A comparison of category and line scales under various experimental protocols

Journal of Sensory Studies

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 49-66

  Jeon, Seon Young ^a   O'Mahony, Michael ^b   Kim, Kwang Ok ^a  

^a Ewha Womans University   (South Korea)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BEVERAGES; COGNITIVE SYSTEMS; FLAVORS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SENSORY AIDS; SENSORY PERCEPTION; SILICONES; SODIUM CHLORIDE;

COGNITIVE STRATEGIES; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTOCOLS;

FOOD PROCESSING;

EID: 1842613449     PISSN: 08878250     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-459X.2004.tb00135.x     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. AVANCINI DE ALMEIDA, T.C., CUBERO, E. and O'MAHONY, M. 1999. Same-different discrimination tests with interstimulus delays up to one day. J. Sensory Studies 14, 1-18.
2. BARKER, L.M. and WEAVER III, C.A. 1983. Rapid, permanent, loss of memory for absolute intensity of taste and smell. Bull. Psychonomic Soc. 21, 281-284.
3. BATEN, W.D. 1946. Organoleptic tests pertaining to apples and pears. Food Res. 11, 84-94.
4. BI, J., ENNIS, D.M. and O'MAHONY, M. 1997. How to estimate and use the variance of d' from difference tests. J. Sensory Studies 12, 87-104.
5. CARLIN, A.F., KEMPTHORNE, O. and GORDON, J. 1956. Some aspects of numerical scoring in subjective evaluation of foods. Food Res. 21, 273-281.
6. CUBERO, E., AVANCINI DE ALMEIDA, T. and O'MAHONY, M. 1995. Cognitive aspects of difference testing: Memory and interstimulus delay. J. Sensory Studies 10, 307-324.
7. DELWICHE, J. and O'MAHONY, M. 1996. Flavor discrimination - an extension of Thurstonian paradoxes to the tetrad method. Food Qual. Pref. 7, 1-5.
8. DESSIRIER, J.-M. and O'MAHONY, M. 1999. Comparison of d' values for the 2-AFC (paired comparison) and 3-AFC discrimination methods: Thurstonian models, sequential sensitivity analysis and power. Food Qual. Pref. 10, 51-58.
9. DESSIRIER, J.-M., SIEFFERMANN, J.-M. and O'MAHONY, M. 1999. Taste discrimination by the 3-AFC method: testing sensitivity predictions regarding particular tasting sequences based on the sequential sensitivity analysis model. J. Sensory Studies 14, 271-287.
10. ENNIS, D.M. 1990. Relative power of difference testing methods in sensory evaluation. Food Technol. 44, 114, 116, 117.
11. ENNIS, D.M. 1993. The power of sensory discrimination methods. J. Sensory Studies 8, 353-370.
12. ENNIS, D.M. and O'MAHONY, M. 1995. Probabilistic models for sequential taste effects in triadic choice. J. Exptl. Psychol. 21, 1088-1097.
13. ENNIS, J.M., ENNIS, D.M., YIP, D. and O'MAHONY, M. 1998. Thurstonian models for variants of the method of tetrads. Brit. J. Math. Stat. Psychol. 51, 205-215.
14. FRIJTERS, J.E.R. 1979. The paradox of discriminatory non-discriminators resolved. Chem. Senses 4, 355-358.
15. FRIJTERS, J.E.R., KOOISTRA, A. and VERIJKEN, P.F.G. 1980. Tables of d' for the triangular method and the 3-AFC signal detection procedure. Percept. Psychophys. 27, 176-178.
16. GALVEZ, F.C.F. and RESURRECCION, V.A. 1990. Comparison of three descriptive analysis scaling methods for the sensory evaluation of noodles. J. Sensory Studies 5, 251-263.
17. GARRIGA-TRILLO, A. 1992. How much of the physical continuum is explained by magnitude estimates and cross-modality matches? In Fechner Day '92, (G. Borg and G. Neely, eds.) pp. 81-85, International Society for Psychophysics, Stockholm.
18. 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.
19. GREEN, D.M. and SWETS, J.A. 1966. Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
20. 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.
21. 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.
22. LAWLESS, H.T. and MALONE, G.J. 1986a. The discriminative efficiency of common scaling methods. J. Sensory Studies 1, 85-98.
23. LAWLESS, H.T. and MALONE, G.J. 1986b. A comparison of rating scales: Sensitivity, replicates and relative measurement. J. Sensory Studies 1, 155-174.
24. LEE, H.J., KIM, K.-O. and O'MAHONY, M. 2001. Effects of forgetting on various protocols for category and line scales of intensity. J. Sensory Studies 16, 327-342.
