A comparison of the labeled affective magnitude scale and the 9-point hedonic scale and examination of categorical behavior

Journal of Sensory Studies

Volumn 25, Issue SUPPL. 1, 2010, Pages 54-66

  Lawless, Harry T ^a   Sinopoli, Dominique ^a   Chapman, Kathryn W ^a  

^a Department of Obstetrics Gynecology   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

MAGNITUDE SCALE; POTATO CHIP; SCALING METHOD; USAGE PATTERNS; USER GROUPS;

SOLANUM TUBEROSUM;

EID: 78149239051     PISSN: 08878250     EISSN: 1745459X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-459X.2010.00279.x     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. CARDELLO, A., LAWLESS, H.T. and SCHUTZ, H.G. 2008. Effects of extreme anchors and interior label spacing on labeled magnitude scales. Food Qual. Prefer. 21, 323-334.
2. CARDELLO, A.V. and MALLER, O. 1982. Relationships between food preferences and food acceptance ratings. J. Food Sci. 47, 1553-1557, 1561.
3. CARDELLO, A.V. and SCHUTZ, H.G. 2004. Research note. Numerical scale-point locations for constructing the LAM (labeled affective magnitude) scale. J. Sensory Studies 19, 341-346.
4. CHUNG, S.-J. and VICKERS, Z. 2007a. Long-term acceptability and choice of teas differing in sweetness. Food Qual. Prefer. 18, 963-974.
5. CHUNG, S.-J. and VICKERS, A. 2007b. Influence of sweetness on the sensory-specific satiety and long-term acceptability of tea. Food Qual. Prefer. 18, 256-226.
6. EL DINE, A.N. and OLABI, A. 2009. Effect of reference foods in repeated acceptability tests: Testing familiar and novel foods using 2 acceptability scales. J. Food Sci. 74, S97-S105.
7. FORDE, C.G. and DELAHUNTY, C.M. 2004. Understanding the role cross-modal sensory interactions play in food acceptability in younger and older consumers. Food Qual. Prefer. 15, 715-727.
8. GIOVANNI, M.E. and PANGBORN, R.M. 1983. Measurement of taste intensity and degree of liking of beverages by graphic scaling and magnitude estimation. J. Food Sci. 48, 1175-1182.
9. GREENE, J.L., BRATKA, K.J., DRAKE, M.A. and SANDERS, T.H. 2006. Effective of category and line scales to characterize consumer perception of fruity fermented flavors in peanuts. J. Sensory Studies 21, 146-154.
10. HEIN, K.A., JAEGER, S.R., CARR, B.T. and DELAHUNTY, C.M. 2008. Comparison of five common acceptance and preference methods. Food Qual. Prefer. 19, 651-661.
11. 1-3. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 86, 55-63.
12. KÖSTER, E.P., COURONNE, T., LEON, F., LEVY, C. and MARCELINO, A.S. 2002. Repeatability in hedonic sensory measurement: A conceptual exploration. Food Qual. Prefer. 14, 165-176.
13. LAWLESS, H.T. and MALONE, G.J. 1986. A comparison of scaling methods: Sensitivity, replicates and relative measurement. J. Sensory Studies 1, 155-174.
14. LAWLESS, H.T., POPPER, R. and KROLL, B.J. 2010. Comparison of the labeled affective magnitude (LAM) scale, an 11-point category scale and the traditional nine-point hedonic scale. Food Qual. Prefer. 21, 4-12.
15. PERYAM, D.R. and GIRARDOT, N.F. 1952. Advanced taste-test method. Food Eng. 24, 58-61.
16. RESANO, H., SANJUAN, A.I. and ALBISU, L.M. 2009. Consumer acceptability and actual choice. An exploratory research on cured ham in Spain. Food Qual. Prefer. 20, 391-398.
17. SCHUTZ, H.G. and CARDELLO, A.V. 2001. A labeled affective magnitude (LAM) scale for assessing food liking/disliking. J. Sensory Studies 16, 117-159.
18. SIDEL, J.L., STONE, H., WOOLSEY, A. and MACREDY, J.M. 1972. Correlation between hedonic ratings and consumption of beer. J. Food Sci. 37, 335-338.
19. TUORILA, H., HUOTILAINEN, A., LATEENMAKI, L., OLLILA, S., TUOMI-NURMI, S. and URALA, N. 2008. Comparison of affective ratings scales and their relationship to variables reflecting food consumption. Food Qual. Prefer. 19, 51-61.
20. VILLANUEVA, N.D.M. and DA SILVA, M.A.A.P. 2009. Performance of the nine-point hedonic, hybrid and self-adjusting scales in the generation of internal preference maps. Food Qual. Prefer. 20, 1-12.