Quick and dirty but still pretty good: A review of new descriptive methods in food science

International Journal of Food Science and Technology

Volumn 47, Issue 8, 2012, Pages 1563-1578

  Valentin, Dominique ^a   Chollet, Sylvie ^b   Lelièvre, Maud ^b   Abdi, Hervé ^c  

^a CENTRE DES SCIENCES DU GOÛT ET DE L ALIMENTATION   (France)

^b Institut Superieur d'Agriculture   (France)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT DALLAS   (United States)

Author keywords

Check all that apply; Consumer research; Descriptive methods; Flash profile; Pivot profile; Polarised sensory positioning; Projective mapping; Sensory characterisation; Sensory evaluation; Sorting task

Indexed keywords

CHECK-ALL-THAT-APPLY; CONSUMER RESEARCH; DESCRIPTIVE METHODS; FLASH PROFILE; PIVOT PROFILE; POLARISED SENSORY POSITIONING; SENSORY CHARACTERISATION; SENSORY EVALUATION;

FOOD TECHNOLOGY;

FOOD PRODUCTS;

EID: 84864025436     PISSN: 09505423     EISSN: 13652621     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2621.2012.03022.x     Document Type: Review

References (126)

1. Abdi, H. (2007). Distance. In: Encyclopedia of Measurement and Statistics (edited by N.J. Salkind). Pp. 280-284. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
2. Abdi, H. (2010). Congruence: congruence coefficient, RV coefficient, and Mantel Coefficient. In: Encyclopedia of Research Design (edited by N.J. Salkind, D.M. Dougherty & B. Frey). Pp. 222-229. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
3. Abdi, H. & Valentin, D. (2007). Some new and easy ways to describe, compare, and evaluate products and assessors. In: New Trends in Sensory Evaluation of Food and Non-Food Products (edited by D. Valentin, D.Z. Nguyen & L. Pelletier). Pp. 5-18. Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam: Vietnam National University-Ho chi Minh City Publishing House.
4. Abdi, H., Valentin, D., Chrea, C. & Chollet, S. (2007). Analyzing assessors and products in sorting tasks: DISTATIS, theory and application. Food Quality and Preference, 18, 627-640.
5. Abdi, H., Williams, L.J., Valentin, D. & Bennani-Dosse, M. (2012). STATIS and DISTATIS: optimum multi-table principal component analysis and three way metric multidimensional scaling. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics, 4, 124-167.
6. Adams, J., Williams, A., Lancaster, B. & 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. Pp. 12-418. August 16th 2007, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
7. Albert, A., Varela, P., Salvador, A., Hough, G. & Fiszman, S. (2011). Overcoming the issues in the sensory description of hot served food with a complex texture. Application of QDA®, flash profiling and projective mapping using panels with different degrees of training. Food Quality and Preference, 22, 463-473.
8. Ares, G., Giménez, A., Barreiro, C. & Gámbaro, A. (2010a). Use of an open-ended question to identify drivers of liking of milk desserts: comparison with preference mapping techniques. Food Quality and Preference, 21, 286-294.
9. Ares, G., Deliza, R., Barreiro, C., Giménez, A. & Gámbaro, A. (2010b). Comparison of two sensory profiling techniques based on consumer perception. Food Quality and Preference, 21, 417-426.
10. Ares, G., Varela, P., Rado, G. & Giménez, A. (2011a). Identifying ideal products using three different consumer profiling methodologies. Comparison with external preference mapping. Food Quality and Preference, 22, 581-591.
11. Ares, G., Varela, P., Rado, G. & Giménez, A. (2011b). Are consumer profiling techniques equivalent for some product categories? The case of orange-flavoured powdered drinks. International Journal of Food Science & Technology, 46, 1600-1608.
12. Ballester, J., Dacremont, C., Le Fur, Y. & Etievant, P. (2005). The role of olfaction in the elaboration and use of the Chardonnay wine concept. Food Quality and Preference, 16, 351-359.
13. Ballester, J., Patris, B., Symoneaux, R. & Valentin, D. (2008). Conceptual vs. perceptual wine spaces: does expertise matter? Food Quality and Preference, 19, 267-276.
14. Ballester, J., Abdi, H., Langlois, J., Peyron, D. & Valentin, D. (2009). The odors of colors: can wine expert or novices distinguish the odors of white, red, and rosé wines? Chemosensory Perception, 2, 203-213.
