you want to approach or touch the scented object (thing, person, or place) related to the recalled mental event Can be measured.

<< (2) Importance >>
The importance of a mental event recalled by a scent is an evaluation factor representing how important the mental event recalled by the scent is for a subject. For example, the importance of a mental event is: (a) how much do you think you have learned from the events related to the recalled mental event, (b) how much do you think the event has a great significance for yourself, Or (c) It can be measured by an indicator such as whether something can be taught from the event.

<< (3) Content clarity >>
The clearness of the content of a mental event recalled by a scent is an evaluation factor that expresses how clearly the mental event is recalled by the subject's smell of the scent. For example, the clarity of a mental event is either (a) how clear the positional relationship of the thing related to the recalled mental event is, or (b) the accuracy of the recalled mental event is correct, or (C) It can be measured by an indicator such as whether the recalled mental event is clear.

<< (4) Sharpness of time information >>
The clearness of the time information of the mental event recalled by the scent is an evaluation factor representing how clearly the mental event is recalled in time by the subject sniffing the scent. For example, the clarity of the time information of a mental event can be determined by whether the subject knows (a) a specific date or (b) how many years the event related to the recalled mental event occurred. Or (c) it can be measured by an index such as whether or not it is known.

<< (5) Impact >>
The influence of the mental event recalled by the scent is an evaluation factor indicating how much the recalled mental event affects the future of the subject (after the point of smelling the scent). For example, the impact of a mental event is that the subject has (a) come up with a new idea or idea, or (b) has come up with a future plan, or (C) It can be measured by an indicator such as whether or not something is desired.

<< (6) Amount of sensory information >>
The information amount of the sensory information of the mental event recalled by the scent is an evaluation factor indicating how much information related to the sensory is included in the recalled mental event. For example, the amount of information on the sensory information of a mental event is such that the subject feels (a) how much smell information is present in the recalled mental event, and (b) how much taste information is present. It can be measured with an index such as (c) how much visually detailed information is felt.

<< (7) Strength of nostalgia >>>>
The strength of nostalgia of the mental event recalled by the scent is an evaluation factor representing the strength of the sense of nostalgia about the recalled mental event. For example, the strength of the retrospective feeling of a mental event is whether the subject wants to return to the time when (a) the event related to the recalled mental event occurs, or (b) feels like being pulled back at that time Or (c) It is possible to measure with an index such as how nostalgic that the mental event is recalled.

<Question Presentation Step S104>
The question presenting step S104 is a step of presenting a question regarding the evaluation factor selected in the selecting step S102 to the subject who smelled the scent about the mental event conceived by smelling the scent.

<< About presentation of fragrance >>
Synthetic fragrances, natural fragrances, or mixed fragrances in which a plurality of synthetic fragrances or natural fragrances are mixed may be used to generate a scent that can be smelled by the subject. In addition, the source of the scent is not limited to the fragrance, but any scented thing (natural substance, cosmetics, food, etc.) may be used. The scent emitted from an object may be the scent inherently possessed by the object, or may be an artificially attached scent. The state of the fragrance and the like when presented to the subject may be liquid, gas, or solid.

  The method of making a subject smell is arbitrary. For example, a wide-mouthed bottle or bottle dropped with a fragrance may be delivered to the subject to smell the scent, or a scented paper with a fragrance dropped may be delivered to the subject to smell the scent. Further, the scent of the fragrance may be sent to the subject using a fan or the like. Of course, from the viewpoint of evaluating with higher accuracy, for example, an olfactometer or the like is used, and a method of adjusting the concentration by a diluting device and feeding the scent is preferable.

  The act of handing the wide-mouth bottle or odor paper to the subject and the act of controlling the olfactometer or the like may be performed manually or by an automatic machine controlled by a computer.

  The timing of smelling the scent may be either before or after presenting the question, or at the same time as presenting the question. However, a method of presenting a scent in advance before presenting a question is suitable.

  The scent may be presented alone or together with any that provides other stimuli to the subject. Other stimuli include, for example, visual stimuli (images, movies, lighting, colors, etc.), auditory stimuli (music, melody, voice, etc.), tactile stimuli (tactile, painful stimuli, temperature, etc.), taste stimuli, etc. It is.

<< About the contents of the question >>
For each selected evaluation factor, the subject is presented with a question that can be obtained as an answer to an index that measures the evaluation factor. When the evaluation factor is the intensity of pleasant emotion of the mental event, for example, (a) how pleasant the smelled scent is in relation to the recalled mental event, (b) How pleasant the overall impression is, or (c) how many times you want to approach or touch the scented object (thing, person, or place) associated with the recalled mental event, Etc. are presented.

  If the assessment factor is the importance of the mental event, for example: (a) how much you think you learned from the events related to the recalled mental event, (b) A question is presented, such as whether you think you have it, or (c) if there is something you can tell from the event.

  When the evaluation factor is the clarity of the content of the mental event, for example, (a) how clear the positional relationship of the thing related to the recalled mental event is, or (b) the accuracy of the recalled mental event A question is presented, such as whether there is no mistake in (c) whether the entire recalled mental event is clear or not.

  When the evaluation factor is the clarity of the time information of the mental event, for example, (a) the specific date when the event related to the recalled mental event occurred can be known, or (b) the recalled mental event Questions are presented such as whether you know how many years the event is, or (c) what season is the event related to the recalled mental event.

  When the evaluation factor is the influence of a mental event, for example, (a) a new idea or idea came up after the mental event was recalled, or (b) a mental event was recalled Questions are presented, such as whether you have come up with a future schedule, or (c) whether the subject wanted to do something after a mental event was recalled.

  When the evaluation factor is the information amount of the sensory information of the mental event, for example, (a) how much odor information is in the recalled mental event, (b) in the recalled mental event Questions such as how much taste information is there or (c) how much visually detailed information is in the recalled mental event are presented.

  If the evaluation factor is the strength of the retrospective of the mental event, for example, (a) do you want to return to the time when the event related to the recalled mental event occurred, or (b) be pulled back to that time? A question is presented, such as whether it feels or (c) how nostalgic it is because the mental event is recalled.

<< About the number of questions >>
In question presentation step S104, at least one or more questions are presented for each evaluation factor selected in selection step S102. When a plurality of questions are prepared for a certain evaluation factor, the questions presented for the evaluation factor may be all of the prepared questions or a part thereof. When only a part of the prepared questions is presented, the presented question may be selected randomly or based on some rule. This selection may be performed manually or by a computer. The number of questions is preferably the same for each evaluation factor (for example, there are three for each evaluation factor), but it need not be the same.

  The order of presenting questions regarding each evaluation factor is arbitrary. For example, questions are presented in a random order. Also, for example, questions are presented in an order based on the order previously assigned to the evaluation factors. Specifically, when the evaluation factor A is 1 and the evaluation factor B is 2, the question regarding the evaluation factor B is presented after the question regarding the evaluation factor A is presented.

