Investigation of bias of hedonic scores when co-eliciting product attribute information using CATA questions

Food Quality and Preference

Volumn 30, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 242-249

  Jaeger, Sara R ^a   Giacalone, Davide ^c   Roigard, Christina M ^a   Pineau, Benedicte ^a   Vidal, Leticia ^b   Giménez, Ana ^b   Frøst, Michael B ^c   Ares, Gaston ^b  

^a THE NEW ZEALAND INSTITUTE FOR PLANT AND FOOD RESEARCH LIMITED   (New Zealand)

^b UNIVERSIDAD DE LA REPÚBLICA   (Uruguay)

^c UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Attribute scaling; CATA; Consumer research; Hedonic scaling; JAR; Research methodology

Indexed keywords

EID: 84880596546     PISSN: 09503293     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2013.06.001     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. 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. Poster presented at the 7th Pangborn Sensory Science Symposium. Minneapolis, MN, USA (12-16 August). Delegate Manual.
2. Ares G., Barreiro C., Deliza R., Giménez A., Gámbaro A. Application of a check-all-that-apply question to the development of chocolate milk desserts. Journal of Sensory Studies 2010, 25:67-86.
3. Ares G., Barrios S., Lareo C., Lema P. Development of a sensory quality index for strawberries based on correlation between sensory data and consumer perception. Postharvest Biology and Technology 2009, 52:97-102.
4. Ares G., Jaeger S.R. Check-all-that-apply questions: Influence of attribute order on sensory product characterization. Food Quality and Preference 2013, 28:141-153.
5. Bruzzone F., Ares G., Giménez A. Consumers' texture perception of milk desserts. II - Comparison with trained assessors' data. Journal of Texture Studies 2012, 43:214-226.
6. Cacioppo J.T., Petty R.E. The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1982, 42:116-131.
7. Cacioppo J.T., Petty R.E., Kao C.F. The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment 1984, 48:306-307.
8. Carver C.S., White T.L. Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment: The BIS/BAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1994, 67:319-333.
9. Dooley L., Lee Y., Meullenet J. 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 2010, 21:394-401.
10. Driesener C., Romaniuk J. Comparing methods of brand image measurement. International Journal of Market Research 2006, 48:681-698.
11. Earthy P.J., MacFie H.J.H., Hedderley D. Effect of question order on sensory perception and preference in central location trials. Journal of Sensory Studies 1997, 12:215-237.
12. Gacula M., Mohan P., Faller J., Pollack L., Moskowitz H.R. Questionnaire practice. What happens when the JAR scale is placed between two "overall" acceptance scales?. Journal of Sensory Studies 2008, 23:136-147.
13. Kool W., McGuire J.T., Rosen Z.B., Botvinich M.M. Decision making and the avoidance of cognitive demand. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2010, 139:665-682.
14. Krosnick J.A. Response strategies for coping with the cognitive demands of attitude measures in surveys. Applied Cognitive Psychology 1991, 5:213-236.
15. Krosnick J.A. Survey research. Annual Review of Psychology 1999, 50:537-567.
16. Lado J., Vicente E., Manzzioni A., Ares G. 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 2010, 90:2268-2275.
17. Lawless H.T, Heymann H. Sensory evaluation of food. Principles and practices 2010, Springer, New York, NY.
18. Lim J. Hedonic scaling: A review of methods and theory. Food Quality and Preference 2011, 22:733-747.
19. Mela D.J. A comparison of single and concurrent evaluation of sensory and hedonic attributes. Journal of Food Science 1989, 54:1098-1100.
20. Moskowitz H.R., Muñoz A.M., Gacula M.C. Viewpoints and controversies in sensory science and consumer product testing 2003, Blackwell Publishing, Trumbull, Connecticut.
21. Péneau S., Brockhoff P.B., Escher F., Nuessli J. A comprehensive approach to evaluate the freshness of strawberries and carrots. Postharvest Biology and Technology 2007, 45:20-29.
22. Plaehn D. CATA penalty/reward. Food Quality and Preference 2012, 24:141-152.
23. Popper R., Rosenstock W., Schraidt M., Kroll B.J. The effect of attribute questions on overall liking ratings. Food Quality and Preference 2004, 15:853-858.
24. Prescott J. Flavour as a psychological construct: Implications for perceiving and measuring the sensory qualities of foods. Food Quality and Preference 1999, 10:349-356.
25. Prescott J., Lee S.M., Kim K. Analytic approaches to evaluation modify hedonic responses. Food Quality and Preference 2011, 22:391-393.
26. Prescott J. Psychological processes in flavour perception. Flavour perception 2004, 256-277. Blackwell Publishing, London. A.J. Taylor, D. Roberts (Eds.).
27. Rasinski K.A., Mingay D., Bradburn N.M. Do respondents really "mark all that apply" on self-administered questions?. Public Opinion Quarterly 1994, 58:400-408.
28. Small D.M., Prescott J. Odor/taste integration and the perception of flavour. Experimental Brain Research 2005, 166:345-357.
29. Stone H., Sidel J.L. Sensory evaluation practices 2004, Elsevier, Academic Press, San Diego, USA.
30. Strack F. "Order effects" in survey research: activation and information functions of preceding questions. Context effects in social and psychological research 1992, 23-34. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY. N. Schwarz, S. Sudman (Eds.).
31. Sudman S., Bradburn N.M. Asking questions 1992, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
32. Varela P., Ares G. Sensory profiling, the blurred line between sensory and consumer science. A review of novel methods for product characterization. Food Research International 2012, 48:893-908.
33. Vázquez M.B., Curia A., Hough G. Sensory descriptive analysis, sensory acceptability and expectation studies on biscuits with reduced added salt and increased fibre. Journal of Sensory Studies 2009, 24:498-511.
34. Vickers Z.M., Christensen C.M., Fahrenholtz S.K., Gengler I.M. Effect of the questionnaire design and the number of samples taste on hedonic ratings. Journal of Sensory Studies 1993, 8:189-200.