Who told you the triangle test was simple?

Food Quality and Preference

Volumn 6, Issue 4, 1995, Pages 227-238

  O'Mahony, Michael ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0000635349     PISSN: 09503293     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/0950-3293(95)00022-4     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Forced choice methods
2. Evaluation of thresholds and minimum difference concentrations for various constituents of wines. I. Water solutions of pure substances
3. A comparison of the triangular and two-sample taste-test methods
4. Pair, triangle and duotrio tests
5. Tables of d′
6. THE POWER OF SENSORY DISCRIMINATION METHODS
7. A multivariate model for discrimination methods
8. Probabilistic psychophysics with noisy stimuli
9. A CRITICAL COMPARISON OF THE TWO-SAMPLE AND TRIANGULAR BINOMIAL DESIGNS
10. The effect of duration of intervals between olfactory stimuli in the triangular method
11. The paradox of discriminatory non-discriminators resolved
12. An olfactory investigation of the compatibility of oddity instructions with the design of a 3-AFC signal detection task
13. c) to the measure of sensory difference (d′) for the triangular method and the 3-alternative forced choice procedure
14. Incidental training in the triangular method
15. Tables of d′ for the triangular method and the 3-AFC signal detection procedure
16. Preference gives more consistent judgments than oddity only if the task can be modeled as forced choice
17. GROUP SIZE IN TASTE SORTING TRIALS
18. A Reexamination of the Two-Stage Triangle Test for the Perception of Sensory Differences
19. Some observed discrepancies in application of the triangle test to evaluation of irradiated whole egg magma
20. A revised table of d′ for M-alternative forced choice
21. What to control in studies of taste
22. Position bias in sensory assessments
23. Some applications of statistics to laboratory taste testing
24. Selection of a taste panel
25. Some Observations on Sensitivity and Repeatability of Triad Taste Difference Tests
26. Binomial systems and organoleptic analysis
27. Threshold determination by triangle testing: effects of judgemental procedure, positional bias and incidental training
28. Preference can be more powerful than detection of oddity as a test of discriminability
29. Salt taste adaptation: The psychophysical effects of adapting solutions and residual stimuli from prior tastings on the taste of sodium chloride
30. SENSORY ADAPTATION
31. Cognitive aspects of difference testing and descriptive analysis: Criterion variation and concept formation
32. UNDERSTANDING DISCRIMINATION TESTS: A USER-FRIENDLY TREATMENT OF RESPONSE BIAS, RATING AND RANKING R-INDEX TESTS AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO SIGNAL DETECTION
33. Effectiveness of sensory difference tests: Sequential sensitivity analyses for liquid food stimuli
34. Tasting successive salt and water stimuli: the roles of adaptation, variability in physical signal strength, learning, supra- and subadapting signal delectability
35. Direct magnitude estimation of salt taste intensity with continuous correction for salivary adaptation
36. A THEORETICAL NOTE ON DIFFERENCE TESTS: MODELS, PARADOXES AND COGNITIVE STRATEGIES
37. A Comparison of Sensory Difference Testing Procedures: Sequential Sensitivity Analysis and Aspects of Taste Adaptation
38. The Warm-up Effect as a Means of Increasing the Discriminability of Sensory Difference Tests
39. The effect of interstimulus procedures on salt taste intensity functions
40. Sensory difference tests
41. Measurement of sensory differences
42. Knowledge of the stimulus variable as an aid in discrimination tests
43. EXPANDED STATISTICAL TABLES FOR ESTIMATING SIGNIFICANCE IN PAIRED?PREFERENCE, PAIRED?DIFFERENCE, DUO?TRIO AND TRIANGLE TESTS
44. Response selection, sensitivity and tastetest performance
45. Triadic discrimination testing: refinement of Thurstonian and Sequential Sensitivity Analysis approaches
46. MODIFICATIONS TO SENSORY DIFFERENCE TEST PROTOCOLS: THE WARMED UP PAIRED COMPARISON, THE SINGLE STANDARD DUO-TRIO AND THE A-NOT A TEST MODIFIED FOR RESPONSE BIAS
47. Psychophysical Analysis
48. A law of comparative judgement
49. Pair, triangle and duo-triangle test
50. TRIANGULAR DIFFERENCE TESTING: REFINEMENTS TO SEQUENTIAL SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS FOR PREDICTIONS FOR INDIVIDUAL TRIADS
51. A Sample Bias in the Evaluation of Smoked Frankfurters by the Triangle Test