25. MASUOKA, S., HATJOPOULOS, D. and O'MAHONY, M. 1995. Beer bitterness detection: Testing Thurstonian and Sequential Sensitivity Analysis models for triad and tetrad methods. J. Sensory Studies 10, 295-306.
26. 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.
27. 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, 1278-1281.
28. MELLERS, B.A. 1983a. Reply to Zwislocki's views on "absolute" scaling. Percept. Psychophys. 34, 405-408.
29. MELLERS, B.A. 1983b. Evidence against "absolute" scaling. Percept. Psychophys. 33, 523-526.
30. METCALF, K.L. and VICKERS, Z.M. 2002. Taste intensities of oil-in-water emulsions with varying fat content. J. Sensory Studies 17, 379-390.
31. NOBLE, A.C. and SCHMIDT, J.O. 1981. Comparison of structured and unstructured category scales in the evaluation of sourness intensity. In Flavor '81, (P. Schreier, ed.) pp. 63-68, Walter de Gruyter, New York.
32. O'MAHONY, M. 1979. Salt taste adaptation: The psychophysical effects of adapting solutions and residual stimuli from prior tastings on the taste of sodium chloride. Perception 8, 441-476.
33. O'MAHONY, M. 1995. Who told you the triangle test was simple? Food Qual. Pref. 6, 227-238.
34. O'MAHONY, M. and GOLDSTEIN, L.R. 1986. Effectiveness of sensory difference tests: Sequential Sensitivity Analysis for liquid food stimuli. J. Food Sci. 51, 1550-1553.
35. O'MAHONY, M. and GOLDSTEIN, L.R. 1987. Tasting successive salt and water stimuli: the roles of adaptation, variability in physical signal strength, learning, supra- and subadapting signal detectability. Chem. Senses 12, 425-436.
36. O'MAHONY, M. and HEINTZ, C. 1981. Direct magnitude estimation of salt taste intensity with continuous correction for salivary adaptation. Chem. Senses 6, 101-112.
37. 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.
38. O'MAHONY, M. and ODBERT, N. 1985. A comparison of sensory difference testing procedures: Sequential Sensitivity Analysis and aspects of taste adaptation. J. Food Sci. 50, 1055-1058.
39. O'MAHONY, M. and WINGATE, P. 1974. The effect of interstimulus procedures on salt taste intensity functions. Percept. Psychophys. 16, 494-502.
40. PURDY, M.A., ARMSTRONG, G.A. and MCILVEEN, H. 2002. Three scaling methods for consumer rating of salt intensity. J. Sensory Studies 17, 263-274.
41. ROUSSEAU, B., MEYER, A. and O'MAHONY, M. 1998. Power and sensitivity of the same-different test: Comparison with triangle and duo-trio methods. J. Sensory Studies 13, 149-173.
42. ROUSSEAU, B. and O'MAHONY, M. 1997. Sensory difference tests: Thurstonian and SSA predictions for vanilla flavored yogurts. J. Sensory Studies 12, 127-146.
43. ROUSSEAU, B., ROGEAUX, M. and O'MAHONY, M. 1999. Mustard discrimination by same-different and triangle tests: Aspects of irritation, memory and τ criteria. Food Qual. Pref. 10, 173-184.
44. 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.
45. STEINSHOLT, K. and VEGGELAND, K. 1989. Scale length in sensory evaluation. Norsk landbruksforsking 3, 159-165.
46. STILLMAN, J.A. 1993. Response selection, sensitivity, and taste-test performance. Percept. Psychophys. 54, 190-194.
47. TEDJA, S., NONAKA, R., ENNIS, D.M. and O'MAHONY, M. 1994. Triadic discrimination testing - Refinement of Thurstonian and Sequential Sensitivity Analysis approaches. Chem. Senses 19, 279-301.
48. TUORILA, H., THEUNISSEN, M.J.M. and AHLSTROM, R. 1996. Chem. Senses 21, 29-34.
49. VIÉ, A. and O'MAHONY, M. 1989. Triangular difference testing: Refinements to Sequential Sensitivity Analysis for predictions for individual triads. J. Sensory Studies 4, 87-103.
50. WONG, D.A. 1997. Cognitive strategy of the triangle difference test. MS Thesis, University of California, Davis.
51. YIP, D.H.-P. 1996. Triadic and tetradic taste discrimination testing: Thurstonian and sequential effects. MS Thesis, University of California, Davis.
52. ZWISLOCKI, J.J. 1983. Absolute and other scales: Question of validity. Percept. Psychophys. 33, 593-594.
53. ZWISLOCKI, J.J. and GOODMAN, D.A. 1980. Absolute scaling of sensory magnitudes: A validation. Percept. Psychophys. 28, 28-38.