A Comparison Of Seven Preference Mapping Techniques Using Four Software Programs

Journal of Sensory Studies

Volumn 26, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 135-150

  Yenket, Renoo ^a   Chambers Iv, Edgar ^a   Adhikari, Koushik ^a  

^a KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPLETE SOLUTIONS; CONSUMER PREFERENCES; DESCRIPTORS; EMPIRICAL STUDIES; HETEROGENEOUS DATA; MAPPING TECHNIQUES; MEAN VECTOR; MULTIVARIATE METHODS; MULTIVARIATE TECHNIQUES; NEW YORK; PREFERENCE ANALYSIS; SENSORY PROFILES; SOFTWARE PROGRAM; STATISTICAL SOFTWARE PROGRAMS; WOODBRIDGE;

COMPUTER SOFTWARE;

EID: 79953284613     PISSN: 08878250     EISSN: 1745459X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-459X.2011.00330.x     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. ADHIKARI, K., DOOLEY, L.M., CHAMBERS, E., IV and BHUMIRATANA, N. 2010. Sensory characteristics of commercial lactose-free milks manufactured in the United States. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 43, 113-118.
2. ADNAN, N., AHMAD, M.H. and ADNAN, R. 2006. A comparative study on some methods for handling muticollinearity problems. Matematika 22, 109-119.
3. ARES, G., GIMÉNEZ, A. and GÁMBARO, A. 2006. Preference mapping of texture of dulce de leche. J. Sensory Studies 21, 553-571.
4. BUSING, F.M.T., HEISER, W.J. and CLEAVER, G. 2010. Restricted unfolding: Preference analysis with optimal transformations of preferences and attributes. Food Qual. Prefer. 21, 82-92.
5. CARBONELL, L., IZQUIERDO, L., CARBONELL, I. and COSTELL, E. 2008. Segmentation of food consumers according to their correlations with sensory attributes projected on preference spaces. Food Qual. Prefer. 19, 71-78.
6. CARROLL, J.D. 1972. Individual differences and multidimensional scaling. In Multidimensional Scaling: Theory and Applications in the Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 1 (R.N. Shepard, A.K. Romney and S.B. Nerlove, eds.) pp. 105-155, Seminar Press, New York, NY.
7. CHANG, J.J. and CARROLL, J.D. 1969. How to Use MDPREF, A Computer Program for Multidimensional Analysis of Preference Data. Computer Manual, Bell Labs, Murray Hill, NJ.
8. CHUNG, S-J., HEYMANN, H. and GRÜN, I.U. 2003. Application of GPA and PLSR in correlating sensory and chemical data sets. Food Qual. Prefer. 14, 485-495.
9. FELBERG, I., DESIZA, R., FARAH, A., CALADO, E. and DONANGELO, C.M. 2010. Formulation of a soy-coffee beverage by response surface methodology and internal preference mapping. J. Sensory Studies 25(Suppl. 1), 226-242.
10. GÁMBARO, A., ARES, G., GIMÉNEZ, A. and PAHOR, S. 2007. Preference mapping of color of Uruguayan honeys. J. Sensory Studies 22, 507-519.
11. GREENHOFF, K. and MACFIE, H.J.H. 1994. Preference mapping in practice. In Measurement of Food Preferences (H.J.H. MacFie and D.M.H. Thompson, eds.) pp. 146-166, Blackie Academic & Professional, London, U.K.
12. HEIN, K., EBELER, S.E. and HEYMANN, H. 2009. Perception of fruity and vegetative aroma in red wine. J. Sensory Studies 24, 441-455.
13. HUNTER, E.A. and MUIR, D.D. 1995. A comparison of two multivariate methods for the analysis of sensory profile data. J. Sensory Studies 10, 89-104.
14. JAEGER, S.R., WAKELING, I.N. and MACFIE, H.J.H. 2000. Behavioral extensions to preference mapping: The role of synthesis. Food Qual. Prefer. 11, 349-359.
15. JOHNSON, D. 1998. Applied Mutivariate Methods for Data Analysts, pp. 93-142, Duxbury, Pacific Grove, CA.
16. JOHNSON, R.A. and WICHERN, D.W. 1988 (eds.). Clustering. Chapter 12. In Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis. pp. 543-589, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
17. LOVELY, C. and MEULLENET, J.-F. 2009. Comparison of preference mapping techniques for the optimization of strawberry yogurt. J. Sensory Studies 24, 457-478.