<< About the answer format >>
The format of the answer to the question is arbitrary. For example, the answer format includes a Likert Scale, a Visual Analog Scale (VAS), two choices, or a free answer. FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating an answer format in the Likert scale format. FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating a VAS format answer format. FIG. 4 is a diagram illustrating a two-choice answer format. In each figure, a question 20 and an answer column 30 are displayed on the display screen 10. The question 20 is a question representing the content of “how pleasant the smelled scent is related to the recalled mental event”.

  The answer column 30 in FIG. 2 is for selecting one of seven ranks, with 7 being “very pleasant” having the highest rank and 1 being “very uncomfortable” having the lowest rank. In FIG. 2, “6” is selected.

  The answer column 30 in FIG. 3 is a line segment whose right end is “very pleasant” and whose left end is “very uncomfortable”. The test subject can specify any position of the line segment as an answer. In FIG. 3, the position where the diagonal line is displayed is the position designated by the subject. The length of the line segment in FIG. 3 is 10 cm. However, the length of the line segment is not limited to 10cm.

  The answer column 30 in FIG. 4 has two choices of “Yes” meaning very pleasant and “No” meaning other than that. In FIG. 4, “Yes” is selected.

  Here, in the answer formats illustrated in FIGS. 2 and 3 described above, a negative answer is shown on the left side, and a positive answer is shown on the right side. However, each of the above-described drawings is merely an example, and the method of arranging the answers is not limited to this method. For example, a positive answer may be arranged on the left side as shown in FIG. On the other hand, in FIG. 4 as well, FIG. 2 and FIG.

  The answer format may be defined in common for all questions, may be defined in common for a plurality of questions related to the same evaluation factor, or may be defined for each question.

  The answer format may be determined manually or by a computer that operates automatically. It can also be configured to input the result determined manually. In addition, the answer format may be fixed, or may be determined by some method (such as random determination or determination based on some rule) when the fragrance evaluation method 100 is performed.

<< About how to present questions >>
The method for presenting the question is arbitrary. For example, the practitioner of the fragrance evaluation method 100 shows the subject the flip board on which the question is written, or gives the subject the questionnaire sheet on which the question is written. For example, the computer may display the question on the display screen. The questionnaire sheet may be created manually or using a computer.

<About Acquisition Step S106>
Acquisition step S106 is a step of acquiring the user's answer to the question presented in question presentation step S104 as a numerical value.

<< How to get answers >>
The method for obtaining the answer from the subject is arbitrary. For example, there is a method in which an answer sheet for filling in an answer to a question is given to the subject, the answer is entered in the answer sheet, and the answer sheet is collected for collection. In this case, the question may be presented on the answer sheet, or the question may be presented on a medium different from the answer sheet.

  In addition, for example, there is a method in which a subject inputs an answer to a computer and obtains data indicating the answer. In this case, the question may be presented on a display screen connected to the computer, or the question may be presented on a medium different from the display screen. In this case, the computer may be a computer prepared for inputting an answer, or may be a computer (such as a portable terminal) owned by the subject. In the latter case, for example, the subject opens a web page for inputting an answer on the mobile terminal owned by the subject, and enters the answer on the web page. Answers entered for a web page are obtained, for example, by the web server that provides the web page. The input method to the computer is arbitrary. For example, input to a computer is performed by character input using a keyboard or a touch panel, or voice input using a microphone. Alternatively, the answer entered on the answer sheet may be read by an image reading device such as a camera or a scanner.

  The answer presented by the subject may be a numerical value or may be other than a numerical value. However, answers obtained with non-numeric values are converted into numeric values. For example, in the example of FIG. 2, instead of selecting a numerical value from 1 to 7, words such as “very pleasant” and “very uncomfortable” may be selected. In this case, the selected word is converted into a numerical value according to a predetermined rule. The predetermined rule is, for example, a rule in which each item of an answer (such as “very pleasant”) is associated with a numerical value corresponding to the item. This predetermined rule is assumed to be predetermined.

  The process of converting the selected answer into a numerical value may be performed manually or by a computer. When conversion is performed by a computer, the predetermined rule is stored in advance in a storage device or the like as information that can be used by the computer.

  When the answer format is a free answer, for example, the subject freely describes or inputs the answer in the answer field. Then, in the obtaining step S106, this answer is converted into a numerical value. For example, the practitioner of the fragrance evaluation method 100 scores the answer of the subject based on a predetermined rule, thereby digitizing the answer. For example, the predetermined rule is a rule that when a predetermined keyword is included in an answer, a score corresponding to the keyword is added.

  The scoring can be done manually or by a computer. In this case, for example, the computer extracts each keyword included in the free answer, and adds the score corresponding to each keyword to convert the answer into a numerical value.

<About the characteristic presentation step S108>
The characteristic presentation step S108 is a step of presenting characteristic information using the answers obtained for each selected evaluation factor. The characteristic information is information that represents the characteristic of the presented scent for the subject by an index value for each selected evaluation factor.

<< About the contents of characteristic information >>
The characteristic information indicates information based on the numerical value of the answer obtained for each evaluation factor. For example, in the characteristic presentation step S108, characteristic information indicating the numerical value of the answer obtained for each evaluation factor as an index value of each evaluation factor is generated. FIG. 5 is a diagram illustrating characteristic information (characteristic information 200) whose index value is a numerical value of an answer.

  When a plurality of questions are presented for one evaluation factor, the characteristic information 200 may represent an index value of the evaluation factor as a statistical value of an answer regarding the evaluation factor. For example, the statistical value is a total value, a representative value, an average value, or a median value of a plurality of answers. For example, the representative value is a maximum value, a minimum value, or a mode value. In addition, the total value or the average value may be calculated using only the answers excluding the maximum value, the minimum value, or both of the plurality of answers.

<< About presentation of characteristic information 200 >>
There are various representation formats of the characteristic information 200 to be presented. For example, the characteristic information 200 is presented as a table, a radar chart, a bar graph, or a character string (sentence etc.). FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating a state in which the characteristic information 200 is presented on the radar chart. FIG. 7 is a diagram illustrating a state in which the characteristic information 200 is presented in a bar graph.

  The order of presentation of the index values of the plurality of evaluation factors is arbitrary. For example, an order is given to the evaluation factors in advance, and the index value of each evaluation factor is presented in that order. Further, for example, the index values of the respective evaluation factors may be presented after being sorted according to the size of the index value.

  When the characteristic information 200 is presented for a plurality of evaluation factors, the evaluation factors may be presented in several groups. How the evaluation factors are divided into groups can be determined in advance. For example, the above seven evaluation factors are related to the amount and quality of information such as “content clarity, temporal information clarity, sensory information content”, “strength of pleasant feeling, strength of nostalgia”, etc. It can be divided into three groups: those related to emotions and those related to rational aspects such as “importance and influence”. FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating a state in which the bar graph of FIG. 7 is presented by being divided into the above three groups.

