Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from Flavour and BioMed Central.

Open Access Highly Accessed Opinion

Airplane noise and the taste of umami

Charles Spence1*, Charles Michel1 and Barry Smith2

Author Affiliations

1 Crossmodal Research Laboratory, Department of Psychology, Oxford University, Oxford, UK

2 Centre for the Study of the Senses, School of Advanced Studies, University of London, London, UK

For all author emails, please log on.

Flavour 2014, 3:2  doi:10.1186/2044-7248-3-2


The electronic version of this article is the complete one and can be found online at: http://www.flavourjournal.com/content/3/1/2


Received:31 December 2013
Accepted:22 January 2014
Published:20 February 2014

© 2014 Spence et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Abstract

Have you ever noticed how many people ask for a Bloody Mary or tomato juice from the drinks trolley on airplanes? The air stewards have, and when you ask the people who order, they will tell you that they rarely order such a drink at any other time. Could it be that umami-rich tomato provides one of the only basic tastes that is relatively unaffected by the loud background noise that one is exposed to while in flight? That is the research suggestion, or hypothesis, outlined in this opinion piece. Should such a claim be validated by future research, the potential application for airline catering could be huge.

Introduction

“A loud noise, for instance, may prevent entirely our ability to smell or taste, yet softly played dinner music can create an environment favourable for elegant dining.” ([1] p. 7).

Researchers have long suspected that loud noise might interfere with an individual’s ability to taste the flavour of food [1]. Nevertheless, the earliest experimental findings on the topic failed to demonstrate any such crossmodal effect [2]. However, more recent research has now clearly demonstrated that loud noise can suppress the perception of certain basic tastes [3]. Specifically, woods and his colleagues had their participants eat a range of savoury and sweet snacks (including potato chips, cheese, biscuits, and flapjack) while listening to loud white noise presented over headphones [3]. Their results revealed that the perception of sweetness and saltiness were significantly reduced by the presence of loud white noise (Figure 1).

thumbnailFigure 1. The effect of quiet (45–55 dB) and loud (75–85 dB) background noise on rated sweetness, saltiness, and liking in Woods et al.’s study, relative to the silent baseline condition (Experiment 1). Note that a negative value indicates a lower level than baseline and a positive value a higher level. Error bars = 2 SEM. (Figure reprinted from Woods et al. [3]).

Considering that the sound inside of an airborne airplane is not too dissimilar in terms of either its loudness or unpleasantness to the white noise used in Woods et al.’s [3] study (the interior of an Airbus A320 is said to run at 86 dB, http://ask.metafilter.com/37070/How-loud-is-the-inside-of-an-airplane webcite; while the normal level for commercial planes in flight is 80–85 dB, [4]; although the sound intensity likely varies somewhat depending on the type of aircraft and how close to the engines passengers happen to be seated), it does not seem unreasonable to suggest that the perception of sweetness and saltiness of foods and drinks served in the air would also be suppressed. Unfortunately, however, the authors failed to assess whether any of the other basic tastes (e.g., sourness, bitterness, or the savouriness of umami; [5,6])a would be similarly suppressed by the presence of loud background noise. The intuition is, surely, that all tastes would be affected equally.

Not all basic tastes behave similarly though; when it comes to the suppression of tastes, for instance, combining sweet, sour, salty, and bitter tends to lead to an overall suppression of taste. Umami, however, is immune to this effect. There is even some evidence to suggest that it fails to show the suppression effect and may actually boost some of the other basic tastes [7]. So all tastes may not be created equal when it comes to crossmodal noise-induced sensory suppression effects. The hypothesis that background noise might not impact on the perception of umami is supported by the results of some of the earliest research to have studied the impact of sound on taste/flavour perception [2]. It would also be consistent with anecdotal reports from those who test airline food for some of the world’s biggest airlines [8]. In her early research, Pettit reported that a variety of different types of background noise failed to impact on people’s ratings of tomato juice samples in a central test location study. The irony here is that should Pettit have chosen to test another foodstuff then different results may well have been obtained, and the field of sound/music-taste/flavour interaction research may not have been held up for quite as long as it was (see [9], for a review).

