Projective Mapping for interpreting wine aroma differences as perceived by naïve and experienced assessors

Food Quality and Preference

Volumn 29, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 6-15

  Torri, Luisa ^a   Dinnella, Caterina ^b   Recchia, Annamaria ^b   Naes, Tormod ^c,d   Tuorila, Hely ^e   Monteleone, Erminio ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GASTRONOMIC SCIENCES   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF FLORENCE   (Italy)

^c NORWEGIAN FOOD RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Norway)

^d UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^e UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

Author keywords

Consumers; Descriptive analysis; Liking; Quality; Red wines; Trained panel; Wine experts

Indexed keywords

EID: 84874450118     PISSN: 09503293     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2013.01.006     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Albert A., Varela P., Salvador A., Hough G., Fiszman S. 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 2011, 22:463-473.
2. Ares G., Deliza R., Barreiro C., Giménez A., Gámbaro A. Comparison of two sensory profiling techniques based on consumer perception. Food Quality and Preference 2010, 21:417-426.
3. Ares G., Varela P., Rado G., Giménez A. Identifying ideal products using three different consumer profiling methodologies. Comparison with external preference mapping. Food Quality and Preference 2011, 22:581-591.
4. Avancini De Almeida T.C., Cubero E., O'Mahony M. Same-different discrimination tests with interstimulus delays up to one day. Journal of Sensory Studies 1999, 14:1-18.
5. Bäckström A., Pirttilä-Backman A.M., Tuorila H. Willingness to try new foods as predicted by social representations and attitude and trait scales. Appetite 2004, 43:75-83.
6. Ballester J., Abdi H., Langlois J., Peyron D., Valentin D. The odor of colors: Can wine experts and novices distinguish the odors of white, red, and rosé wines?. Chemosensory Perception 2009, 2:203-213.
7. Barcenas P., Pérez Elortondo F.J., Albisu M. Projective mapping in sensory analysis of ewes milk cheeses: A study on consumers and trained panel performance. Food Research International 2004, 37:723-729.
8. Cardello A.V., Schutz H.G. Research note: Numerical scale-point locations for constructing the LAM (Labeled Affective Scale). Journal of Sensory Studies 2004, 19:341-346.
9. Carlucci A., Monteleone E. A procedure of sensory evaluation for describing the aroma profile of single grape variety wines. Journal of Sensory Studies 2008, 23:817-834.
10. Chollet S., Lelièvre M., Abdi H., Valentin D. Sort and beer: Everything you wanted to know about the sorting task but did not dare to ask. Food Quality and Preference 2011, 22:507-520.
11. Delarue J., Sieffermann J.M. 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 2004, 15:383-392.
12. Dinnella C., Recchia A., Vincenzi S., Tuorila H., Monteleone E. Temporary modification of salivary protein profile and individual responses to repeated phenolic astringent stimuli. Chemical Senses 2010, 35:75-85.
13. Goldsmith R.E., Foxall G.R. The measurement of innovativeness. The international handbook on innovation 2003, 322-330. Elsevier Science Ltd., Oxford, UK. L.V. Shavinina (Ed.).
14. Goldsmith R.E., Hofacker C.F. Measuring consumer innovativeness. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 1991, 19:209-221.
15. Goldsmith R.E., d'Hauteville F., Flynn L.R. Theory and measurement of consumer innovativeness: A transnational evaluation. European Journal of Marketing 1998, 32:340-353.
16. Gower J.C. Generalized procrustes analysis. Psychometrika 1975, 40:33-51.
17. Gudziol V., Hummel C., Negoias S., Ishimaru T., Hummel T. Lateralized differences in olfactory function. The Laryngoscope 2007, 117:808-811.
18. Kähkönen P., Tuorila H. Consumer responses to reduced and regular fat content in different products: Effects of gender, involvement and health concern. Food Quality and Preference 1999, 10:83-91.
19. Kennedy J., Heymann H. Projective mapping and descriptive analysis of milk and dark chocolates. Journal of Sensory Studies 2009, 24:220-233.
20. King M.C., Cliff M.A., Hall J.W. Comparison of projective mapping and multivariate methodologies for identification of similarity-of-use snack bars. Journal of Sensory Studies 1998, 13:347-358.
21. Maitre I., Symoneaux R., Jourjon F., Mehinagic E. Sensory typicality of wines: How scientists have recently dealt with this subject. Food Quality and Preference 2010, 21:726-731.
22. Martens H., Martens M. Multivariate analysis of quality. An introduction 2001, J. Wiley & Sons, UK, Chichester.
23. Morand E., Pagès J. Procrustes multiple factor analysis to analyse the overall perception of food products. Food Quality and Preference 2005, 17:36-42.
24. Moussaoui K.A., Varela P. Exploring consumer product profiling techniques and their linkage to a quantitative descriptive analysis. Food Quality and Preference 2010, 21:1088-1099.
25. Naes, T., Brockhoff, B., & Tomic, O. (2010). Quality control of sensory profile data. In: Statistics for sensory and consumer science (pp. 11-38). UK, Chichester: J. Wiley & Sons.
26. Nestrud M.A., Lawless H.T. Perceptual mapping of citrus juices using projective mapping and profiling data from culinary professionals and consumers. Food Quality and Preference 2008, 19:431-438.
27. Nestrud M.A., Lawless H.T. Perceptual mapping of apples and cheeses using Projective Mapping and Sorting. Journal of Sensory Studies 2010, 25(3):390-405.
28. Pagès J. Recueil direct de distances sensorielles: Application à l'évaluation de dix vins blancs de Val de Loire. Sciences des Aliments 2003, 23:679-888.
29. Pagès J. 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 2005, 16:642-649.
30. Perrin L., Symoneaux R., Maître I., Asselin C., Jourjon F., Pagès J. Comparison of three sensory methods for use with the Napping® procedure: Case of ten wines from Loire valley. Food Quality and Preference 2008, 19:1-11.
31. Recchia A., Picchi M., Fia G., Bertuccioli M., Monteleone E. Sensory identity of Sangiovese wines from different Tuscany areas. Industrie delle Bevande 2009, 38:25-32.
32. Risvik E., McEwan J.A., Colwill J.S., Rogers R., Lyon D.H. Projective mapping: A tool for sensory analysis and consumer research. Food Quality and Preference 1994, 5:263-269.
33. Risvik E., McEwan J.A., Rødbotten M. Evaluation of sensory profiling and projective mapping data. Food Quality and Preference 1997, 8:63-71.
34. Veinand B., Godefroy C., Adam C., Delarue J. Highlight of important product characteristics for consumers. Comparison of three sensory descriptive methods performed by Consumers. Food Quality and Preference 2011, 22:474-485.