Structured and unstructured 9-point hedonic scales: A cross cultural study with American, Japanese and Korean consumers

Journal of Sensory Studies

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 115-139

  Yao, Emily ^a   Lim, Juyeon ^b   Tamaki, Kazuhiko ^a   Ishii, Rie ^a   Kim, Kwang Ok ^b   O'Mahony, Michael ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b Ewha Womans University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

RESEARCH; SALES; SENSORY PERCEPTION;

HEDONIC SCALES;

FOOD PRODUCTS;

EID: 0038714443     PISSN: 08878250     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-459X.2003.tb00379.x     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. AYABE-KANAMURA, S., SCHICKER, I., LASITA, M., HUDSON, R., DISTEL, H., KOBAYAKAWA, T. and SAITO, S. 1998. Differences in perception of everyday odors: A Japanese-German cross-cultural study. Chem. Senses 23, 31-38.
2. BELL, G.A., PRESCOTT, J., GILLMORE, R., ALLEN, S., KORAC, S., YOSHIDA, M. and YAMAZAKI, K. 1994. Perception of and preferences for sweetness in foods by Japanese and Australians. Chem. Senses 19, 441-442.
3. BERTINO, M., BEAUCHAMP, G.K. and JEN, K.C. 1983. Rated taste perception in two cultural groups. Chem. Senses 8, 3-15.
4. BERTINO, M. and CHAN, M.M. 1986. Taste perception and diet in individuals with Chinese and European ethnic backgrounds. Chem. Senses 77, 229-241.
5. CURIA, A.V., HOUGH, G., MARTINEZ, M.C. and MARGALEF, M.I. 2001. How Argentine consumers understand the Spanish translation of the 9-point hedonic scale. Food Qual. Pref. 72, 217-221.
6. DOTY, R.L., APPLEBAUM, S., ZUSHO, H. and SETTLE, R.G. 1985. Sex differences in odor identification ability: A cross-cultural analysis. Neurophysiologia 23, 667-672.
7. DRUZ, L.L. and BALDWIN, R.E. 1982. Taste thresholds and hedonic responses of panels representing three nationalities. J. Food Sci. 47, 561-569.
8. GARRIGA-TRILLO, A. and GONZALEZ-REPRESA, F. 2001. Cross-cultural differences in magnitude estimation of olfactory stimuli: Spanish and Portuguese data. Psychologia 28, 107-119.
9. GIOVANNI, M.E. and PANGBORN, R.M. 1983. Measurement of taste intensity and degree of liking of beverages by graphic scales and magnitude estimation. J. Food Sei. 48, 1175-1182.
10. GREEN, E.G., DALTON, P., COWART, B., SHAFFER, G., RANKIN, K. and HIGGINS, J. 1996. Evaluating the 'labeled magnitude scale' for measuring sensations of taste and smell. Chem. Senses 27, 323-334.
11. GREEN, E.G., SHAFFER, G.S. and GILMORE, M.M. 1993. Derivation and evaluation of a semantic scale of oral sensation magnitude with apparent ratio properties. Chem. Senses 78, 683-702.
12. HOLT, S.H.A., COBIAC, L., BEAUMONT-SMITH, N.B., EASTON, K. and BEST, D.I. 2000. Dietary habits and the perception and liking of sweetness among Australian and Malaysian students: A cross-cultural study. Food Qual. Pref. 11, 299-312.
13. HORNE, J., LAWLESS, H.T., SPEIRS, W. and SPOSATO, D. 2002. Bitter taste of saccharin and acesulfame-K. Chem. Senses 27, 31-38.
14. ISHII, R. 2002. Personal communication.
15. ISHII, R. and O'MAHONY, M. 1986. A comparison of English and Japanese taste languages: Taste descriptive methodology, codability and the umami taste. Brit. J. Psychol. 77, 161-174.
16. ISHII, R. and O'MAHONY, M. 1987. Taste sorting and naming: Can taste concepts be misrepresented by traditional psychophysical labeling systems? Chem. Senses 12, 37-51.
17. ISHII, R. and O'MAHONY, M. 1990. Group taste concept measurement: Verbal and physical definition of the umami taste concept for Japanese and Americans. J. Sensory Studies 4, 215-227.
18. ISHII, R., YAMAGUCHI, S. and O'MAHONY, M. 1992. Measures of taste discriminability for sweet, salty and umami stimuli: Japanese versus Americans. Chem. Senses 17, 365-380.
19. JONES, L.V., PERYAM, D.R. and THURSTONE, L.L. 1955. Development of a scale for measuring soldiers' food preferences. Food Res. 20, 512-520.
20. JONES, L.V. and THURSTONE, L.L. 1955. The psychophysics of semantics: An experimental investigation. J. Appl. Psychol. 39, 31-36.
21. KARAHADIAN, C. 1995. Impact of global markets on sensory testing programs. Food Technol. 49, Feb, 77-78.
22. KIM, K.O. and O'MAHONY, M. 1998. A new approach to category scales of intensity I: Traditional versus rank-rating. J. Sensory Studies 13, 241-249.
23. KIMMEL, S.A., SIGMAN-GRANT, M. and GUINARD, J.-X. 1994. Sensory testing with young children. Food Technol. 48, March, 92-99.
24. KOO, T.Y., KIM, K.O. and O'MAHONY, M. 2002. Effects of forgetting on performance on various intensity scaling protocols: Magnitude estimation and labeled magnitude scale (Green scale). J. Sensory Studies 17, 177-192.
25. LAING, D.G. et al. 1994. Responses of Japanese and Australians to sweetness in the context of different foods. J. Sensory Studies 9, 131-155.
