Application of two consumer profiling techniques to cosmetic emulsions

Journal of Sensory Studies

Volumn 25, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 685-705

  Parente, María Emma ^a   Ares, Gastón ^b   Manzoni, Ana Victoria ^a  

^a Cátedra de Química Cosmética   (Uruguay)

^b UNIVERSIDAD DE LA REPÚBLICA   (Uruguay)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN; COSMETIC PRODUCTS; INTENSITY SCALE; SENSORY CHARACTERISTICS; SENSORY PROFILES;

RATING;

SENSORY PERCEPTION;

EID: 78149243769     PISSN: 08878250     EISSN: 1745459X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-459X.2010.00297.x     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Adams, J., Williams, A., Lancaster, B. and Foley, M. 2007. Advantages and uses of check-all-that-apply response compared to traditional scaling of attributes for salty snacks. In 7th Pangborn Sensory Science Symposium. Minneapolis, USA, 12-16 August 2007.
2. Almeida, I.F., Gaio, A.R. and Bahia, M.F. 2008. Hedonic and descriptive skinfeel analysis of two oleogels: Comparison with other topical formulations. J. Sensory Studies 23, 92-113.
3. Ares, G., Barreiro, C., Giménez, A. and Gámbaro, A. 2010a. Use of an open-ended question to identify drivers of liking of milk desserts. Comparison with preference mapping techniques. Food Qual. Prefer. 21, 286-294.
4. Ares, G., Deliza, R., Barreiro, C., Giménez, A. and Gámbaro, A. 2010b. Comparison of two sensory profiling techniques based on consumer perception. Food Qual. Prefer. 21, 417-426.
5. Ares, G., Barreiro, C., Deliza, R., Giménez, A. and Gámbaro, A. 2010c. Application of a check-all-that-apply question to the development of chocolate milk desserts. J. Sensory Studies DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-459X.2010.00290.x.
6. ASTM. 1997. Standard E1490-92. Standard Practice for Descriptive Skinfeel Analysis of Creams and Lotions, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
7. Bécue-Bertaut, M. and PAGÈS, J. 2008. Multiple factor analysis and clustering of a mixture of quantitative, categorical and frequency data. Comput. Stat. Data Anal. 52, 3255-3268.
8. BÉCUE-Bertaut, M., Álvarez-Esteban, R. and PAGÈS, J. 2008. Ratings of products through scores and free-text assertions: Comparing and combining both. Food Qual. Prefer. 19, 122-134.
9. Civille, G.V. and Dus, C.A. 1991. Evaluating tactile properties of skincare products: A descriptive analysis technique. Cosmet. Toil. 106, 83-88.
10. Dooley, L., Lee, Y.S. and Meullenet, J.F. 2010. The application of check-all-that-apply (CATA) consumer profiling to preference mapping of vanilla ice cream and its comparison to classical external preference mapping. Food Qual. Pref. 21, 394-401.
11. Faye, P., Brémaud, D., Teillet, E., Courcoux, P., Giboreau, A. and Nicod, H. 2006. An alternative to external preference mapping based on consumer perceptive mapping. Food Qual. Prefer. 17, 604-614.
12. Gabard, B. 1994. Testing the efficacy of moisturizers. In Bioengineering of the Skin: Water and the Stratum Corneum (P. Elsner, E. Berardesca and H. Maibach, eds.) pp. 147-167, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
13. Husson, F., Le Dien, S. and Pagès, J. 2001. Which value can be granted to sensory profiles given by consumers? Methodology and results. Food Qual. Prefer. 12, 291-296.
14. Husson, F., Josse, J., LÊ, S. and Mazet, J. 2007. FactoMineR: Factor Analysis and Data Mining with R. R package version 1.04. http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/FactoMineR/index.html (accessed April 12, 2010).
15. ISO 1988. Sensory Analysis: General Guidance for the Design of Test Rooms, ISO 8589, International Organization for Standardization, Geneve, Switzerland.
16. Lanzendörfer, G. 2002. Lipidic ingredients in skin care formulations. In Cosmetic Lipids and the Skin Barrier (T. Körster, ed.) pp. 255-297, Marcel Dekker, Inc, New York, NY.
17. Lê, S., Josse, J. and Husson, F. 2008. FactoMineR: An R package for multivariate analysis. J. Stat. Softw. 25(1).
18. Meilgaard, M., Civille, G.V. and Carr, B.T. 1999. Sensory Evaluation Techniques, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
19. Moskowitz, H.R. 1996. Experts versus consumers: A comparison. J. Sensory Studies 11, 19-37.
20. Narain, C., Paterson, A. and Reid, E. 2004. Free choice and conventional profiling of commercial black filter coffees to explore consumer perception of character. Food Qual. Prefer. 15, 31-41.
21. Pagès, J. 2005. Collection and analysis of perceived product inter-distances using multiple factor analysis: Application to the study of 10 white wines from the Loire Valley. Food Qual. Prefer. 16, 642-649.
22. Parente, M.E., Gámbaro, A. and Solana, G. 2005. Study of sensory properties of emollients used in cosmetics and their correlation with physicochemical properties. J. Cosmet. Sci. 56, 175-182.
23. Parente, M.E., Gambaro, A. and Ares, G. 2008. Sensory characterization of emollients. J. Sensory Studies 23, 149-161.
24. Perrin, L., Symoneaux, R., Maïtre, I., Asselin, C., Jourjon, F. and Pagès, J. 2008. Comparison of three sensory methods for use with the Napping® procedure: Case of ten wines from Loire valley. Food Qual. Prefer. 19, 1-11.
25. Popper, R., Rosenstock, W., Schraidt, M. and Kroll, B.J. 2004. The effect of attribute questions on overall liking ratings. Food Qual. Prefer. 15, 853-858.
26. R Development Core Team 2007. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing, ISBN 3-900051-07-0, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna.
27. Risvik, E., Mcewan, J.A. and Rodbotten, M. 1997. Evaluation of sensory profiling and projective mapping data. Food Qual. Prefer. 8, 63-71.
28. Stone, H. and Sidel, J.L. 1985. Sensory Evaluation Practices, Academic Press, London, UK.
29. Ten Kleij, F. and Musters, P.A.D. 2003. Text analysis of open ended survey responses:Acomplementary method to preference mapping. Food Qual. Prefer. 14, 43-52.
30. Wiechers, J., Taelman, M., Wortel, V., Verboom, C. and Deberen, J. 2002. Emollients and emulsifiers exert their sensory impact in different phases of the sensory evaluation process bit how does one demonstrate the absence of such an influence? IFSSC Magazine. 5, 99.
31. Worch, T., LÊ, S. and Punter, P. 2010. How reliable are the consumers? Comparison of sensory profiles from consumers and experts. Food Qual. Prefer. 21, 309-318.
32. Wortel, V.A.L. and Wiechers, J.W. 2000. Skin sensory performance of individual personal care ingredients and marketed personal care products. Food Qual. Prefer. 11, 121-127.