15. Bárcenas, P., Pérez Elortondo, F.J. & Albisu, M. (2004). Projective mapping in sensory analysis of ewes milk cheeses: a study on consumers and trained panel performance. Food Research International, 37, 723-729.
16. Bécue-Bertaut, M. & Lê, S. (2011). Analysis of multilingual labeled sorting tasks: application to a cross-cultural study in wine industry. Journal of Sensory Studies, 26, 299-310.
17. Blancher, G., Chollet, S., Kesteloot, R., Nguyen, D., Cuvelier, G. & Sieffermann, J.-M. (2007). French and Vietnamese: how do they describe texture characteristics of the same food? A case study with jellies. Food Quality and Preference, 18, 560-575.
18. Blancher, G., Clavier, B., Egoroff, C., Duineveld, K. & Parcon, J. (2012). A method to investigate the stability of a sorting map. Food Quality and Preference, 23, 36-43.
19. Bragato Richter, V., Avancini de Almaido, T.C., Prudencio, S.H. & De Toledo Benassi, M. (2010). Proposing a ranking descriptive sensory method. Food Quality and Preference, 21, 611-620.
20. Brandt, M.A., Skinner, E.A. & Coleman, J.A. (1963). Texture profile method. Journal of Food Science, 28, 404-409.
21. Bruzzone, F., Ares, G. & Giménez, A. (2011). Consumers' texture perception of milk desserts. Comparison with trained assessors' data. Journal of Texture Studies, Doi:.
22. Cadoret, M., Lê, S. & Pagès, J. (2009). A factorial approach for sorting task data (FAST). Food Quality and Preference, 20, 410-417.
23. Cadoret, M., Lê, S. & Pagès, J. (2011). Statistical analysis of hierarchical sorting data. Journal of Sensory Studies, 26, 96-105.
24. Cairncross, S. & Sjostrom, I. (1950). Flavor profile. A new approach to flavor problems. Food Technology, 4, 308-311.
25. Campo, E., Do, V.B., Ferreira, V. & Valentin, D. (2008). Sensory properties of a set of commercial Spanish monovarietal young white wines. A study using sorting tasks, lists of terms and frequency of citation. Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research, 14, 104-115.
26. Cartier, R., Rytz, A., Lecomte, A. et al. (2006). Sorting procedure as an alternative to quantitative descriptive analysis to obtain a product sensory map. Food Quality and Preference, 17, 562-571.
27. Chollet, S. & Valentin, D. (2000). Le degré d'expertise a-t-il une influence sur la perception olfactive? Quelques éléments de réponse dans le domaine du vin. L'Année Psychologique, 100, 11-36.
28. Chollet, S. & Valentin, D. (2001). Impact of training on beer flavor perception and description: are trained and untrained assessors really different? Journal of Sensory Studies, 16, 601-618.
29. Chollet, S., Lelièvre, M., Abdi, H. & Valentin, D. (2011). Sort and Beer: everything you wanted to know about the sorting task but did not dare to ask. Food Quality and Preference, 22, 507-520.
30. Chrea, C., Valentin, D., Sulmont-Rossé, C., Ly, M.H., Nguyen, D. & Abdi, H. (2005). Semantic, typicality and odor representation: a cross-cultural study. Chemical Senses, 30, 37-49.
31. Coomb, C.H. (1964). The Theory of Data. New York: Wiley.
32. Courcoux, P., Qannari, E.M., Taylor, Y., Buck, D. & Greenhoff, K. (2012). Taxonomic free sorting. Food Quality and Preference, 24, 30-35.
33. Coxon, A.P.M. (1999). Sorting Data: Collection and Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
34. Dairou, V. & Sieffermann, J.-M. (2002). A comparison of 14 jams characterized by conventional profile and a quick original method, the Flash Profile. Journal of Food Science, 67, 826-834.
35. Deegan, K.C., Koivisto, L., Näkkilä, L.J., Hyvönen, L. & Tuorila, H. (2010). Application of a sorting procedure to greenhouse-grown cucumbers and tomatoes. Food Science and Technology, 43, 393-400.
36. Delarue, J. & Loescher, E. (2004). Dynamics of food preferences: a case study with chewing gums. Food Quality and Preference, 15, 771-779.
37. Delarue, J. & Sieffermann, J.-M. (2004). Sensory mapping using Flash profile. Comparison with a conventional descriptive method for the evaluation of the flavour of fruit dairy products. Food Quality and Preference, 15, 383-392.
