Consumer-Based Product Profiling: Application of Partial Napping® for Sensory Characterization of Specialty Beers by Novices and Experts

Journal of Food Products Marketing

Volumn 19, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 201-218

  Giacalone, Davide ^a   Ribeiro, Leticia Machado ^a   Frøst, Michael Bom ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

Author keywords

beer; consumers vs. experts; fast sensory methods; Napping; sensory profiling

Indexed keywords

EID: 84879678158     PISSN: 10454446     EISSN: 15404102     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10454446.2013.797946     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Abdi, H., Valentin, D., Chollet, S. and Chrea, C. 2007. Analyzing assessors and products in sorting tasks: DISTATIS, theory and applications. Food Quality and Preference, 18 (4): 627 - 640.
2. Albert, A., Varela, P., Salvador, A., Hough, G. and 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 (5): 463 - 473.
3. Ares, G., Deliza, R., Barreiro, C., Gimenez, A. and Gámbaro, A. 2010. Comparison of two sensory profiling techniques based on consumer perception. Food Quality and Preference, 21 (4): 417 - 426.
4. Chollet, S., Lelièvre, M., Abdi, H. and 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 (6): 507 - 520.
5. Dairou, J. and Sieffermann, J. 2002. A comparison of 14 jams characterized by conventional profile and a quick original method, the flash profile. Journal of Food Science, 67 (2): 826 - 834.
6. Dehlholm, C., Brockhoff, P. B., Meinert, L., Aaslyng, M. D. and Bredie, W. L. P. 2012. Rapid sensory methods - Comparison of free multiple sorting, partial napping, napping, flash profiling and conventional profiling. Food Quality and Preference, 26 (2): 267 - 277.
7. Det Danske Ølakademi. 2006. " Det danske ølsprog ". In The Danish beer language, Copenhagen, Denmark: Danish Brewers Union.
8. Garber, L. L., Hyatt, E. M. and Starr, R. G. 2003. Measuring consumer response to food products. Food Quality and Preference, 14 (1): 3 - 15.
9. Gower, J. C. 1975. Generalized procrustes analysis. Psychometrika, 40 (1): 33 - 51.
10. Husson, F., Lê, S. and Pagès, J. 2011. Exploratory multivariate analysis by example using R, Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
11. Jack, F. R. and Piggott, J. R. 1992. Free choice profiling in consumer research. Food Quality and Preference, 3 (3): 129 - 134.
12. Lawless, H. T. and Heymann, H. 2010. Sensory evaluation of food. principles and practises, 2nd, New York, NY: Springer.
13. Lê, S. and Husson, F. 2008. SensoMineR: A package for sensory data analysis. Journal of Sensory Studies, 23 (1): 14 - 25.
14. Lê, S., Josse, J. and Husson, F. 2008. FactoMineR: An R package for multivariate analysis. Journal of Statistical Software, 25 (1): 1 - 18.
15. Meilgaard, M. C., Dalgliesh, C. E. and Clapperton, J. F. 1979. Beer flavor terminology. Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 85 (1): 38 - 42.
16. Morand, E. and Pagès, J. 2006. Procrustes multiple factor analysis to analyse the overall perception of food products. Food Quality and Preference, 17 (1-2): 36 - 42.
17. Pagès, J. and Husson, F. 2001. Inter-laboratory comparison of sensory profiles: Methodology and results. Food Quality and Preference, 12 (5-7): 297 - 309.
18. Pagès, J. 2003. Recueil direct de distances sensorielles: Application à l'évaluation de dix vins blancs du val-de-loire. (Direct collection of sensory distances: Application to the evaluation of ten white wines from Loire Valley. Sciences des Aliments, 23: 679 - 688.
19. 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 (7): 642 - 649.
20. Perrin, L., Symoneaux, R., Maître, 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 Quality and Preference, 19 (1): 1 - 11.
21. Pfeiffer, J. C. and Gilbert, C. C. 2008. Napping by modality: A happy medium between analytic and holistic approaches. Proceedings of the 9th Sensometrics, Meeting, July 20-23, 2008, St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada
22. Risvik, E., McEwan, J. A., Colwill, J. S., Rogers, R. and Lyon, D. H. 1994. Projective mapping: A tool for sensory analysis and consumer research. Food Quality and Preference, 5 (4): 263 - 269.
23. Robert, P. and Escoufier, Y. 1976. A unifying tool for linear multivariate statistical methods: The RV-coefficient. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series C (Applied Statistics), 25 (3): 257 - 265.
24. Schutz, H. G. 1999. Consumer data-sense and nonsense. Food Quality and Preference, 10: 245 - 251.
25. Williams, A. A. and 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 (5): 558 - 568.