Location and scale influence on sensory acceptability measurements among low-income consumers

Journal of Sensory Studies

Volumn 23, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 707-719

  Sosa, Miriam ^a,b   Martinez, Carolina ^b   Marquez, Fernando ^b   Hough, Guillermo ^a,b  

^a Universidad Provincial del Sudoeste   (Argentina)

^b Instituto Superior Experimental de Tecnologia Alimentaria   (Argentina)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

THEOBROMA CACAO;

EID: 52349088779     PISSN: 08878250     EISSN: 1745459X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-459X.2008.00181.x     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. BAXTER, I., SCHRODER, M. BOWER, J. 1999. The influence of socio-economic background on perceptions of vegetable among Scottish primary school children. Food Qual. Prefer. 10, 261 272.
2. BOUTROLLE, I., DELARUE, J., ARRANZ, D., ROGEAUX, M. KÖSTER, E. 2007. Central location test vs. home use test: Contrasting results depending on product type. Food Qual. Prefer. 18, 490 499.
3. COETZEE, H. TAYLOR, J. 1996. The use and adaptation of the paired-comparison method in the sensory evaluation of hamburger type patties by illiterate/semi-literate consumers. Food Qual. Prefer. 7, 81 85.
4. COMISIÓN ECONÓMICA PARA AMERICA LATINA Y EL CARIBE 2006. Panorama Social de América Latina. CEPAL-UNFPA http://ielat.uah.es/ FICHEROS/indicadoresAmericaLatina/PSE_2006_todo.pdf (accessed August 14, 2008).
5. COX, D.N., CLARK, M.R. MIALON, V.S. 2001. A cross-cultural methodological study of the uses of two common hedonic response scales. Food Qual. Prefer. 12, 119 131.
6. CURIA, A., HOUGH, G., MARTÍNEZ, C. MARGALEF, M. 2001. How Argentine consumers understand the Spanish translation of the 9-point hedonic scale. Food Qual. Prefer. 12, 217 221.
7. DELIZA, R. MACFIE, H.J.H. 1996. The generation of sensory expectations by external cues and its effects on sensory perception and hedonic ratings: A review. J. Sensory Studies 11, 103 128.
8. JANSSEN, W., ASHBY, J., CARLIER, M. CASTAÑO, J. 1991/1992. Targeting new technology at consumer food preferences in developing countries. Food Qual. Prefer. 3, 175 182.
9. KOZLOWSKA, K., JERUSZKA, M., MATUSZEWSKA, I., ROSZKOWSKI, W., BARYLKO-PIKIELNA, N. BRZOZOWSKA, A. 2003. Hedonic tests in different locations as predictors of apple juice consumption at home in elderly and young subjects. Food Qual. Prefer. 14, 653 661.
10. LAVENKA, N. KAMEN, J. 1994. Magnitude estimation of food acceptance. J. Food Sci. 59, 1322 1324.
11. MUIR, D. HUNTER, E. 1991/1992. Sensory evaluation of cheddar cheese: Order of tasting and carryover effects. Food Qual. Prefer. 3, 141 145.
12. OLUWAMUKOMI, M.O., ELEYENMI, A.F. ENUJIUGHA, V.N. 2005. Effect of soy supplementation and its stage of inclusion on the quality of ogi - a fermented maize meal. Food Chem. 91, 651 657.
13. SCHUTZ, H. CARDELLO, A. 2001. A labeled affective magnitude (LAM) scale for assessing food liking/disliking. J. Sensory Studies 16, 117 159.
14. SCRIMSHAW, N. 1993. The challenge of global malnutrition to the food industry. Food Technol. 47, 60 71.
15. SOSA, M. HOUGH, G. 2006. Sensory acceptability of menus and sweet snacks among children and adults from low- and medium-income households in Argentina. Food Qual. Prefer. 17, 590 597.
16. YEH, L.L., KIM, K.O., CHOMPREEDA, P., RIMKEEREE, H., YAUD, N.J.N. LUNDAHL, D.S. 1998. Comparison in use of the 9-point hedonic scale between Americans, Chinese, Koreans, and Thai. Food Qual. Prefer. 9, 413 419.