This is, in fact, where the anecdotal observation outlined at the start of this piece comes into play. Should the reported shift in passengers’ preference toward ordering tomato-based beverages during flights turn out to be an accurate representation of the true state of affairs, what explains this desire for tomato-based foods? A key feature of tomatoes is that they are rich in umami [10]. So the question arises as to whether umami might be the one basic taste whose perception is relatively unaffected by the level of background noise. Should it turn out that the taste of umami really is resistant to loud noise, then that will certainly bode well for the umami-based menu recently introduced by British Airways [11]. Indeed, more generally, there would appear to be something of a growing interest amongst western chefs in the use of umami-rich ingredients in cuisine [12], though note that many umami-rich ingredients have been used in Italian cuisine for a long time; think only of the classic ‘pasta al pomodoro’ , often drowned under large amounts of parmesan cheese and tomato sauce; not to mention tomato and anchovy sauces in pizza recipes, all umami-rich. The last combination producing synergistic umami where the umami hit is presumably boosted.

“The inexplicable blandness of airline food has been pondered at 30,000 feet by generations of travellers.” ([13], p. 13).

Of course, anything we can do to gain a better understanding about why most food tastes less than wonderful in the plane has to be welcome (see [14] for some of the earliest research on this topic). Indeed, some carriers, such as Lufthansa and Singapore Airlines, have even built specialized testing facilities in order to mimic the conditions of the average passenger without anyone having to leave the ground [8], all with the aim of making their food taste better in the air.

Understanding (or predicting) how flavour perception might be affected by a noise-induced reduction in the perception of any basic taste in airline food (or for that matter in any other food) is by no means a simple matter. First, as has already been noted, the basic tastes interact, and mutually suppress one another in ways that are sometimes unpredictable, e.g., [7,15-17], with umami being suppressed when combined with any of the other basic tastes, while at the same time enhancing sweetness and saltiness perception. Second, the reduction in the contribution of volatile compounds to flavour perception given the low cabin pressure, not to mention the dry air [8], will also likely reduce any smell-induced taste perception (e.g., as in the case of olfactory-induced sweetness or bitterness; [18]). Note here also that Maga and Lorenz [19] reported that their participants were significantly less sensitive to the four basic tastes in an environment designed to simulate what it is like at 5,000 ft above sea level than at sea level. Finally, it should be noted that a growing body of research now shows that background sound can also affect olfactory perception [20-22].

Should it be proved that the perception of umami is indeed noise-insensitive, then one might also want to recommend an umami-rich menu – that is, foods such as parmesan cheese, tomatoes, and mushrooms – to all those vocal restaurant critics out there, especially it seems in North America, who have been complaining that the background noise in many restaurants is simply too loud nowadays so that they can no longer taste/enjoy their food [23-25]. In fact, Sietsema [24,25] measured some restaurants at 90 dB at especially busy times, that is, higher than the noise levels used in the study by Woods et al. [3], and higher too than the noise levels experienced by passengers in commercial planes while in flight (Figure 2) [4]!

thumbnailFigure 2. Sound levels in a variety of eating environments.

We would, of course, still be left with the question of what exactly it is that is so special about umami relative to the other ‘basic’ tastes. But here it is worth remembering that the different tastes serve different evolutionary functions, and what is more we would not be the first to suggest that loud noise might not affect all tastes equally [26]. Furthermore, the latest research from Obrist et al. [27] has demonstrated that umami appears to be special amongst the five basic tastes in being rated as the most intense, and even after matching for intensity effects, gives rise to a sensation that lingers for longer than any of the other tastes (Figure 3). This representation of taste experiences would support the idea that monosodium glutamate, when combined with other tastes, has the power to enhance them [7] or maybe even ‘lift up’ overall taste experiences, in particular with loud ambient noise.

thumbnailFigure 3. Three characteristics of taste combined for equi-intense basic tastes evaluated by naïve participants. Temporality (that is, the duration of the taste experience indicated from left to right), affective reactions (green pleasant, red unpleasant, and yellow neutral experience), and the embodied mouth feeling for each of the five basic tastes (Figure reprinted from [27]).