18. MARTENS, H. and MARTENS, M. 2001. Multivariate Analysis of Quality. An Introduction, Johnson Wiley and Sons Ltd., Chichester, U.K.
19. MCEWAN, J.A. 1996. Preference mapping for product optimization. In Multivariate Analysis of Data in Sensory Science (T. Næs and E. Risvik, eds.), pp. 71-102. Elsevier, New York, NY.
20. MEULLENET, J.-F., XIONG, R. and FINDLAY, C. 2007. Multivariate and Probabilistic Analyses of Sensory Science Problems, pp. 111-126, Blackwell Publishing, Ames, IA.
21. MEULMAN, J., HEISER, W.J. and CARROLL, D.J. 1986. PREFMAP-3 user's guide. (accessed November 1, 2010).
22. MICHON, C., O'SULLIVAN, M.G., SHEEHAN, E., DELAHUNTY, C.M. and KERRY, J.P. 2010. Investigation of the influence of age, gender and consumption habits on the liking of jam-filled cakes. Food Qual. Prefer. 21, 553-561.
23. MOUSSAOUI, K.A. and VARELA, P. 2010. Exploring consumer product profiling techniques and their linkage to a quantitative descriptive analysis. Food Qual. Prefer. 21, 1088-1099.
24. NESTRUD, M.A. and LAWLESS, H.T. 2008. Perceptual mapping of citrus juices using projective mapping and profiling data from culinary professionals and consumers. Food Qual. Prefer. 19, 431-438.
25. OUPADISSAKOON, C., CHAMBERS, E., IV, KONGPENSOOK, V., SUWONSICHON, S., YENKET, R. and RETIVEAU, A. 2010. Sensory properties and consumer acceptance of sweet tamarind varieties grown in Thailand. J. Sci. Food Agric. 90, 1081-1088.
26. PAGLIARINI, E. 1997. Sensory profile description of mozzarella cheese and its relationship with consumer preference. J. Sensory Studies 12, 285-301.
27. RETIVEAU, A.N. 2004. Individual differences and the perception of complex scents. Doctoral dissertation, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS.
28. ROSIPAL, R. and KRÄMER, N. 2006. Overview and recent advances in partial least squares. In Subspace, Latent Structure and Feature Selection Techniques (C. Saunders, M. Grobelnik, S. Gunn and J. Shawe-Taylor, eds.) pp. 34-51, Lecture notes in Computer Science, Springer, New York, NY.
29. ROUGOOR, C.W., SUNDARAM, R. and VAN ARENDONK, J.A.M. 2000. The relation between breeding management and 305-day milk production, determined via principal components regression and partial least squares. Livest. Prod. Sci. 66, 71-83.
30. SCHLICH, P. 1995. Preference mapping: Relating consumer preferences to sensory or instrumental measurements. In Bioflavour'95: Analysis/Precursor Studies/Biotechnology (P. Étiévant and P. Schreier, eds.) pp. 135-150, INRA, Dijon, France.
31. SINESIO, F., CAMMARERI, M., MONETA, E., NAVEZ, B., PEPARAIO, M., CAUSSE, M. and GRANDILLO, S. 2010. Sensory quality of fresh French and Dutch market tomatoes: A preference mapping study with Italian consumers. J. Food Sci. 75, S55-S67.
32. SVEINSDÓTTIR, K., MARTINSDÓTTIR, E., GREEN-PETERSEN, D., HYLDIG, G., SCHELVIS, R. and DELAHUNTY, C. 2009. Sensory characteristics of different cod products related to consumer preferences and attitudes. Food Qual. Prefer. 20, 120-132.
33. TANG, C., HEYMANN, H. and HSIEH, F.-U. 2000. Alternatives to data averaging of consumer preference data. Food Qual. Prefer. 11, 99-104.
34. TENENHAUS, M., PAGÉS, J., AMBROISINE, L. and GUINOT, C. 2005. PLS methodology to study relationships between hedonic judgments and product characteristics. Food Qual. Prefer. 16, 315-325.
35. VAN KLEEF, E., VAN TRIJP, H.C.M. and LUNING, P. 2006. Internal versus external preference analysis: An exploratory study on end-user evaluation. Food Qual. Prefer. 17, 387-399.
36. VILLANUEVA, N.D.M. and DA SILVA, M.A.A. 2009. Comparative performance of the nine-point hedonic, hybrid and self-adjusting scales in the generation of internal preference maps. Food Qual. Prefer. 20, 1-12.
37. WILLIAMS, A.A., ROGERS, C.A. and COLLINS, A.J. 1988. Relating chemical/physical and sensory data in food acceptance studies. Food Qual. Prefer. 1, 25-31.