  The presentation method of the characteristic information 200 is arbitrary. For example, the characteristic information 200 may be described or printed on paper, or displayed on a display screen of a computer.

  In addition, when the characteristic information 200 regarding each of several fragrance is produced | generated about one test subject, those characteristic information 200 may be shown individually and may be shown collectively. In the latter case, for example, the characteristic information 200 regarding a plurality of scents is displayed in parallel on paper or a display screen.

  When the characteristic information 200 is generated for a plurality of subjects, the characteristic information 200 of each subject may be presented individually or collectively. In the latter case, for example, the characteristic information 200 regarding a plurality of subjects is displayed in parallel on paper or a display screen.

<About the method of realizing the fragrance evaluation method 100 with a computer>
As described above, one or more of the steps of the fragrance evaluation method 100 may be performed by a computer. Each step may be performed by a combination of manual processing and computer processing. FIG. 9 is a block diagram illustrating an information processing apparatus 2000 that executes each step of the fragrance evaluation method 100. In FIG. 1, each block represents a functional unit configuration, not a hardware unit configuration.

  The selection unit 2020, the question presentation unit 2040, the acquisition unit 2060, and the characteristic presentation unit 2080 are functional components that execute the selection step S102, the question presentation step S104, the acquisition step S106, and the characteristic presentation step S108, respectively. Since the method of executing each step by the computer has been described above, it is omitted here.

  The information processing apparatus 2000 may be a computer operated by a person who executes the fragrance evaluation method 100 or may be a computer that operates automatically. As described above, when the subject inputs an answer by accessing the Web page using a mobile terminal or the like, for example, the information processing apparatus 2000 operates as a Web server that provides the Web page.

<< Hardware configuration of information processing apparatus 2000 >>
Each functional component of the information processing apparatus 2000 according to the first embodiment may be realized by hardware (for example, a hard-wired electronic circuit) that implements each functional component, or between hardware and software. It may be realized by a combination (for example, a combination of an electronic circuit and a program for controlling the electronic circuit). Hereinafter, the case where each functional component of the information processing apparatus 2000 is realized by a combination of hardware and software will be further described.

  FIG. 10 is a block diagram illustrating a hardware configuration of a computer 1000 that implements the information processing apparatus 2000. The computer 1000 is a computer used for mounting the information processing apparatus 2000, and is a variety of computers such as a PC (Personal Computer), a server machine, or a mobile terminal (smart phone or the like). The computer 1000 may be a dedicated computer for mounting the information processing apparatus 2000, or a general-purpose computer on which various applications operate.

  The computer 1000 includes a bus 1020, a processor 1040, a memory 1060, a storage 1080, and an input / output interface 1100. The bus 1020 is a data transmission path through which the processor 1040, the memory 1060, the storage 1080, and the input / output interface 1100 transmit / receive data to / from each other. However, the method of connecting the processors 1040 and the like is not limited to bus connection. The processor 1040 is an arithmetic processing unit such as a CPU (Central Processing Unit) or a GPU (Graphics Processing Unit). The memory 1060 is a memory such as a RAM (Random Access Memory) or a ROM (Read Only Memory). The storage 1080 is an external storage device such as a hard disk, an SSD (Solid State Drive), or a memory card.

  The input / output interface 1100 is an interface for connecting the computer 1000 and an external device. The external device is, for example, a keyboard, a scanner, a display screen, or a printer.

  The storage 1080 stores a program for realizing each function of the information processing apparatus 2000. Specifically, the storage 1080 stores program modules that realize the functions of the respective functional components of the information processing apparatus 2000. The processor 1040 implements the functions of the functional components of the information processing apparatus 2000 by transferring these program modules to the memory 1060 and executing them.

  The storage 1080 may further store a question to be presented to the subject and an answer obtained from the subject. However, this question or answer may be stored in a storage device provided outside the computer 1000.

  The hardware configuration of the information processing apparatus 2000 is not limited to the configuration shown in FIG. For example, each program module may be stored in the ROM of the memory 1060. In this case, the information processing apparatus 2000 may not include the storage 1080.

<Regarding the basis for evaluating fragrance by seven evaluation factors>
The inventor has conducted experiments on (1) strength of pleasant emotion, (2) importance, (3) clarity of content, (4) clarity of time information, (5) influence, (6) sense Seven evaluation factors, the amount of information and (7) strength of nostalgia, are important evaluation factors in expressing the characteristics of mental events that are recalled by the person who smelled the scent. The knowledge that it is an important evaluation factor for evaluation was obtained. Specifically, the present inventor has (a) an experiment for determining an evaluation factor having an important role in fragrance evaluation (hereinafter, experiment 1), and (b) the determined evaluation factor (the above seven evaluation factors). The verification experiment (Experiment 2) was conducted. Each will be described in detail below.

<< Experiment 1 >>
Experiment 1 was conducted on 126 men and women in their 20s and 40s. The content of Experiment 1 is that each subject sniffs a predetermined scent and answers 64 questions related to autobiographical memory. The predetermined scents are peach, jasmine, and mint. These scents have been used in previous research on scents and are appropriate as scents used in experiments. Each scent was sent to the subject, and the subject answered the question about the received scent through the Web questionnaire system. In addition, the fragrance was sent to the subject in a state where it was dropped into a clean cotton ball and sealed in a microtube that could be sealed. The answer format for each question is a seven-step Likert scale except for one free answer.

  As a result of factor analysis of the obtained answers, 62 items having a high contribution rate to fragrance evaluation among 64 items were classified into 7 factors. 11 to 13 are diagrams showing 21 items representing the results of the factor analysis. These figures show the factor loading for each of the seven factors for each item classified into seven factors. For example, in FIG. 11, each item in the first row to the third row classified as the first factor is such that the factor load value for the first factor is compared with the load value values for the other factors. Obviously big. Therefore, each of these items is classified as a first factor.

  Furthermore, based on the contents of items classified into the factors, the present inventor has examined what characteristics of the fragrance each property evaluates. As a result, the present inventors found that the first to seventh factors are (1) strength of pleasant emotion, (2) importance, (3) clarity of content, (4) clarity of time information, They found that they evaluated (5) impact, (6) the amount of sensory information, and (7) the strength of nostalgia. Therefore, these factors were named as (1) to (7), respectively. These seven factors are the seven evaluation factors used in the present invention.

<< Experiment 2 >>
Furthermore, the inventor conducted a verification experiment on reliability and validity of the evaluation factor determined in the above-described Experiment 1. Reliability is the consistency of the results measured by the indicators, such as the data being stable even after repeated measurements over time, and the rating values for the same subject being in good agreement with different raters. Indicates that there is. Relevance is the degree to which the measured data accurately measures the concept to be measured.

