Persistence of context effects after training and with intensity references

Journal of Food Science

Volumn 73, Issue 4, 2008, Pages

  Olabi, A ^a   Lawless, H T ^b  

^a AMERICAN UNIVERSITY OF BEIRUT   (Lebanon)

^b Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics   (United States)

Author keywords

Context; Intensity; Sensory; Training

Indexed keywords

SUCROSE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; BEVERAGE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; HUMAN; PHYSIOLOGY; STANDARD; TASTE; TEACHING;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; BEVERAGES; HUMANS; REFERENCE STANDARDS; SUCROSE; TASTE; TEACHING;

EID: 43049116545     PISSN: 00221147     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1750-3841.2008.00732.x     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Diamond J, Lawless HT. 2001. Context effects and reference standards with magnitude estimation and the labeled magnitude scale. J Sens Stud 16: 1 10.
2. Feria-Morales AM, Pangborn RM. 1983. Sensory attributes of corn tortillas with substitutions of potato, rice, and pinto beans. J Food Sci 48: 1124 30, 1134.
3. Gay C, Mead R. 1992. A statistical appraisal of the problem of sensory measurement. J Sens Stud 7: 205 28.
4. Goldstein BE. 2007. Sensation and perception. 7th ed. Florence, Ky.: Wadsworth Publishing. 544 p.
5. Green BG, Shaffer GS, Gilmore MM. 1993. Derivation and evaluation of a semantic scale of oral sensation magnitude with apparent ratio properties. Chem Senses 18: 683 702.
6. Green BG, Dalton P, Cowart B, Shaffer G, Rankin K, Higgins J. 1996. Evaluating the labeled magnitude scale for measuring sensations of taste and smell. Chem Senses 21: 323 34.
7. Hansen AP, Heinis JJ. 1992. Benzaldehyde, citral, and d-limonene flavor perception in the presence of casein and whey proteins. J Dairy Sci 75: 1211 5.
8. Kappel F, Dever M, Bouthillier M. 1992. Sensory evaluation of 'Gala' and 'Jonagold' strains. Fruit Varieties J 46: 37 43.
9. Kerrola KM, Kallio HP. 1994. Extraction of volatile compounds of angelica (Angelica archangelica L.) root by liquid carbon dioxide. J Agric Food Chem 42: 2235 45.
10. Larson-Powers NM, Pangborn RM. 1978. Descriptive analysis of the sensory properties of beverages and gelatin containing sucrose and synthetic sweeteners. J Food Sci 43 (11 47 51.
11. Lawless HT. 1983. Contextual effects in category ratings. J Test Eval 11: 346 9.
12. Lawless HT, Glatter S, Hohn C. 1991. Context dependent changes in the perception of odor quality. Chem Senses 16: 349 60.
13. Lawless HT, Horne J, Speirs W. 2000. Contrast and range effects for category, magnitude and labeled magnitude scales. Chem Senses 25: 85 92.
14. Mattes RD, Lawless HT. 1985. An adjustment error in optimization of taste intensity. Appetite 6: 103 14.
15. Mead R, Gay C. 1995. Sequential design of sensory trials. Food Qual Pref 6: 271 80.
16. Meilgaard M, Civille GV, Carr BT. 2006. Sensory evaluation techniques. 4th ed. Boca Raton, Fla.: CRC Press. 464 p.
17. Muñoz AM. 1986. Development and application of texture reference scales. J Sens Stud 1: 55 83.
18. Muñoz AM, Civille GV. 1998. Universal, product and attribute specific scaling and the development of common lexicons in descriptive analysis. J Sens Stud 13: 57 75.
19. Pangborn RM. 1984a. Sensory research as a laboratory tool in food research. In: Stewart KK, Whitaker JR, editors. Modern methods of food analysis. Westport, Conn.: AVI Publishing.
20. Pangborn RM. 1984b. Sensory techniques of food analysis. In: Gruenwedel DW, Whitaker JR, editors. Food analysis principles and techniques. Vol. 1. Physical characterization. New York: Marcel Dekker.
21. Rankin KM, Marks LE. 1991. Differential context effects in taste perception. Chem Senses 16: 617 29.
22. Schifferstein HJN, Frijters AER. 1992. Contextual and sequential effects on judgments of sweetness intensity. Percept Psychophys 52: 243 55.
23. Stevens SS. 1956. The direct estimation of sensory magnitudes - loudness. Am J Psychol 69: 1 25.
24. Stoer N, Lawless HT. 1993. A comparison of single product scaling and relative to reference scaling in sensory evaluation of dairy products. J Sens Stud 8: 257 70.
25. Stone H, Sidel J. 2004. Sensory evaluation practices. 3rd ed. San Diego, Calif.: Elsevier Academic Press. 408 p.