38. Derndorfer, E. & Baierl, A. (2006). Development of an aroma map of spices by multidimensional scaling. Journal of Herbs, Spices & Medicinal Plants, 12, 39-50.
39. Dooley, L., Lee, Y.S. & 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 Quality and Preference, 21, 394-401.
40. Dravineks, A. (1982). Odor quality: semantically generated multidimensional profiles are stable. Science, 218, 799-801.
41. Driesener, C. & Romaniuk, J. (2006). Comparing methods of brand image measurement. International Journal of Market Research, 48, 681-698.
42. Dun-Rankin, P. (1983). Scaling Methods. Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum.
43. Escofier, B. & Pagès, J. (1990). Multiple factor analysis. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 18, 121-140.
44. Escoufier, Y. (1980). L'analyse conjointe de plusieurs matrices de données. In: Biométrie et Temps (edited by M. Jolivet). Pp. 59-76. Paris, France: Société Française de Biométrie.
45. Falahee, M. & MacRae, A.W. (1995). Consumer appraisal of drinking water: multidimensional scaling analysis. Food Quality and Preference, 6, 327-332.
46. Falahee, M. & MacRae, A.W. (1997). Perceptual variation among drinking waters: the reliability of sorting and ranking data for multidimensional scaling. Food Quality and Preference, 8, 389-394.
47. Faye, P., Brémaud, D., Durand-Daubin, D., Courcoux, P., Giboreau, A. & Nicod, A. (2004). Perceptive free sorting and verbalization tasks with naive subjects: an alternative to descriptive mappings. Food Quality and Preference, 15, 781-791.
48. Faye, P., Brémaud, D., Teillet, E., Courcoux, P., Giboreau, A. & Nicod, H. (2006). An alternative to external preference mapping based on consumer perceptive mapping. Food Quality and Preference, 17, 604-614.
49. Faye, P., Courcoux, P., Qannari, M. & Giboreau, A. (2011). Méthodes de traitement statistique des données issues d'une épreuve de tri libre. Revue MODULAD, 43, 1-24.
50. Giboreau, A., Navarro, S., Faye, P. & Dumortier, J. (2001). Sensory evaluation of automotive fabrics: the contribution of categorization tasks and non-verbal information to set-up a descriptive method of tactile properties. Food Quality and Preference, 12, 311-322.
51. Goldstone, R. (1994). An efficient method for obtaining similarity data. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, 26, 381-386.
52. Gómez Alvarado, T., Hernández Cervantes, M., López Velázquez, J., Santiago Cabreral, R., Ramón Canul, L.G. & Juárez Barrientos, J.M. (2010). Caracterización sensorial del queso fresco "cuajada" en tres localidades de Oaxaca, México: diferencias en la percepción sensorial. Revista Venezolana de Ciencia y Tecnología de Alimentos, 1, 127-140.
53. Gower, J.C. (1971). Statistical methods of comparing different multivariate analysis of the same data. In: Mathematics in the Archeological and Historical Sciences (edited by F.R. Hodson, D. Kendall & P. Tautu). Pp. 138-149. Edinburgh, UK: University Press.
54. Greenhof, K. & MacFie, H.J.H. (1994). Preference mapping in practice. In: Measurement of Food Preferences (edited by H.J.H. MacFee & D.M.H. Thomson). Pp. 137-166. London: Blackie Academic and Professional.
55. Heymann, H. (1994). A comparison of free choice profiling and multidimentional scaling of vanilla samples. Journal of Sensory Studies, 9, 445-453.
56. Hoek, A.C., Van Boekel, M., Voordouw, J. & Luning, P.A. (2011). Identification of new food alternatives: how do consumers categorize meat and meat substitutes? Food Quality and Preference, 22, 371-383.
57. Hughson, A.L. & Boakes, R.A. (2002). The knowing nose: the role of knowledge in wine expertise. Food Quality and Preference, 13, 463-472.
58. Hulin, W.S. & Katz, D. (1935). The Frois-Wittmann pictures of facial expression. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 482-498.
59. Imai, S. (1966). Classification of sets of stimuli with different stimulus characteristics and numerical properties. Perception and Psychophysics, 1, 48-54.
60. Jaros, D., Thamke, I., Raddatz, H. & Rohm, H. (2009). Single-cultivar cloudy juice made from table apples: an attempt to identify the driving force for sensory preference. European Food Research and Technology, 229, 51-61.