  Experiment 2 was conducted on 330 men and women in their 20s and 40s. The content of Experiment 2 is that each subject answers a predetermined question after smelling a predetermined scent. The predetermined scents are peach, jasmine, mint, orange, soap, vanilla, cypress, and rose. These scents have been used in previous research on scents and are appropriate as scents used in experiments. In addition to the peach, jasmine, and mint used in Experiment 1, orange, soap, vanilla, hinoki and rose were used to ensure a wider range of fragrance quality. This indicates that it does not occur specifically. FIG. 14 is a diagram illustrating the questions presented in Experiment 2. The question shown in FIG. 14 is obtained by extracting three items for each of the seven factors from the question used in Experiment 1, and is the same question as the question shown in FIGS. Before asking the question shown in FIG. 14, the degree of each scent was remembered and the degree was answered in four stages. After asking the questions shown in FIG. 14, they answered the pleasantness of emotion caused by the scent, the subjective strength, the degree of familiarity, and what scent they thought (free description). Each scent was sent to the subject, and the subject answered the question about the received scent through a questionnaire system. The scent was sent to the subject in a state where it was impregnated with clean porous cellulose particles and enclosed in a plastic bottle. The format for each question is a seven-step Likert scale unless otherwise noted.

  The present inventor first extracted the data that answered “I remembered something clearly” or “I am ambiguous but I remembered” about the response obtained from the subject, and then performed a factor analysis fixed to the above 7 factors. It was. 15 and 16 are tables showing the results of factor analysis of the answers obtained in Experiment 2. FIG. 15 and 16, the factors are arranged in descending order of Cronbach's α coefficients (hereinafter referred to as α coefficients) calculated for each factor. Note that the α coefficient is a general index used for reliability evaluation, and a description of the calculation method and the like is omitted.

  As shown in FIGS. 15 and 16, although the order in which the seven factors appear is different, each item classified as the same factor in Experiment 1 was also classified as the same factor in Experiment 2. Furthermore, the α coefficient calculated for each factor shows a high value. This proved the high reliability of the evaluation factor determined in Experiment 1.

  There are several types of validation. In this experiment, (1) content validity, (2) criteria-related validity, and (3) construct validity were verified. The content validity is an index indicating whether the item reflects the content to be measured without deviation. For example, if an expert examines the process of collecting and selecting items used in an experiment, it can be said that the experiment has content validity. In Experiment 1 above, two inventors, who are experts in olfactory cognitive psychology, collected a wide range of items related to memory characteristics that have been used in conventional memory research. The original 64 items were adopted through the creation of new items. Based on this, a series of procedures for data collection using actual scents, factor analysis, determination of the number of factors, and factor naming were performed. Therefore, it can be said that Experiment 1 has content validity.

  The criterion-related validity is an index indicating whether or not the magnitude of the correlation with any external criterion considered to be strongly related to the scale is appropriate. An external criterion is a prior measure that measures a similar subject, another indicator taken simultaneously, or data obtained in the future. In this experiment, attention was paid to the fact that emotions experienced by scents are strong and autobiographical memory is caused by scents (Non-Patent Documents 7 to 9, etc.). Autobiographical memory, one of the psychological events recalled by scents, recalls various episodes related to one's own memories. If the emotions experienced by scents are strong, the score of each of the seven evaluation factors Estimated to be high.

  Therefore, the correlation coefficient between the degree of emotional feeling felt by the scent acquired in this experiment and the score of each of the seven evaluation factors was calculated. Further, for comparison, a correlation coefficient between the subjective intensity of the fragrance and the seven evaluation factors, and a correlation coefficient between the familiarity of the fragrance and the seven evaluation factors were also calculated.

  FIG. 17 is a diagram showing the calculated correlation coefficients. The seven evaluation factors were rearranged in the order obtained in Experiment 1. As FIG. 17 shows, the pleasantness of the emotion felt by the scent was found to be significantly correlated with all seven evaluation factors of the mental events recalled by the scent. On the other hand, the subjective intensity and familiarity of fragrances that are not ratings related to emotions did not show a significant correlation with all of the seven evaluation factors. Therefore, it was shown that the result of Experiment 1 has a criterion related validity.

  The validity by this verification method is also shown from the data of Experiment 1. For 337 cases for which all evaluations have been completed, scores for the seven evaluation factors were calculated by averaging the scores for the three items of each factor shown in the first embodiment. The correlation coefficient indicating the correlation between the subjective intensity of fragrance and the degree of familiarity was calculated.

  FIG. 18 is a diagram showing the calculated correlation results. As shown in FIG. 18, the emotional pleasure felt by the scent was significantly correlated with all seven evaluation factors. On the other hand, the evaluation of subjective intensity and familiarity of fragrance did not show a significant correlation with all evaluation factors. Therefore, even in different populations, the criterion-related validity inferred from previous studies has been repeatedly proved.

  The construct validity is an index indicating whether the scale score supports the strength of the construct. In this experiment, attention was paid to previous studies (Non-Patent Documents 8 and 10) in which the level of memory characteristics caused by the scent differs depending on whether the scent can be correctly named. For each of the seven evaluation factors, the average value was calculated based on whether the answer to the question “what fragrance” was correct or incorrect, and the scores were compared by t-test for each factor.

  FIG. 19 is a diagram illustrating an average value of the answers and a comparison result by t-test. As a result of the comparison, the score when a mental event was recalled with a correctly named scent was higher than the score when a mental event was recalled with a scent whose name was incorrect. These results confirm previous studies, and it was confirmed that the results of Experiment 1 have a construct validity.

<Action and effect>
According to the fragrance evaluation method 100 of the present embodiment, the evaluation factor used for fragrance evaluation is (1) the intensity of pleasant emotion, (2) importance, At least one of (3) sharpness of contents, (4) sharpness of time information, (5) influence, (6) amount of sensory information, and (7) strength of nostalgia is selected. . Furthermore, according to the scent evaluation method 100 of the present embodiment, a question regarding the selected evaluation factor is presented to the subject who smelled the scent, and the subject has the scent by using an answer to the question. Characteristics are presented.

  As described above, the present inventors have found that these seven evaluation factors are evaluation factors that greatly contribute to expressing or presenting what characteristics the fragrance has for humans. Thus, according to the scent evaluation method 100 of the present embodiment, “the evaluation factor that greatly contributes to the expression of the characteristics of the scent for the person who smelled the scent is (1) strength of pleasant emotion, (2 (7) importance, (3) clarity of content, (4) clarity of time information, (5) influence, (6) amount of sensory information, and (7) strength of nostalgia. By utilizing the characteristics of humans (that is, the laws of nature), it is possible to comprehensively and accurately represent the characteristics of a scent for a person who smells the scent.

