Expectations and stability of preference choice

Journal of Sensory Studies

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 441-455

  Chapman, K W ^a   Grace Martin, K ^a   Lawless, H T ^a  

^a Department of Obstetrics Gynecology   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33746362555     PISSN: 08878250     EISSN: 1745459X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-459X.2006.00076.x     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. ALLISON, P.D. 2001. Logistic Regression Using SAS® System: Theory and Application, p. 29, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.
2. BI, J. and ENNIS, D.M. 1998. Sensory thresholds: Concepts and methods. J. Sens. Studies 13, 133-148.
3. BUSCHENA, D. and ZILBERMAN, D. 1995. Performance of the similarity hypothesis relative to existing models of risky choice. J. Risk Uncertainty 11, 233-262.
4. BUTLER, D.J. 2000. Do non-expected utility choice patterns spring from hazy preferences? An experimental study of choice errors. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 41, 277-297.
5. BUTLER, D.J. and LOOMES, G.C. 1988. Decision difficulty and imprecise preferences. Acta Psychol. 68, 183-196.
6. CASPIA, E.L., COGGINS, P.C., SCHILLING, M.W., YOON, Y. and WHITE, C.H. 2006. The relationship between consumer acceptability and descriptive sensory attributes in Cheddar cheese. J. Sens. Studies 21, 112-127.
7. CHAPMAN, K.W. and LAWLESS, H.T. 2005. Sources of error and the No-preference option in dairy product testing. J. Sens. Studies 20, 454-468.
8. GAMBARO, A., FISZMAN, S., GIMENEZ, A., VARELA, P. and SALVADOR, A. 2004. Consumer acceptability compared with sensory and instrumental measures of white pan bread: Sensory shelf-life estimation by survival analysis. J. Food Sci. 69, 401-405.
9. HOSMER, D.W. and LEMESHOW, S. 2000. Applied Logistic Regression, 2nd Ed., John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.
10. HOUGH, G. LANGOHR, K., GOMEZ, G. and CURIA, A. 2003. Survival analysis applied to sensory shelf life of foods. J. Food Sci. 68, 359-362.
11. HOUGH, G., SANCHEZ, R.H., GARBARINI DE PABLO, G., SANCHEZ, R.G., CALDERON VILLAPLANA, S., GEMENEZ, A.M. and GAMBARO, A. 2002. Consumer acceptability versus trained sensory panel scores of powdered milk shelf-life defects. J. Dairy Sci 85, 2075-2080.
12. LELAND, J 1994. Generalized similarity judgments: An alternative explanation for choice anomalies. J. Risk Uncertainty 9, 151-172.
13. MARCHISANO, C., LIM, J., CHO, H.S., SUH, D.S., JEON, S.Y., KIM, K.O. and O'MAHONY, M. 2003. Consumers report preferences when they should not: A cross-cultural study. J. Sens. Studies 18, 487-515.
14. MARIN, A.B., BARNARD, J., DARLINGTON, R.B. and ACREE, T.E. 1991. Sensory thresholds: Estimation from dose-response curves. J. Sens. Studies 6, 205-225.
15. O'MAHONY, M.A.P.D.E. 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.
16. RESURRECCION, A. 1998. Consumer Sensory Testing for Product Development, p. 20, Chapman and Hall, New York, NY.
17. SALVADOR, A. and FISZMAN, S.M. 2004. Textural and sensory characteristics of whole and skimmed flavored set-type yogurt during long storage. J. Dairy Sci. 87, 4033-4041.
18. WEBER, E.U. 2004. Personality and risk taking. In International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, pp. 11274-11276, Elsevier, New York, NY.