26. LAING, D. et al. 1993. A cross-cultural study of taste perception with Australians and Japanese. Chem. Senses 18, 161-168.
27. LAWLESS, H. 1983. Contextual effects in category ratings. J. Testing and Evaluation 11, 346-349.
28. LAWLESS, H.T. and HEYMANN, H. 1998. Sensory Evaluation of Food Principles and Practices. Chapman and Hall, New York.
29. LAWLESS, H.T. and MALONE, G.J. 1986. A comparison of rating scales: Sensitivity, replicates and relative measurement. J. Sensory Studies 1, 155-174.
30. LUNDGREN, B., PANGBORN, R.M., BARYLKO-PIKIELNA, N. and DAGET, N. 1976. Difference taste thresholds for sucrose in water and in orange juice: An interlaboratory study. Chem. Senses Flav. 2, 157-176.
31. MELLERS, B.A. 1983a. Evidence against "absolute" scaling. Percept. Psychophys. 33, 405-408.
32. MELLERS, B.A. 1983b. Reply to Zwislocki's views on "absolute" scaling. Percept. Psychophys. 34, 405-408.
33. MURRAY, J.M., EASTON, K. and BEST, D.J. 2001. A study of Chinese-origin and European-origin Australian consumers' texture preferences using a novel extruded product. J. Sensory Studies 16, 485-504.
34. O'MAHONY, M. 1991. Descriptive analysis and concept alignment. In Sensory Science Theory and Applications in Foods, (H.T. Lawless and B.P. Klein, eds.) pp. 223-267, Marcel Dekker, New York.
35. O'MAHONY, M. 1992. Understanding discrimination tests: A user-friendly treatment of response bias, rating and ranking R-Index tests and their relationship to signal detection. J. Sensory Studies 7, 1-47.
36. O'MAHONY, M. and ISHII, R. 1987. The umami taste concept: Implications for the dogma of four basic tastes. In Umami: A Basic Taste, (Y. Kawamura and M.R. Kare, eds.) pp. 75-93, Marcel Dekker, New York.
37. O'MAHONY, M. and MANZANO ALBA, M. del C. 1980. Taste descriptions in Spanish and English. Chem. Senses 5, 47-62.
38. O'MAHONY, M. and TSANG, T. 1980. A preliminary comparison of Cantonese and American English as taste languages. Brit. J. Psychol. 71, 221-226.
39. PARDUCCI, A. 1963. Range-frequency compromise in judgment. Psychol. Monographs 77, 1-50.
40. PARDUCCI, A. 1965. Category judgment: A range-frequency model. Scientific American 219, 84-90.
41. PERYAM, D.R. and GIRARDOT, N.F. 1952. Advanced taste-test method. Food Eng. 24, 58-61, 194.
42. PIPATSATTAYANUWONG, S., LEE, H.S., LAU, S. and O'MAHONY, M. 2001. Hedonic R-Index measurement of temperature preferences for drinking black coffee. J. Sensory Studies 16, 517-536.
43. POULTON, E.C. 1979. Models for biases in judging sensory magnitude. Psychol. Bull. 86, 777-803.
44. PRESCOTT, J. 1998. Comparisons of taste perceptions and preferences of Japanese and Australian consumers: Overview and implications for cross-cultural sensory research. Food Qual. Pref. 9, 393-402.
45. PRESCOTT, J. et al. 1998. Cross-cultural comparisons of Japanese and Australian responses to manipulations of sourness, saltiness and bitterness in foods. Food Qual. Pref. 9, 53-66.
46. PRESCOTT, J. et al. 1992. Hedonic responses to taste solutions: a cross-cultural study of Japanese and Australians. Chem. Senses 17, 801-809.
47. PRESCOTT, J., YOUNG, O. and O'NEILL, L. 2001. The impact of variations in flavour compounds on meat acceptability: a comparison of Japanese and New Zealand consumers. Food Qual. Pref. 72, 257-264.
48. SOBAL, J. 1998. Cultural comparison research designs in food, eating and nutrition. Food Qual. Pref. 9, 385-392.
49. SONG, H.-J. and BELL, G.A. 1998. Cross-cultural comparison of judgements of odours by Australians and Indonesians. Chem. Senses 23, 584-585.
50. STONE, H. and SIDEL, J. 1995. Strategic applications for sensory evaluation in a global market. Food Technol. 49, Feb, 80-89.
51. THURSTONE, L.L. 1953. Some new psychophysical methods. In Food Acceptance Testing Methodology. A Symposium, (D.R. Peryam, F.S. Pilgrim and M.S. Peterson, eds.) pp. 100-104, Nat. Acad. Sciences Nat. Res. Council, Washington DC.
52. YAMAGUCHI, S., KIMURA, M. and ISHII, R. 1988. Comparison of Japanese and American taste thresholds. Japanese Symposium on Taste and Smell, pp. 73-75, Symposium Press, Fukuoka.
53. YEH, L.L., KIM, K.O., CHOMPREEDA, P., RIMKEEREE, H., YAU, N.J.N. and LUNDAHL, D.S. 1998. Comparison in use of the 9-point hedonic scale between Americans, Chinese, Koreans and Thai. Food Qual. Pref. 9, 413-419.
54. ZUSHO, H., YAMAMOTO, K., NEGISHI, M., KOYABASHI, H., DOTY, R.L. and APPLEBAUM, S. 1985. Comparison of Japanese and American subjects on the University of Pennsylvania smell identification test. Chem. Senses 9, 84.
55. ZWISLOCKJ, J.J. 1983. Absolute and other scales: Question of validity. Percept. Psychophys. 33, 593-594.
56. ZWISLOCKI, J.J. and GOODMAN, D.A. 1980. Absolute scaling of sensory magnitudes: A validation. Percept. Psychophys. 28, 28-38.