  In addition, by evaluating the scent by using the evaluation factor determined by paying attention to the characteristics of humans in this way, compared to the case where the scent is evaluated by the practitioner's own judgment, based on a certain standard It becomes possible to evaluate the fragrance uniformly.

[Embodiment 2]
FIG. 20 is a flowchart illustrating the flow of the fragrance evaluation method 100 according to the second embodiment. The scent evaluation method 100 according to the second embodiment is the same as the scent evaluation method 100 according to the first embodiment except that the scent evaluation method 100 includes the alerting step S202.

  The alerting step S202 is a step for prompting the subject to pay attention to a mental event recalled by the scent. The method of alerting the subject is arbitrary. For example, an arbitrary message that prompts the user to pay attention to a mental event recalled by the scent is displayed on the display screen viewed by the subject. Further, for example, a paper on which the message is written may be presented to the subject, or a voice representing the message may be output.

  In FIG. 20, the alerting step S202 is performed before the question presenting step S104, but the timing at which the alerting step S202 is performed is not limited to this timing. For example, the alerting step S202 may be performed simultaneously with the question presenting step S104. As a method of performing these simultaneously, for example, there is a method of displaying the above warning message in parallel with the question on a display screen or paper on which the question is presented.

<Information processing apparatus 2000>
One or more of the steps of the scent evaluation method 100 of the second embodiment can be executed by the information processing apparatus 2000. Further, some of the steps may be executed by combining manual processing and computer processing. FIG. 21 is a block diagram illustrating an information processing apparatus 2000 that executes each step of the fragrance evaluation method 100. In FIG. 21, each block represents a functional unit configuration, not a hardware unit configuration.

  The information processing apparatus 2000 according to the second embodiment is the same as the information processing apparatus 2000 according to the first embodiment, except that the attention calling unit 2100 is included. The alerting unit 2100 is a functional component that executes alerting step S202. Since the method for executing the alerting step S202 by the information processing apparatus 2000 has been described above, it is omitted here.

  The hardware configuration of the information processing apparatus 2000 according to the second embodiment is the same as the hardware configuration of the information processing apparatus 2000 according to the first embodiment. However, the storage 1080 further includes a program module for realizing the alerting unit 2100.

<Action and effect>
The subject recalls some mental event by smelling the scent. However, humans tend to be less aware of olfactory experiences than visual experiences. According to the present embodiment, a warning message or the like is presented so as to make the recalled mental event conscious, so that the subject is aware of an olfactory experience that is difficult to notice compared to a visual experience or the like. Therefore, the fragrance evaluation by the fragrance evaluation method 100 can be performed more smoothly and accurately.

[Embodiment 3]
The fragrance evaluation method 100 of the third embodiment is represented in FIG. 1 similarly to the fragrance evaluation method 100 of the first embodiment, or is represented in FIG. 20 similarly to the fragrance evaluation method 100 of the second embodiment. . Except for the points described below, the fragrance evaluation method 100 of the third embodiment is configured by the same steps as the fragrance evaluation method 100 of the first or second embodiment.

  In the characteristic presentation step S108 of the third embodiment, for each evaluation factor selected in the selection step S102, statistical values of answers obtained from a plurality of subjects are calculated as index values of the evaluation factor. Further, using the index value, the characteristics of the presented scent are presented to a group composed of a plurality of subjects. For example, the statistical value is a total value, a representative value, an average value, or a median value of answers by a plurality of subjects. For example, the representative value is a maximum value, a minimum value, or a mode value. In addition, the representative value or the average value may be calculated using an answer obtained by excluding the maximum value, the minimum value, or both of the answers from a plurality of subjects.

  The representative value may be a value of an answer by a representative belonging to the group or a statistical value of the value of the answer. The method for selecting the representative from the group is arbitrary. For example, the representative is selected at random.

  In the presented characteristic information 200, the presentation order of the index values regarding each evaluation factor is arbitrary. For example, an order is given to the evaluation factors in advance, and index values relating to the respective evaluation factors are presented in that order. Further, for example, the index values related to each evaluation factor may be presented after being sorted according to the size of the index value.

  In addition, when the characteristic information 200 regarding each of several fragrance is produced | generated about one group, those characteristic information 200 may be shown individually and may be shown collectively. In the latter case, for example, the characteristic information 200 regarding a plurality of scents is displayed in parallel on paper or a display screen.

  Further, when the characteristic information 200 is generated for a plurality of groups, the characteristic information 200 of each group may be presented individually or collectively. In the latter case, for example, the characteristic information 200 regarding a plurality of groups is displayed in parallel on paper or a display screen.

  Groups composed of subjects are arbitrary. For example, subjects are classified into the same group based on common attributes. The attributes of the subject are age and sex. For example, there is a group “female”, a group “person in 20s”, or a group “woman in 20s”.

  The process of dividing the subject into groups may be performed manually or by the information processing apparatus 2000.

  22 and 23 are diagrams illustrating characteristic information presented for a group including a plurality of subjects. FIG. 22 is a radar chart showing characteristic information 200 generated based on answers obtained from a plurality of men and women in their 20s. FIG. 23 is a bar graph showing characteristic information 200 generated based on answers obtained from a plurality of women in their 30s.

  In the present embodiment, presentation of fragrance, presentation of questions, acquisition of answers, and the like may be performed simultaneously for a plurality of subjects, or may be performed at different timings for each subject. In the latter case, for example, the information processing apparatus 2000 is operated as a Web server that receives an answer to a question from a subject. And the information processing apparatus 2000 produces | generates the characteristic information 200 about a test subject's group by totaling the answer received from each test subject, and performing a statistical process.

<Information processing apparatus 2000>
In the fragrance evaluation method 100 of the third embodiment, one or more of the steps may be executed by the information processing apparatus 2000. Some of the steps may be executed by a combination of manual processing and computer processing. The functional configuration of the information processing apparatus 2000 of the third embodiment is the same as that of the information processing apparatus 2000 (FIG. 1) of the first embodiment or the information processing apparatus 2000 (FIG. 21) of the second embodiment.

  The hardware configuration of the information processing apparatus 2000 according to the third embodiment is the same as the hardware configuration of the information processing apparatus 2000 according to the first embodiment. However, the storage 1080 has a program module that realizes the function of the characteristic presentation unit 2080 of the third embodiment.

<Action and effect>
According to the present embodiment, by using the answers obtained from a plurality of subjects with respect to the questions regarding the seven evaluation factors, the characteristics of the fragrance for the group of subjects are determined by the seven evaluation factors. It is presented with the index value. As described above, the above seven evaluation factors are evaluation factors that greatly contribute to expressing what kind of characteristic a fragrance has for humans. Therefore, according to the fragrance evaluation method 100 of the present embodiment, the characteristics of the fragrance for a group of a plurality of subjects, that is, a human having a certain attribute, can be accurately and uniformly displayed. Can be expressed.

