Effects of order of tasting in sensory difference tests using apple juice stimuli: Development of a new model

Journal of Food Science

Volumn 74, Issue 6, 2009, Pages

  Lee, Young Mi ^a   Chae, Ji Eun ^a   Lee, Hye Seong ^a  

^a Ewha Womans University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Interstimulus rinsing; Memory effects; Sensory difference tests; Sequence effects; Taste adaptation; Taste contrast

Indexed keywords

WATER;

ADAPTATION; ADULT; APPLE; ARTICLE; BEVERAGE; CHEMISTRY; DIET RESTRICTION; FEMALE; FRUIT; HUMAN; SENSATION; SOUTH KOREA; STATISTICAL MODEL; SUGAR INTAKE; TASTE;

ADAPTATION, PHYSIOLOGICAL; ADULT; BEVERAGES; DIETARY SUCROSE; FASTING; FEMALE; FRUIT; HUMANS; MALUS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; REPUBLIC OF KOREA; SENSATION; TASTE PERCEPTION; WATER; YOUNG ADULT;

MALUS X DOMESTICA;

EID: 70350149623     PISSN: 00221147     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1750-3841.2009.01218.x     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Avancini de Almeida TC, Cubero E, O'Mahony M. 1999. Same-different discrimination tests with interstimulus delays up to one day. J Sens Stud 14:1-18.
2. Berliner JE, Durlach NI. 1973. Intensity perception: IV. Resolution in roving-level discrimination. J Acoust Soc Am 2:1543-1550
3. Bi J, Ennis DM, O'Mahony M. 1997. How to estimate and use the variance of d' from difference tests. J Sens Stud 12:87-104.
4. Cubero E, Avancini de Almeida TC, O'Mahony M. 1995. Cognitive aspects of difference testing: memory and interstimulus delay. J Sens Stud 10:307-324
5. Dessirier JM, Sieffermann JM, 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 Sens Stud 14:271-287
6. Ennis DM. 1993. The power of sensory discrimination methods. J Sens Stud 8: 353-370
7. Ennis DM, O'Mahony M. 1995. Probabilistic models for sequential taste effects in triadic choice. J Exp Psychol 21:1088-1097
8. Green DM, Swets JA. 1966. Signal detecting theory and psychophysics.NewYork: John Wiley. p 7-16.
9. Kinchla R, Smyzer F. 1967. A diffusions model of perceptual memory. Percept Psychophys 2:219-229
10. Kling JW, Riggs LA. 1971. Woodworth and schlosberg's experimental psychology. 3rd ed. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. p 17-19
11. Lau S,O'MahonyM, Rousseau B. 2004. Are three-sample tasks less sensitive than twosample tasks? Memory effects in the testing of taste discrimination. Percept Psychophys 66:464-474
12. Lee HS. 2008. A predictive model for sensory difference tests accounting for sequence effects. Food Sci Biotechnol 17:1052-1059
13. Lee HS, O'Mahony M. 2004. Sensory difference testing: Thurstonian models. Food Sci Biotechnol 13:841-847
14. Lee HS, O'Mahony M. 2007a. Difference test sensitivity: cognitive contrast effects. J Sens Stud 22:17-33.
15. Lee HS, O'Mahony M. 2007b. The evolution of a model: a review of Thurstonian and conditional stimulus effects on difference testing. Food Qual Prefer 18: 369-383
16. Lee HS, van-Hout D, Hautus M. 2007. Comparison of performance in the A-Not A, 2- AFC, and same-different tests for the flavor discrimination ofmargarines: the effect of cognitive decision strategies. Food Qual Pref 18:920-928
17. Macmillan NA, Creelman CD. 2005. Detection theory: a user's guide. 2nd ed. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press. p 45-50.
18. Masuoka S, Hatjopoulos D, O'Mahony M. 1995. Beer bitterness detection: testing thurstonian and sequential sensitivity analysis models for triad and tetrad methods. J Sens Stud 10:295-306.
19. O'Mahony M, Goldstein L. 1986. Effectiveness of sensory difference tests: sequential sensitivity analysis for liquid food stimuli. J Food Sci 51:1550-1553
20. O'Mahony M, Goldstein L. 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
21. O'Mahony M, Odbert N. 1985. A comparison of sensory difference testing procedures: sequential sensitivity analysis and aspects of taste adaptation. J Food Sci 50: 1055-1058
22. Osgood CE. 1958. Method and theory in experimental psychology. New York: Oxford Univ. Press. p 54-58.
23. Rousseau B, O'Mahony M. 1997. Sensory difference tests: thurstonian and SSA predictions for vanilla flavored yogurts. J Sens Stud 12:127-146
24. Tedja S, Nonaka R, Ennis DM, O'Mahony M. 1994. Triadic discrimination testing: refinement of Thurstonian and sequential sensitivity analysis approaches. Chem Senses 19:279-301.
25. Thurstone LL. 1927a. Psychophysical analysis. AmJ Psychol 38:368-389
26. Thurstone LL. 1927b. A law of comparative judgement. Psychol Rev 34:273-286
27. Vié A, O'Mahony M. 1989. Triangular difference testing: refinements to sequential sensitivity analysis for predictions for individual triads. J Sens Stud 4:87-103.
28. Wilson P, Tanner Jr. 1961. Physiological implications of psychophysical data. Ann NY Acad Sci 89:752-765