A matching task as a potential technique for descriptive profile validation

Food Quality and Preference

Volumn 14, Issue 7, 2003, Pages 539-547

  O'Neill, Lynda ^a   Nicklaus, Sophie ^b   Sauvageot, François ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE BOURGOGNE   (France)

^b CEMAGREF   (France)

Author keywords

Descriptive profiles; Matching task; Panel performance; Validity

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; CHEESE; CHI SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FLAVOR; FOOD ANALYSIS; FREQUENCY ANALYSIS; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INDIVIDUALIZATION; MALE; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; NORMAL HUMAN; ODOR; PREDICTION; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; TASK PERFORMANCE; TASTE; VALIDATION PROCESS;

EID: 0038209051     PISSN: 09503293     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0950-3293(02)00108-8     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Brockhoff P.M. Assessor modelling Food Quality and Preference 9 1998 87-89
2. EBrockhoff P.M. Skovgaard I.M. Modelling individual differences between assessors in sensory evaluations Food Quality and Preference 5 1994 215-224
3. Cairncross S.E. Sjoström L.B. Flavor profiles: a new approach to flavor problems Food Technology 4 1950 308-311
4. Clausen S. Applied correspondence analysis: an introduction 1998 Sage Publications Thousand Oaks
5. Couronne, T. (1996). Etude de l'interaction pour l'analyse de Ia performance d'un jury. 3rd Sensometrics meeting, (12.1-12.3) Nantes, 19-21 June 1996.
6. De Rovira D. The dynamic flavor profile method Food Technology 50 1996 55-60
7. Gawel R. The use of language by trained and untrained experienced wine tasters Journal of Sensory Studies 12 1997 267-284
8. Heymann H. Noble A.C. Comparison of canonical variate and principal component analysis of wine descriptive analysis data Journal of Food Science 54 1989 1355-1358
9. Lawless H.T. Flavour description of white wine by 'expert' and non-expert wine consumers Journal of Food Science 49 1984 120-123
10. Lawless H.T. Heymann H. Sensory evaluation of food: principles and practices 1998 Chapman & Hall New York
11. Lee S.-Y. Luna-Guzman I. Chang S. Barrett D.M. Guinard J.-X. Relating descriptive analysis and instrumental texture data of processed diced tomatoes Food Quality and Preference 10 1999 447-455
12. Lehrer A. Talking about wine Language 51 1975 901-923
13. Lesschaeve I. Issanchou S. Could selection tests detect the future performance of descriptive panellists Food Quality and Preference 7 1996 163-165
14. Martin M. Molimard P. Spinnler H.E. Schlich P. Comparison of odour sensory profiles performed by two independent trained panels following the same descriptive analysis procedures Food Quality and Prefrrence 11 2000 487-495
15. McClelland D. C Toward a theory of motive acquisition American Psychologist 20 1965 321-333
16. McEwan J. A Comparison of sensory panels: a ring trial Food Quality and Preference 10 1999 161-171
17. Meilgaard M. Civille G.V. Carr B.T. Sensory evaluation techniques (3rd ed) 1999 CRC Press Boca Raton
18. Porcherot C. Schlich P. FLASH table and canonical mapping of potato varieties Food Quality and Preference 11 2000 163-165
19. Pritchett Mangan P.A. Performance assessment of sensory panelists Journal of Sensory Studies 7 1992 229-252
20. Sauvageot F. Fuentes P. Une approche pour valider la technique du profil sensoriel: la technique de l'appariement Science des Ailments 20 2000 467-489
21. Schlich P. Defining and validating assessor compromises about product distances and attribute correlations In. Naes T. Risvik E. (Eds.) Multivariate analysis of data in sensory science 1996 259-306 Elsevier Science Amsterdam
22. Solomon G.E.A. Psychology of novice and expert wine talk American Journal of Psychology 103 1990 495-517
23. Stone H. Sidel J.L. Sensory evaluation practices 1993 Academic Press San Diego
24. EStone H. Sidel J.L. Oliver S. Woolsey A. Singleton R.C. Sensory evaluation by quantitative descriptive analysis Food Technology 28 1974 24 26, 28, 29, 32, 34
25. Szczesniak A.C. Classification of textural characteristics Journal of Food Science 28 1963 385-389
26. Williams A.A. Langron S.P. The use of free-choice profiling for the evaluation of commercial ports Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 35 1984 558-568