[Example]
The fragrance evaluation method 100 of the present invention has been described above with a plurality of embodiments. Below, the implementation | achievement method of the fragrance evaluation method 100 of this invention is demonstrated more concretely using an Example. However, the Example described below is an example of a specific method for realizing the scent evaluation method 100, and does not limit the method for realizing the scent evaluation method 100 according to each of the above embodiments.

  FIG. 24 is a flowchart illustrating the flow of processing for setting the information processing apparatus 2000 used to implement the scent evaluation method according to the present embodiment. The practitioner of the fragrance evaluation method sets the evaluation order for the fragrance to be evaluated (S302). For example, the practitioner registers the identifiers of the fragrances to be evaluated in the information processing apparatus 2000 in the order of evaluation.

  The practitioner sets a reminder message representing the alert message described in the second embodiment (S304). Here, the practitioner may newly register the alert statement to be used, or may select the alert statement to be used from those registered in advance. In the latter case, for example, the information processing apparatus 2000 displays a list of alert statements registered on the display screen. Then, the information processing apparatus 2000 receives an input for selecting a warning sentence.

  The practitioner sets an evaluation factor to be used among the seven evaluation factors described above with respect to the information processing apparatus 2000 (S306). This process corresponds to the selection step S102 in each embodiment.

  Here, the evaluation factor to be selected is appropriately determined according to what is focused on in the evaluation of the fragrance characteristics. For example, the practitioner can select (1) strength of pleasant emotion, (2) importance, and (3) clarity of content.

  The practitioner sets the question and answer format presented in the question presentation step S104 for each selected evaluation factor (S308). In the present embodiment, the practitioner sets an answer format for each question. In addition, the practitioner selects the answer format from a Likert scale, a visual analog scale, and two choices.

  Then, the practitioner sets the order in which questions are presented (S310).

  FIG. 25 is a flowchart showing the flow of processing of the fragrance evaluation method according to the present embodiment. The practitioner prepares a scent to be presented to the subject (S402). Specifically, the practitioner stores the volatilized fragrance in the fragrance container. An identification label is attached to the perfume container. An identification label is a label showing the identifier for identifying the volatile fragrance | flavor accommodated in the fragrance | flavor container. The identifier is an arbitrary character, symbol, number, color, or the like. The identification label is attached to a place that is easily noticed by the subject, such as the side surface of the fragrance container or the lid surface. Here, when making the same test subject evaluate a plurality of fragrances, a plurality of fragrance containers are prepared, and one volatile fragrance is accommodated in each fragrance container.

  Next, the practitioner sets the information processing apparatus 2000 used for carrying out the scent evaluation method of the present embodiment (S404). The specific process performed in S404 is a series of processes shown in FIG.

  The information processing apparatus 2000 requests the subject to input attribute information (S406). The attribute information is a symbol, number, name, or the like that individually identifies the subject. The answer acquired from the subject and the characteristic information generated based on the answer are stored in an arbitrary storage device in association with the attribute information input here. Further, the attribute information may include information (gender, age, occupation, etc.) for determining which group the subject belongs to.

  The information processing apparatus 2000 instructs the subject about the fragrance to be evaluated (S408). For example, a message “Please smell the third scent” is presented on the display screen.

  The information processing apparatus 2000 instructs the subject to input for confirming the scent to be smelled (S410). This is a process for confirming whether or not the subject is trying to smell the wrong scent. Upon receiving this instruction, the subject inputs the identifier displayed on the identification label attached to the scented fragrance container to the information processing apparatus 2000.

  The information processing apparatus 2000 determines whether or not the identifier of the fragrance to be evaluated matches the identifier input by the subject (S412). If they match (S412: YES), the process of FIG. 25 proceeds to S414. On the other hand, if they do not match (S412: NO), S408 is executed again.

  The information processing apparatus 2000 displays the set alert sentence on the display screen (S414). FIG. 26 is a diagram showing a warning text displayed in the present embodiment.

  The information processing apparatus 2000 instructs the subject to smell the scent presented in S408 (S416). For example, the information processing apparatus 2000 displays a message “Open the lid and smell the scent” on the display screen. The subject opens the lid of the fragrance container according to this instruction and smells the scent. At this time, as described in the first embodiment, an arbitrary stimulus may be given to the subject together with the scent. These stimuli may be given by the information processing apparatus 2000 or may be given manually.

  The information processing apparatus 2000 requests the subject to input to confirm the degree to which the mental event has been recalled (S418). When a subject sniffs a scent, a mental event is not recalled or the recall is small, it is difficult to evaluate the scent. Therefore, the information processing apparatus 2000 receives an input from the subject to confirm whether or not a mental event has been recalled, and determines whether or not to proceed with the process (S420). When the process proceeds (S420: YES), the process of FIG. 25 proceeds to S422. On the other hand, when the process cannot be advanced (S420: NO), the process of FIG. 25 is ended or the process proceeds to S408. When progressing to S408, the information processing apparatus 2000 presents the scent to be evaluated next to the subject. In FIG. 25, when the process cannot proceed, the process of FIG. 25 proceeds to S408.

  FIG. 27 is a diagram illustrating a message displayed by the information processing apparatus 2000 in S418. FIG. 27A shows a message for confirming the extent to which a mental event has been recalled with two options. On the other hand, FIG. 27B shows a message for confirming the degree to which a mental event has been recalled with four choices. For example, when “I came up” in FIG. 27A is selected, the fragrance evaluation method 100 of this embodiment proceeds with the process first (S420: YES). On the other hand, when “I don't think” in FIG. 27A is selected, the information processing apparatus 2000 does not allow the process to proceed (S422: NO).

  When there are more than two options as shown in FIG. 27B, for example, the fragrance evaluation method 100 advances the process to S422 only when an option of a preset level or higher is selected. For example, in FIG. 27B, when any one of 1 to 3 is selected, the process of the scent evaluation method 100 proceeds to S422, and when 4 is selected, the process of the scent evaluation method 100 Ends or proceeds to S408.

  Note that S418 may be omitted. This is because the subject may become aware of the mental events that were recalled and proceed to answer as the steps are advanced.

  In S422, the information processing apparatus 2000 executes question presentation step S104 and acquisition step S106 for each question. Specifically, for each question, a process of “the information processing apparatus 2000 displays the question on the display screen and the subject inputs an answer to the question” is sequentially performed.

  The information processing apparatus 2000 performs a characteristic presentation step S108 using the obtained answer (S424).

Hereinafter, the results obtained by the fragrance evaluation method 100 of this example will be exemplified. Result 1
Is a result of performing the fragrance evaluation method 100 for an individual (a woman in her 20s), and a result 2 is a result of performing the fragrance evaluation method 100 for a group (a man in her 20s and a woman in her 40s).