61. Kennedy, J. (2010). Evaluation of replicated projective mapping of granola bars. Journal of Sensory Studies, 25, 672-684.
62. Kennedy, J. & Heymann, H. (2009). Projective mapping and descriptive analysis of milk and dark chocolates. Journal of Sensory Studies, 24, 220-233.
63. King, M.C., Cliff, M.A. & Hall, J.W. (1998). Comparison of projective mapping and sorting data collection and multivariate methodologies for identification of similarity-of-use snack bars. Journal of Sensory Studies, 13, 347-358.
64. Kirkland, J., Bimler, D., Drawneek, A., McKim, M. & Schölmerich, A. (2000). A quantum leap in the analyses and interpretation of attachment sort items. In: Patterns of Secure Base Behavior: Q-Sort Perspectives on Attachment and Caregiving in Infancy and Childhood (edited by B. Vaughn, E. Waters, G. Posada & D. Teti). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
65. ten Kleij, F. & Musters, P.A.D. (2003). Text analysis of open-ended surveyresponses: a complementary method to preference mapping. Food Quality and Preference, 14, 43-52.
66. Lado, J., Vicente, E., Manzsioni, A. & Ares, G. (2010). Application of a check-all-that-apply question for the evaluation of strawberry cultivars from a breeding program. Journal of the science of Food and Agriculture, 90, 2268-2275.
67. Lancaster, B. & Foley, M. (2007). Determining statistical significance for choose-all that-apply question responses. In: 7th Pangborn Sensory Science Symposium. August 16th 2007, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
68. Lassoued, N., Delarue, J., Launay, B. & Michon, C. (2007). Baked product texture: correlations between instrumental and sensory characterization using Flash Profile. Journal of Cereal Science, 48, 133-143.
69. Lawless, H.T. (1989). Exploration of fragrances categories and ambiguous odors using multidimensional scaling and cluster analysis. Chemical Senses, 14, 349-360.
70. Lawless, H.T. & Glatter, S. (1990). Consistency of multidimensional scaling models derived from odor sorting. Journal of Sensory Studies, 5, 217-230.
71. Lawless, H.T. & Heymann, H. (2010). Sensory Evaluation of Food: Principles and Practice. New York: Springer.
72. Lawless, H.T., Sheng, N. & Knoops, S.S.C.P. (1995). Multidimensional scaling of sorting data applied to cheese perception. Food Quality and Preference, 6, 91-98.
73. Lee, S.-Y., Luna-Guzman, I., Chang, S., Barrett, D.M. & Guinard, J.-X. (1999). Relating descriptive analysis and instrumental texture data of processed diced tomatoes. Food Quality and. Preference, 10, 447-455.
74. Lelièvre, M., Chollet, S., Abdi, H. & Valentin, D. (2008). What is the validity of the sorting task for describing beers? A study using trained and untrained assessors. Food Quality and Preference, 19, 697-703.
75. Lelièvre, M., Chollet, S., Abdi, H. & Valentin, D. (2009). Beer trained and untrained assessors rely more on vision than on taste when they categorize beers. Chemosensory Perception, 2, 143-153.
76. Lim, J. & Lawless, H.T. (2005). Qualitative differences of divalent salts: multi-dimensional scaling and cluster analysis. Chemical Senses, 30, 719-726.
77. MacKay, D.B. (2001). Probabilistic unfolding models for sensory data. Food Quality and Preference, 12, 427-436.
78. MacRae, A.W., Rawcliffe, T., Howgate, P. & Geelhoed, E.N. (1992). Patterns of odour similarity among carbonyls and their mixtures. Chemical Senses, 17, 119-125.
79. McCloskey, L.P., Sylvan, M. & Arrhenius, S.P. (1996). Descriptive analysis for wine quality experts determining appellations by Chardonnay wine aroma. Journal of Sensory Studies, 11, 49-67.
80. Meilgaard, M., Civille, G.V. & Carr, B.T. (1999). Sensory Evaluation Techniques, 3rd edn. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
81. Miller, G.A. (1969). A psychological method to investigate verbal concepts. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 6, 169-191.
82. Morand, E. & Pagès, J. (2006). Procrustes multiple factor analysis to analyze the overall perception of food products. Food Quality and Preference, 17, 36-42.
83. Moussaoui, K.A. & Varela, P. (2010). Exploring consumer product profiling techniques and their linkage to a quantitative descriptive analysis. Food Quality and Preference, 21, 1088-1099.
