A new approach to category scales of intensity I: Traditional versus rank-rating

Journal of Sensory Studies

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 1998, Pages 241-249

  Kim, Kwang Ok ^a,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

EID: 0038979367     PISSN: 08878250     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-459X.1998.tb00086.x     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. BROWN, J. 1974. Recognition assessed by rating and ranking. Brit. J. Psychol. 65, 13-22.
2. CANDLAND, D.K. 1968. Psychology: The Experimental Approach. McGraw-Hill, New York.
3. D'AMATO, M.R. 1970. Experimental Psychology: Methodology, Psychophysics and Learning. McGraw-Hill, New York.
4. ENNIS, D.M. 1990. Relative power of difference testing methods in sensory evaluation. Food Technol. 44, 114, 116, 117.
5. ENNIS, D.M. 1993. The power of sensory discrimination methods. J. Sensory Studies 8, 353-370.
6. FRIJTERS, J.E.R. 1979. The paradox of discriminatory non-discriminators resolved. Chem. Senses 4, 355-358.
7. FRIJTERS, J.E.R., KOOISTRA, A. and VEREIJKEN, P.F.G. 1980. Tables of d′ for the triangular method and the 3-AFC signal detection procedure. Percept. Psychophys. 27, 176-178.
8. GALVEZ, F.C. and RESURRECCION, A.V.A. 1990. Comparison of three descriptive analysis scaling methods for the sensory evaluation of noodles. J. Sensory Studies 5, 251-263.
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 Sci. 48, 1175-1182.
10. GREEN, D.M. and SWETS, J.A. 1966. Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
11. KIM, K.-O., ENNIS, D.M. and O'MAHONY, M. 1998. A new approach to category scales of intensity: II. Use of d′ values. J. Sensory Studies 13, 251-267.
12. LAWLESS, H.T. and MALONE, G.J. 1986a. The discriminative efficiency of common scaling methods. J. Sensory Studies 1, 85-98
13. LAWLESS, H.T. and MALONE, G.J. 1986b. A comparison of rating scales: sensitivity, replicates and relative measurement. J. Sensory Studies 1, 155-174.
14. MacMILLAN, N.A. and CREELMAN, C.D. 1991. Detection Theory: A User's Guide. Cambridge Univ. Press. Cambridge, U.K.
15. McDANIEL, M.R. and SAWYER, F.M. 1981. Descriptive analysis of whiskey sour formulations: Magnitude estimation versus a 9-point category scale. J. Food Sci. 46, 178-181, 189.
16. McNICOL, D. 1972. A Primer of Signal Detection Theory. George and Allen Unwin, London.
17. McTIGUE, M.C., KOEHLER, H.H. and SILBERNAGEL, M.J. 1989. Comparison of four sensory evaluation methods for assessing cooked dry bean flavor. J. Food Sci. 54, 1278-1283.
18. NOBLE, A.C. and SCHMIDT, J.O. 1981. Comparison of structured and unstructured category scales in the evaluation of sourness intensity. In Flavor (P. Schreler, ed.) pp. 63-68, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin.
19. O'MAHONY, M. 1995. Who told you the triangle test was simple? Food Qual. Pref. 6, 227-238.
20. O'MAHONY, M. MASUOKA, S. and ISHII, R. 1994. A theoretical note on difference tests: Models and cognitive strategies. J. Sensory Studies 9, 247-272.
21. SHAND, P.J., HAWRYSH, Z.J., HARDIN, R.T. and JEREMIAH, L.E. 1985. Descriptive sensory assessment of beef steaks by category scaling, line scaling and magnitude estimation. J. Food Sci. 50, 495-500.
22. STEINSHOLT, K. and VEGGELAND, K. 1989. Scale length in sensory evaluation. Norsk Landbruksforsking 3, 159-165.
23. WOODWORTH, R.S. and SCHLOSBERG, H. 1954. Experimental Psychology. Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York.
24. ZHENG, C.-J., HOFFMAN, H.J., LUCCHINA, L.A., BARTOSHUK, L.M. and WEIFFENBACH, J.M. 1997. Comparison of the Green scale and magnitude estimation for taste perception. Abstracts: International Symposium on Olfaction and Taste XII and Association for Chemoreception Sciences XIX San Diego, p. 52.