<Result 1>
The scent evaluation method was carried out with female A in her 20s as the subject. The fragrances used were fruity-like blended fragrance M, herbal-like blended fragrance S, and floral-like blended fragrance G. Each fragrance was fragranced at a concentration of 0.1% into clean porous cellulose particles and enclosed in a semi-transparent small bottle (fragrance container). The identification label is a symbol of one letter of the alphabet. Three questions were presented for each of the seven assessment factors described above. The order of presentation is random.

  The information processing apparatus 2000 generates characteristic information 200 indicating the average value of three answers for each of the seven types of evaluation factors. The result of carrying out the fragrance evaluation method with Mr. A as the subject was the result shown in FIG. From this figure, it was shown that Mr. A's fragrance M is a fragrance that has a very strong feeling of pleasure and nostalgia, and a very high content clarity. On the other hand, it was shown that the fragrance S is a fragrance having a characteristic that the clearness of the content is slightly high and the feeling of nostalgia is slightly strong, while the pleasant feeling is weak.

<Result 2>
The fragrance evaluation method 100 was implemented for each group of men in their 20s and women in their 40s. The group of men in their 20s is composed of 10 men in their 20s. A group of women in their 40s consists of 10 women in their 40s. The used fragrance | flavor is the floral-like compounded fragrance | flavor G. Evaluation factors are the strength of pleasant emotion, the sharpness of the content, and the influence. There are 9 questions, 3 for each evaluation factor. The display order of the questions is random. The answer format is a seven-step Likert scale.

  The information processing apparatus 2000 generates characteristic information 200 for each of the two groups. The characteristic information 200 indicates an average value of answers of subjects belonging to the group for each evaluation factor. FIG. 28 is a diagram showing the characteristic information 200 of each group in a table format. For male groups in their 20s, the average value of any of the evaluation factors of strength of pleasant feeling, clarity of content, and influence is low. Therefore, it is presumed that the mental event recalled by the scent G is not characteristic for men in their twenties. On the other hand, for women in their 40s, the psychological events recalled by the fragrance G have the characteristics that they have strong emotions and high content clarity, but have a low impact (equivalent to that of men in their 20s). I understood that I have it.

<Another example of a method for presenting a scent>
In the above-described embodiment, presentation of a scent to a subject may be performed by an apparatus described below. FIG. 29 is a diagram illustrating a presentation device 60 that presents a scent to a subject. The presentation device 60 includes an opening 62, a shutter 64, a fan 66, and a fragrance setting unit 68. The fragrance setting unit 68 is a place where the fragrance to be presented is installed, and is provided inside the presentation device 60. The fragrance | flavor installation part 68 can install the fragrance | flavor container demonstrated in the Example, for example. The fan 66 is a fan that creates an air flow from the inside of the presentation device 60 toward the outside. The fan 66 releases the fragrance installed in the fragrance installation unit 68 to the outside of the presentation device 60. The opening 62 is a hole for releasing the fragrance from the inside of the presentation device 60 to the outside, and can be opened and closed using the shutter 64.

  When the presentation of the scent to the subject is started, the presentation device 60 opens the shutter 64 and operates the fan 66. Thereby, since the fragrance emitted from the fragrance | flavor installed in the fragrance | flavor installation part 68 is discharge | released to the exterior of the presentation apparatus 60, a test subject can smell a fragrance. On the other hand, when the presentation of the scent to the subject ends, the presentation device 60 closes the shutter 64 and stops the fan 66.

  In addition, when the fragrance | flavor container installed in the fragrance | flavor installation part 68 has a lid | cover, the presentation apparatus 60 may further have the function to open and close the lid | cover of a fragrance | flavor container. In this case, the presentation device 60 opens the lid of the fragrance container when the presentation of the scent to the subject starts, and closes the lid of the fragrance container when the presentation of the scent to the subject ends.

  The presentation device 60 may be operated manually, or may be operated by the information processing device 2000. Note that the presentation device 60 and the information processing device 2000 may be provided as a single unit or may be provided separately.

  As mentioned above, although embodiment of this invention was described with reference to drawings, these are illustrations of this invention and can employ | adopt various structures other than the above.