Perhaps neuroimaging, especially MRI where the loud background noise is thrown in for free [28], might be able to help discern where exactly in the human brain such curious crossmodal interactions are taking place.

As a first step at the behavioural level, the ideal solution here might well be to serve the same selection of foods (either umami-rich or without umami) to participants in four different conditions: i) While in flight (i.e., with loud background noise and with low cabin air pressure); ii) While in flight but wearing noise-cancelling headphones (low background noise and low air pressure); iii) On the ground with the engines running, or perhaps, more likely, with pre-recorded engine sounds being played back to participants (loud background noise and normal air pressure); and iv) On the ground with the engines off (low background noise and normal air pressure). One would presumably want to assess taste and flavour intensity ratings as well as participants’ hedonic responses to the foods served. We would certainly welcome the results of such a study.

Conclusions

In conclusion, perhaps all those travellers who order a Bloody Mary after the seatbelt sign has been turned off have figured out intuitively what scientists are only now slowly coming to recognize empirically, regarding the interaction between what we hear and what we taste [9,11]. Only future research will be able to definitively show whether certain tastes are more or less affected by background noise (or music) than others. Answering this question may have implications for all of us who need, on occasion, to eat and/or drink in the sky!

Endnote

aThough, note that it is something of an open question as to how many ‘basic’ tastes there actually are [29], and whether they should even be called basic in the first place [30,31]).

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors' contributions

The three authors CS, CM, & BS all contributed to the writing of this manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Authors' information

Charles Michel is the first chef in residence at the Crossmodal Research Laboratory.

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Heston Blumenthal and Lisa Methven for helpful discussion on the impact of sound on umami and flavour perception. The authors received no funding for this piece of work.

References

  1. Crocker EC: The technology of flavors and odors.

    Confectioner 1950, 34:7-10. OpenURL

  2. Pettit LA: The influence of test location and accompanying sound in flavor preference testing of tomato juice.

    Food Technol 1958, 12:55-57. OpenURL

  3. Woods AT, Poliakoff E, Lloyd DM, Kuenzel J, Hodson R, Gonda H, Batchelor J, Dijksterhuis GB, Thomas A: Effect of background noise on food perception.

    Food Qual Preference 2011, 22:42-47. Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  4. Ozcan HK, Nemlioglu S: In-cabin noise levels during commercial aircraft flights.

    Can Acoust 2006, 34:31-35. OpenURL

  5. Kawamura Y, Kare MR: Umami: A Basic Taste – Physiology, Biochemistry, Nutrition, Food Science. New York, NY: Marcel Dekker; 1987. OpenURL

  6. Yasuo T, Kusuhara Y, Yasumatsu K, Ninomiya Y: Multiple receptor systems for glutamate detection in the taste organ.

    Biol Pharmacol Bull 2006, 31:1833-1837. OpenURL

  7. Suwankanit C, Dermiki M, Kennedy OB, Methven L: Umami: Suppressed by all Other Tastes but Itself an Enhancer of Salty and Sweet Perception. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Poster presented at 10th Pangborn Sensory Science Symposium; 2013. OpenURL

  8. Michaels D: Test flight: Lufthansa searches for savor in the sky.

    Wall Street J 2010.

    [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703294904575384954227906006.html webcite]

    OpenURL

  9. Spence C: Auditory contributions to flavour perception and feeding behaviour.

    Physiol Behav 2012, 107:505-515. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  10. Oruna-Concha MJ, Methven L, Blumenthal H, Young C, Mottram DS: Differences in glutamic acid and 5′-ribonucleotide contents between flesh and pulp of tomatoes and the relationship with umami taste.

