Seven experiments examined recognition memory for sequentially presented odors. Following Reed (2000), participants were presented with a sequence of odors and then required to identify an odor from the sequence in a test probe comprising 2 odors. The pattern of results obtained by Reed (2000, although statistically marginal) demonstrated enhanced recognition for odors presented at the start (primacy) and end (recency) of the sequence: a result that we failed to replicate in any of the experiments reported here. Experiments 1 and 3 were designed to replicate Reed (2000), employing five-item and seven-item sequences, respectively, and each demonstrated significant recency, with evidence of primacy in Experiment 3 only. Experiment 2 replicated Experiment 1, with reduced interstimulus intervals, and produced a null effect of serial position. The ease with which the odors could be verbally labeled was manipulated in Experiments 4 and 5. Nameable odors produced a null effect of serial position (Experiment 4), and hard-to-name odors produced a pronounced recency effect (Experiment 5); nevertheless, overall rates of recognition were remarkably similar for the two experiments at around 70%. Articulatory suppression reduced recognition accuracy (Experiment 6), but recency was again present in the absence of primacy. Odor recognition performance was immune to the effects of an interleaved odor (Experiment 7), and, again, both primacy and recency effects were absent. There was no evidence of olfactory fatigue: Recognition accuracy improved across trials (Experiment 1). It is argued that the results of the experiments reported here are generally consistent with that body of work employing hard-to-name visual stimuli, where recency is obtained in the absence of primacy when the retention interval is short.