Hereinafter, examples of the reference form will be added.
<1> A plurality of evaluation factors for evaluating a scent, the intensity of pleasant emotion of a mental event recalled by a user who smelled the scent, the importance of the mental event, and the content of the mental event clearly A plurality of evaluation factors including gender, clarity of temporal information of the mental event, influence of the mental event, amount of sensory information of the mental event, and strength of nostalgia of the mental event A selection step of selecting any one or more evaluation factors from among,
A question presenting step for presenting a question about each selected evaluation factor for a mental event conceived by smelling the scent to a user who smelled the scent;
An acquisition step of acquiring the user's answer to the question as a numerical value;
Using the answers obtained for each of the selected evaluation factors, a characteristic presentation step for presenting characteristic information representing the characteristics of the scent for the user for each of the evaluation factors,
A method for evaluating a scent.
<2> The evaluation factors selected in the selection step include the intensity of pleasant feeling related to the mental event, the clarity of the content of the mental event, and the influence of the mental event in <1> The evaluation method of fragrance of description.
<3> The scent evaluation method according to <1> or <2>, further comprising a cautionary calling step that prompts the user to pay attention to a mental event caused by the scent.
<4> The fragrance evaluation method according to any one of <1> to <3>, wherein a plurality of questions presented in the question presentation step are presented for each of the selected evaluation factors.
<5> The characteristic presentation step includes:
For each selected evaluation factor, calculate a statistical value of an answer to the question regarding the evaluation factor,
The fragrance evaluation method according to <4>, wherein the statistical value is used to present characteristics of the fragrance to the user.
<6> The calculation of the statistical value performed by the characteristic presentation step includes, for each selected evaluation factor, a process of excluding the maximum value or the minimum value from answers to the question regarding the evaluation factor, <5> Evaluation method of fragrance as described in 2.
<7> The characteristic presentation step calculates a statistical value of answers obtained from a plurality of users for each of the selected evaluation factors, and uses the statistical value for a group constituted by the plurality of users. The fragrance evaluation method according to any one of <4> to <6>, further presenting characteristics of the fragrance.
<8> The characteristic presentation step presents an evaluation factor having the maximum statistical value or the minimum statistical value, or presents the evaluation factor after sorting by the statistical value. <5> or <6> Evaluation method of fragrance as described in 2.
<9> The characteristic presentation step presents the evaluation factor and the characteristic of the evaluation factor in a table, a bar graph, a radar chart, or a character string, and the fragrance according to any one of <1> to <8> Evaluation method.
<10> The evaluation factors are divided into two or more groups,
The fragrance evaluation method according to any one of <1> to <9>, wherein the characteristic presentation step presents the selected evaluation factor and the characteristic of the evaluation factor for each group of evaluation factors.
<11> The characteristic presentation step displays the characteristic of the scent for each of the plurality of users in parallel, or presents only the characteristic for a representative of the plurality of users, <1> to <10> The fragrance evaluation method according to any one of the above.
<12> The scent according to any one of <1> to <11>, wherein the characteristic presentation step displays, in parallel, characteristics of each of the plurality of scents for the user who smelled the plurality of scents. Evaluation method.
<13> The scent evaluation method according to any one of <1> to <12>, wherein the scent is presented to the user together with any visual stimulus, auditory stimulus, tactile stimulus, or taste stimulus.
<14> A plurality of evaluation factors for evaluating the scent, the intensity of the pleasant emotion of the mental event recalled by the user who smelled the scent, the importance of the mental event, and the content of the mental event clearly A plurality of evaluation factors including gender, clarity of temporal information of the mental event, influence of the mental event, amount of sensory information of the mental event, and strength of nostalgia of the mental event A selection means for selecting any one or more evaluation factors from the above;
Question presenting means for presenting a question about each selected evaluation factor for a mental event conceived by smelling the scent to a user who smelled the scent;
Obtaining means for obtaining the user's answer to the question as a numerical value;
Using the answers obtained for each of the selected evaluation factors, characteristic presentation means for presenting characteristic information representing the characteristics of the scent for the user for each of the evaluation factors;
An information processing apparatus.
<15> The evaluation factors selected by the selection means include the strength of pleasant feeling related to the mental event, the clarity of the content of the mental event, and the influence of the mental event. The information processing apparatus described.
<16> The information processing apparatus according to <14> or <15>, further including an alerting unit that prompts the user to pay attention to a mental event caused by the scent.
<17> The information processing apparatus according to any one of <14> to <16>, wherein a plurality of questions presented by the question presenting unit are presented for each of the selected evaluation factors.
<18> The characteristic presentation unit includes:
For each selected evaluation factor, calculate a statistical value of an answer to the question regarding the evaluation factor,
The information processing apparatus according to <17>, wherein the statistical value is used to present characteristics of the scent to the user.
<19> The calculation of the statistical value performed by the characteristic presentation unit includes a process of excluding a maximum value or a minimum value from answers to the question about the evaluation factor for each of the selected evaluation factors, <18> The information processing apparatus described in 1.
<20> The characteristic presentation unit calculates a statistical value of answers obtained from a plurality of users for each of the selected evaluation factors, and uses the statistical value for a group constituted by the plurality of users. The information processing apparatus according to any one of <17> to <19>, further presenting characteristics of the scent.
<21> The characteristic presentation unit presents an evaluation factor having the maximum statistical value or the minimum statistical value, or presents the evaluation factor sorted by the statistical value, <18> or <19> The information processing apparatus described in 1.
<22> The information processing unit according to any one of <14> to <21>, wherein the characteristic presentation unit presents the evaluation factor and the characteristic of the evaluation factor in a table, a bar graph, a radar chart, or a character string. apparatus.
<23> The evaluation factors are divided into two or more groups,
The information processing apparatus according to any one of <14> to <22>, wherein the characteristic presentation unit presents the selected evaluation factor and the characteristic of the evaluation factor for each group of evaluation factors.
<24> The characteristic presentation unit displays the characteristics of the scent for each of the plurality of users in parallel, or presents only the characteristics for a representative of the plurality of users, <14> to <23> The information processing apparatus according to any one of the above.
<25> The information according to any one of <14> to <24>, wherein the characteristic presentation unit displays, in parallel, characteristics of each of the plurality of scents for the user who smelled the plurality of scents. Processing equipment.
<26> The information processing apparatus according to any one of <14> to <25>, wherein presentation of the scent to the user is performed together with any visual stimulus, auditory stimulus, tactile stimulus, or taste stimulus.
<27> A program that causes a computer to execute each step of the fragrance evaluation method according to any one of <1> to <13>.

DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 10 Display screen 20 Question 30 Answer column 60 Presentation apparatus 62 Opening 64 Shutter 66 Fan 68 Fragrance setting part 100 Fragrance evaluation method 200 Characteristic information 1000 Computer 1020 Bus 1040 Processor 1060 Memory 1080 Storage 1100 Input / output interface 2000 Information processing apparatus 2020 Selection part 2040 Question presentation unit 2060 Acquisition unit 2080 Character presentation unit 2100 Alerting unit

Claims (7)

A plurality of evaluation factors for evaluating a scent, the intensity of pleasant emotion of a mental event recalled by a user who smelled the scent, the importance of the mental event, the clarity of the content of the mental event, Among a plurality of evaluation factors including the clarity of temporal information of a mental event, the influence of the mental event, the amount of sensory information of the mental event, and the strength of the retrospective feeling of the mental event, A selection step of selecting any one or more evaluation factors;
A question presenting step for presenting a question about each selected evaluation factor for a mental event conceived by smelling the scent to a user who smelled the scent;
An acquisition step of acquiring the user's answer to the question as a numerical value;
Using the answers obtained for each of the selected evaluation factors, a characteristic presentation step for presenting characteristic information representing the characteristics of the scent for the user for each of the evaluation factors,
A method for evaluating a scent.   The fragrance evaluation method according to claim 1, wherein a plurality of questions presented in the question presentation step are presented for each of the selected evaluation factors. The characteristic presentation step includes:
For each selected evaluation factor, calculate a statistical value of an answer to the question regarding the evaluation factor,
The scent evaluation method according to claim 1 or 2, wherein the statistic is used to present characteristics of the scent to the user.   The characteristic presentation step calculates a statistical value of answers obtained from a plurality of users for each of the selected evaluation factors, and uses the statistical value, the fragrance for a group constituted by the plurality of users. The fragrance evaluation method according to any one of claims 1 to 3, further presenting a characteristic of the fragrance.   The fragrance evaluation method according to any one of claims 1 to 4, wherein the characteristic presentation step presents the evaluation factor and characteristics of the evaluation factor in a table, a bar graph, a radar chart, or a character string. A plurality of evaluation factors for evaluating a scent, the intensity of pleasant emotion of a mental event recalled by a user who smelled the scent, the importance of the mental event, the clarity of the content of the mental event, Among a plurality of evaluation factors including the clarity of temporal information of a mental event, the influence of the mental event, the amount of sensory information of the mental event, and the strength of the retrospective feeling of the mental event, Selecting means for selecting any one or more evaluation factors;
Question presenting means for presenting a question about each selected evaluation factor for a mental event conceived by smelling the scent to a user who smelled the scent;
Obtaining means for obtaining the user's answer to the question as a numerical value;
Using the answers obtained for each of the selected evaluation factors, characteristic presentation means for presenting characteristic information representing the characteristics of the scent for the user for each of the evaluation factors;
An information processing apparatus.   The program which makes a computer perform each step of the fragrance evaluation method as described in any one of Claims 1 thru | or 5.

Images