    J Agric Food Chem 2007, 55:5776-5780. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  11. McCartney S: The secret to making airline food taste better.

    Wall Street J 2013.

    [http://live.wsj.com/video/the-secret-to-making-airline-food-taste-better/8367EF44-52DD-41C4-AC4A-FFA6659F3422.html#!8367EF44-52DD-41C4-AC4A-FFA6659F3422 webcite]

    OpenURL

  12. Umami Information Center: Dialogue between Peruvian chefs and Monell Scientists.

    2011.

    [http://www.umamiinfo.com/2011/08/dialogue-between-peruvian-chefs-and-monell-scientists.php webcite]

  13. Connor S: Science finds the plane truth about in-flight meals. Independent; 2010.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/science-finds-the-plane-truth-about-inflight-meals-2107130.html webcite

    OpenURL

  14. Green DM, Butts JS: Factors affecting acceptability of meals served in the air.

    J Am Diet Assoc 1945, 21:415-419. OpenURL

  15. Breslin PAS, Beauchamp GK: Salt enhances flavor by suppressing bitterness.

    Nature 1997, 387:563. OpenURL

  16. Gillan DJ: Taste-taste, odor-odor, and taste-odor mixtures: greater suppression within than between modalities.

    Percept Psychophys 1983, 33:183-183. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  17. Savant L, McDaniel MR: Suppression of sourness: a comparative study involving mixtures of organic acids and sugars.

    Percept Psychophys 2004, 66:642-650. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  18. Stevenson RJ, Boakes RA: Sweet and sour smells: learned synaesthesia between the senses of taste and smell. In The Handbook of Multisensory Processing. Edited by Calvert GA, Spence C, Stein BE. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2004:69-83. OpenURL

  19. Maga JA, Lorenz K: Effect of altitude on taste thresholds.

    Percept Mot Skills 1972, 34:667-670. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  20. Seo HS, Gudziol V, Hähner A, Hummel T: Background sound modulates the performance of odor discrimination task.

    Exp Brain Res 2011, 212:305-314. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  21. Seo HS, Hähner A, Gudziol V, Scheibe M, Hummel T: Influence of background noise on the performance in the odor sensitivity task: effects of noise type and extraversion.

    Exp Brain Res 2011, 222:89-97. OpenURL

  22. Seo HS, Hummel T: Auditory-olfactory integration: congruent or pleasant sounds amplify odor pleasantness.

    Chem Senses 2010, 36:301-309. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  23. McLaughlin K: Pass the salt … and a megaphone.

    Wall Street J 2010.

    [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704022804575041060813407740.html webcite]

    OpenURL

  24. Sietsema T: No appetite for noise. The Washington Post.

    2008.

    [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/01/AR2008040102210_pf.html webcite]

  25. Sietsema T: Revealing raucous restaurants. The Washington Post.

    2008.

    [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/04/AR2008040402738.html?sid=ST2008040402725 webcite]

  26. Ferber C, Cabanac M: Influence of noise on gustatory affective ratings and preference for sweet or salt.

    Appetite 1987, 8:229-235. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  27. Obrist M, Comber R, Subramanian S, Piqueras-Fiszman B, Velasco C, Spence C: Temporal, affective, and embodied characteristics of taste experiences: A framework for design.

    2014.

    Full paper accepted for CHI

  28. de Araujo IET, Kringelbach ML, Rolls ET, Hobden P: Representation of umami taste in the human brain.

    J Neurophysiol 2003, 90:313-319. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  29. Stuckey B: Taste What You’re Missing: The Passionate Eater’s Guide to Why Good Food Tastes Good. London: Free Press; 2012. OpenURL

  30. Delwiche J: Are there ‘basic’ tastes?

    Trends Food Sci Technol 1996, 7:411-415. Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  31. Erikson RP: A study of the science of taste: on the origins and influence of the core ideas.

    Behav Brain Sci 2008, 31:59-105. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text OpenURL