The relationship between odor quality and molecular properties is arguably
the most: important issue in olfaction. Despite sophistication in the chemi
cal characterization of molecules, accompanying perceptual characterization
has had little quantitative usefulness, relying mostly on enumerative desc
ription. As a result of weak interest in the topic outside industry and lit
tle agreement regarding how to measure quality, the field of olfactory psyc
hophysics has failed to develop a substantial database for odor quality and
has offered little help to other researchers, e.g. neurobiologists, in cho
ice of stimuli, interpretation of outcome or testable hypotheses. This revi
ew scrutinizes how psychophysicists and others have measured quality and of
fers criteria for useful techniques. Most measures have had a subjective co
mponent that makes them anachronistic with modern methodology in experiment
al behavioral science, indeterminate regarding the extent of individual dif
ferences, unusable with infrahumans and of unproved ability to discern smal
l differences. Techniques based upon performance, rather than on the more c
ommon reporting of mental content, offer firmer possibilities for growth. T
hese techniques inevitably lap the discriminative basis of perception. The
nonsubjective techniques have high sensitivity, can have counterparts in in
frahuman research, are suitable to examine individual differences and yield
non-negotiable answers with potential archival value. Discriminative techn
iques have their limitations, too-principally excess sensitivity that abrid
ges their use to comparisons between similar-smelling stimuli. Research has
begun to extend that range and may overcome the limitation. Application of
discriminative methods may have the side-effect of shifting focus in struc
ture-activity research from searches for molecular least common denominator
s that underlie often vague similarity to the search for molecular properti
es of importance in discrimination of small differences.