84. Munoz, A.M. & Civille, G.V. (1992). The spectrum descriptive analysis method. In: Manual on Descriptive Analysis Testing for Sensory Evaluation (edited by C. Hootman). West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM Manual Series MNL 13.
85. Navarro, S., Teillet, E., Chrea, C. & Mougin, D. (2011). Application of the polarized sensory positioning in the cosmetic area. In: 9h Pangborn Sensory Science Symposium. September 5th, 2011, Toronto, CA.
86. Nestrud, M.A. & Lawless, H.T. (2008). Perceptual mapping of citrus juices using projective mapping and profiling data from culinary professionals and consumers. Food Quality and Preference, 19, 431-438.
87. Nestrud, M.A. & Lawless, H.T. (2010). Perceptual mapping of apples and cheeses using projective mapping and sorting. Journal of Sensory Studies, 25, 390-405.
88. Nestrud, M.A. & Lawless, H.T. (2011). Recovery of subsampled dimensions and configurations derived from napping data by MFA and MDS. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 73, 1266-1278.
89. Pagès, J. (2003). Recueil direct de distances sensorielles: application à l'évaluation de dix vins blancs de Val de Loire. Science des Aliments, 23, 679-888.
90. 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 Quality and Preference, 16, 642-664.
91. Pagès, J., Cadoret, M. & Lê, S. (2010). The sorted napping: a new holistic approach in sensory evaluation. Journal of Sensory Studies, 25, 637-658.
92. Parr, W.V., Valentin, D., Green, J.A. & Dacremont, C. (2010). Evaluation of French and New Zealand Sauvignon wines by experienced French wine assessors. Food Quality and Preference, 21, 56-64.
93. Patris, B., Gufoni, V., Chollet, S. & Valentin, D. (2007). Impact of training on strategies to realize a beer sorting task: behavioral and verbal assessments. In: New trends in Sensory Evaluation of Food and Non-Food Products (edited by D. Valentin, D.Z. Nguyen & L. Pelletier). Pp. 17-29. Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam: Vietnam National University-Ho chi Minh City Publishing House.
94. Perrin, L. & Pagès, J. (2009). Construction of a product space from the Ultra-flash profiling method: application to ten red wines from the Loire Valley. Journal of Sensory Studies, 24, 372-395.
95. Perrin, L., Symoneaux, R., Maître, I., Asselin, C., Jourjon, F. & Pagès, J. (2008). Comparison of three sensory methods for use with the Napping® procedure: case of ten wines from the Loire valley. Food Quality and Preference, 19, 1-11.
96. Picard, D., Dacremont, C., Valentin, D. & Giboreau, A. (2003). Perceptual dimensions of tactile textures. Acta Psychologica, 114, 165-184.
97. Piombino, P., Nicklaus, S., LeFur, Y., Moio, L. & Le Quéré, J. (2004). Selection of products presenting given flavor characteristics: an application to wine. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 55, 27-34.
98. Plaehn, D. (2012). CATA penalty/reward. Food Quality and Preference, 24, 141-152.
99. Popper, R., Abdi, H., Williams, A. & Kroll, B.J. (2011). Multi-block Hellinger analysis for creating perceptual maps from check-all-that-apply questions. In: 9th Pangborn Sensory Science Symposium. September 7th, 2011, Toronto, CA.
100. Qannari, E.M., Cariou, V., Teillet, E. & Schlich, P. (2009). SORT-CC: a procedure for the statistical treatment of free sorting data. Food Quality and Preference, 21, 302-308.
101. Ramírez Rivera, E.J., Ramón Canul, L.G., Huante González, Y., Shaín Mercado, A.J., Bravo Delgado, H.R. & Concepción Martínez Liébana, M. (2009). Caracterización sensorial del camarón ahumado (Litopenaeus vannamei) mediante la técnica perfil flash. Ciencia y Mar, XIII, 27-34.
102. Rao, V.R. & Katz, R. (1971). Alternative multidimensional scaling methods for large stimulus sets. Journal of Marketing Research, 8, 488-494.
103. Rason, J., Léger, L., Dufour, E. & Lebecque, A. (2006). Relations between the know-how of small scale facilities and the sensory diversity of traditional dry sausages from the Massif-Central in France. European Food Research and Technology, 222, 580-589.
