Paired preference "placebo" tests with "identical" stimuli: Does introducing graded preference responses affect the frequency of "no preference" responses?

Journal of Sensory Studies

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 439-449

  Villegas Ruiz, Xadeni ^a   Angulo, Ofelia ^a   O'mahony, Michael ^b  

^a INSTITUTO TECNOLÓGICO DE VERACRUZ   (Mexico)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 48849095246     PISSN: 08878250     EISSN: 1745459X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-459X.2008.00164.x     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. ALFARO-RODRIGUEZ, H., O'MAHONY, M. ANGULO, O. 2005. Paired preference tests: d′ values from Mexican consumers with various response options. J. Sensory Studies 20, 275 281.
2. ALFARO-RODRIGUEZ, H., ANGULO, O. O'MAHONY, M. 2007. Be your own placebo: A double paired preference test approach for establishing expected frequencies. Food Qual. Prefer. 18, 353 361.
3. ANGULO, O. O'MAHONY, M. 2005. The paired preference test and the "no preference" option: Was Odesky correct? Food Qual. Prefer. 16, 425 434.
4. BAKER, G.A., AMERINE, M.A., ROESSLER, E.B. FILIPELLO, F. 1960. The non-specificity of differences in taste testing for preference. Food Res. 25, 810 816.
5. CHAPMAN, K.W. LAWLESS, H.T. 2005. Sources of error and the no-preference option in dairy product testing. J. Sensory Studies 20, 454 468.
6. CHAPMAN, K.W., GRACE-MARTIN, K. LAWLESS, H.T. 2006. Expectations and stability of preference choice. J. Sensory Studies 21, 441 455.
7. ENNIS, D.M. 1990. Relative power of difference testing methods in sensory evaluation. Food Technol. 44, 114 118.
8. ENNIS, D.M. 1993. The power of sensory discrimination methods. J. Sensory Studies 8, 353 370.
9. ENNIS, D.M. Institute for Perception, Richmond, VA. Personal communication, 2007.
10. FALK, S.N., HENRICKSON, R.L. MORRISON, R.D. 1975. Effect of boning beef carcasses prior to chilling on meat tenderness. J. Food Sci. 40, 1075 1079.
11. FOLEY, M., WILLIAMS, A., BADE, J., LANCASTER, B., POPPER, R. CARR, B.T. 2003. Effect of preference-question format with and without sample differences. Abstracts of the 5th Pangborn Sensory Science Symposium, Abstract #043, July 2003, Boston, MA.
12. FRIJTERS, J.E.R. 1979. The paradox of discriminatory non-discriminators resolved. Chem. Sens. Flav. 4, 355 358.
13. GREEN, D.M. SWETS, J.A. 1966. Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.
14. GREENBERG, A. COLLINS, S. 1966. Paired comparison taste tests: Some food for thought. J. Mark. Res. 3 (Feb 76 80.
15. GRIDGEMAN, N.T. 1959. Pair comparison, with and without ties. Biometrics 15, 382 388.
16. KIM, H.S. 2007. "Preference" and "no preference" responses when identical pairs and non-identical pairs were presented in different test protocols. MS Thesis, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Korea.
17. LAWLESS, H.T. HEYMANN, H. 1998. Sensory Evaluation of Food: Principles and Practices, Chapman and Hall, New York, NY.
18. LEE, H.-S. O'MAHONY, M. 2004. Sensory difference testing: Thurstonian models. Food Sci. Biotechnol. 13, 841 847.
19. MACMILLAN, N.A. CREELMAN, C.D. 2005. Detection Theory: A User's Guide, 2nd Ed., Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
20. MARCHISANO, C., LIM, J., CHO, H.S., SUH, D.S., JEON, S.Y., KIM, K.O. O'MAHONY, M. 2003. Consumers report preference when they should not: A cross-cultural study. J. Sensory Studies 18, 487 516.
21. ODESKY, S.H. 1967. Handling the neutral vote in paired comparison product testing. J. Mark. Res. 4, 199 201.
22. O'MAHONY, M. ROUSSEAU, B. 2003. Discrimination testing: A few ideas, old and new. Food Qual. Prefer. 14, 157 164.
23. O'MAHONY, M., MASUOKA, S. ISHII, R. 1994. A theoretical note on difference tests: Models, paradoxes and cognitive strategies. J. Sensory Studies 9, 247 272.
24. RESURRECCION, A.V.A. 1998. Consumer Sensory Testing for Product Development, Aspen Publishers, Gaithersburg, MD.
25. ROSAS-NEXTICAPA, M., ANGULO, O. O'MAHONY, M. 2005. How well does the 9-point scale predict purchase frequency? J. Sensory Studies 20, 313 331.
26. SCHWARTZ, N. PRATT, C.H. 1956. Simultaneous vs successive presentation in a paired comparison situation. Food Res. 21, 103 108.
27. STONE, H. SIDEL, J.L. 1992. Sensory Evaluation Practices, Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
28. THURSTONE, L.L. 1927a. A law of comparative judgment. Psychol. Rev. 34, 273 286.
29. THURSTONE, L.L. 1927b. Psychophysical analysis. Am. J. Psychol. 38, 368 389.
30. ULLMANN-MARGALIT, E. MORGENBESSER, S. 1977. Picking and choosing. Soc. Res. 44, 757 785.
31. WATERMAN, A., BLADES, M. SPENCER, C. 2001. Is a jumper angrier than a tree? Psychologist 14, 474 477.
32. WILKE, K.D., COCHRANE, C.-Y.C. CHAMBERS, E. IV. 2006. Multiple preference tests can provide more information on consumer preferences. J. Sensory Studies 21, 612 625.