104. Risvik, E., McEwan, J.A., Colwill, J.S., Rogers, R. & Lyon, D.H. (1994). Projective mapping: a tool for sensory analysis and consumer research. Food Quality and Preference, 5, 263-269.
105. Risvik, E., McEwan, J.A. & Redbottena, M. (1997). Evaluation of sensory profiling and projective mapping. Food Quality and Preference, 8, 63-71.
106. Rodrigue, N., Guillet, M., Fortin, J. & Martin, J.F. (2000). Comparing information obtained from ranking and descriptive tests of four sweet corn products. Food Quality and Preference, 11, 47-54.
107. Saint-Eve, A., Paçi Kora, E. & Martin, N. (2004). Impact of the olfactory quality and chemical complexity of the flavouring agent on the texture of low fat stirred yogurts assessed by three different sensory methodologies. Food Quality and Preference, 15, 655-668.
108. Santosa, M., Abdi, H. & Guinard, J.X. (2010). A modified sorting task to investigate consumer perceptions of extra virgin olive oils. Food Quality and Preference, 21, 881-892.
109. Sidel, J.L. & Stone, H. (1993). The role of sensory evaluation in the food industry. Food Quality and Preference, 4, 65-73.
110. Sieffermann, J.M. (2000). Le profil Flash: Un outil rapide et innovant d'évaluation sensorielle descriptive. In: L'innovation: de l'idée au succès - Douzièmes rencontres AGORAL. Pp. 335-340, 22 & 23 mars 2000. Paris, France: Lavoisier, Tec & Doc.
111. da Silva, R., Minim, V.P.R., Simiquel, A.A., da Silva Moraes, L.E., Gomide, A.I. & Minim, L.A. (2012). Optimized descriptive profile: a rapid methodology for sensory description. Food Quality and Preference, 24, 190-200.
112. Soufflet, I., Calonnier, M. & Dacremont, C. (2004). A comparison between industrial experts' and novices' haptic perception organization: a tool to identify descriptors of handle of fabrics. Food Quality and Preference, 15, 689-699.
113. Stampanoni, C.R. (1993). The quantitative flavor profiling technique. Perfumer & Flavorist, 18, 19-24.
114. Stevens, D.A. & O'Connell, R.J. (1996). Semantic-free scaling of odor quality. Physiological Behavior, 60, 211-215.
115. Stone, H. & Sidel, J. (1993). Sensory Evaluation Practices. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, Inc.
116. Stone, H., Sidel, J., Oliver, S., Woosley, A. & Singleton, R.C. (1974). Sensory evaluation by quantitative descriptive analysis. Food Technology, 28, 24-34.
117. Strother, S.C., Anderson, J., Hansen, L.K. et al. (2002). The quantitative evaluation of functional neuroimaging experiments: the NPAIRS data analysis framework. NeuroImage, 15, 747-771.
118. Symoneaux, R., Galmarini, M.V.E. & Mehinagic, E. (2012). Comment analysis of consumer's likes and dislikes as an alternative tool to preference mapping: a case study on apples. Food Quality and Preference, 24, 59-66.
119. Takane, Y. (1982). IDSORT: an individual differences multidimensional scaling program for sorting data. Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation, 14, 546.
120. Talavera-bianchi, M., Edgar Chambers, I.V. & Chambers, D.H. (2010). Describing flavor using fewer and simpler "HITS" (high identity traits) profiling: an example with cheese. Journal of Sensory Studies, 25, 481-493.
121. Tang, C. & Heymann, H. (1999). Multidimensional sorting, similarity scaling and free choice profiling of grape jellies. Journal of Sensory Studies, 17, 493-509.
122. Tarea, S., Cuvelier, G. & Sieffermann, J.-M. (2007). Sensory evaluation of the texture of 49 commercial apple and pear purees. Journal of Food Quality, 30, 1121-1131.
123. Teillet, E., Schlich, P., Urbano, C., Cordelle, S. & Guichard, E. (2010). Sensory methodologies and the taste of water. Food Quality and Preference, 21, 967-976.
124. Thuillier, B. (2007). Rôle du CO2 dans l'Appréciation Organoleptique des Champagnes - Expérimentation et Apports Méthodologiques. Reims, France: Thèse de l'URCA.
125. Veinand, B., Godefroy, C., Adam, C. & Delarue, J. (2011). Highlight of important product characteristics for consumers. Comparison of three sensory descriptive methods performed by consumers. Food Quality and Preference, 22, 474-485.
126. Williams, A.A. & Langron, S.P. (1984). The use of free-choice profiling for the evaluation of commercial ports. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 35, 558-568.