Transitioning from proportion of discriminators to a more meaningful measure of sensory difference

Food Quality and Preference

Volumn 32, Issue , 2014, Pages 77-82

  Jesionka, Virginie ^a   Rousseau, Benoît ^b   Ennis, John M ^c  

^a SKIM Healthcare   (Netherlands)

^b The Institute for Perception   (United States)

^c Institute for Perception   (United States)

Author keywords

Difference testing; Discrimination testing; Proportion of discriminators; Thurstonian analysis

Indexed keywords

EID: 84886283127     PISSN: 09503293     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2013.04.007     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Byer A., Abrams D. A comparison of the triangular and two-sample taste test methods. Food Technology 1953, 7:185.
2. Christensen, R. (2011). Statistical methodology for sensory discrimination tests and its implementation in sensR. Retrieved from http://cran.r-project.org.
3. David H., Trivedi M. Pair, triangle and duo-trio tests (Technical report 55) 1962, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Department of Statistics, Blacksburg, VA.
4. Delwiche J., O'Mahony M. Flavour discrimination - An extension of Thurstonian paradoxes to the tetrad method. Food Quality and Preference 1996, 7:1-5.
5. Ennis D. Relative power of difference testing methods in sensory evaluation. Food Technology 1990, 44:114. pp. 116-117.
6. Ennis D. The power of sensory discrimination methods. Journal of Sensory Studies 1993, 8(4):353-370.
7. Ennis D. A single multidimensional model for discrimination, identification, and preferential choice. Acta Psychologica 1993, 84:17-27.
8. Ennis, D. (2003). IFPrograms user manual.
9. Ennis J. Guiding the switch from triangle testing to tetrad testing. Journal of Sensory Studies 2012, 27(4):223-231.
10. Ennis, J. & Christensen, R. (2014). Precision of measurement in tetrad testing. Food Quality and Preference, 32, 98-106.
11. Ennis J., Ennis D., Yip D., O'Mahony M. Thurstonian models for variants of the method of tetrads. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 1998, 51:205-215.
12. Ennis J., Jesionka V. The power of sensory discrimination testing methods revisited. Journal of Sensory Studies 2011, 26(5):371-382.
13. Ennis D., Johnson N. Noncentral and central chi-square, F and beta distribution functions as special cases of the distribution function of an indefinite quadratic form. Communications in Statistics - Theory and Methods 1993, 22(3):897-905.
14. Fechner, G. (1860). Elemente der psychophysik (H. Adler, Trans.). Erster Theil (Breitkopf and Härtel, Leipzig, 1860). p. 65.
15. Fechner G.T., Howes D.H., Boring E.G. Elements of psychophysics 1966, Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
16. Frijters J. The paradox of discriminatory nondiscriminators resolved. Chemical Senses 1979, 4:355-358.
17. Garcia K., Ennis J., Prinyawiwatkul W. A large-scale experimental comparison of the tetrad and triangle tests in children. Journal of Sensory Studies 2012, 27(4):217-222.
18. Green D., Swets J. Signal detection theory and psychophysics 1966, Wiley, New York, NY.
19. Gridgeman N. A re-examination of the two-stage triangle test for the perception of sensory differences. Journal of Food Science 1970, 35:87-91.
20. Hacher M.J., Ratcliff R. A revised table of d' for M-alternative forced choice. Perception and Psychophysics 1979, 26:168-170.
21. Hautus M., Shepherd D., Peng M. Decision strategies for the A Not-A, 2AFC and 2AFC-reminder tasks: Empirical tests. Food Quality and Preference 2011, 22(5):433-442.
22. Ishii R., Kawaguchi H., O'mahony M., Rousseau B. Relating consumer and trained panels' discriminative sensitivities using vanilla flavored ice cream as a medium. Food Quality and Preference 2007, 18(1):89-96.
23. Jesionka, V. (2010). VPower. Available for download at http://www.opp.nl/uk/software/v-power/index.html.
24. Lau S., O'Mahony M., Rousseau B. Are three-sample tasks less sensitive than two-sample tasks? Memory effects in the testing of taste discrimination. Perception & Psychophysics 2004, 66:464-474.
25. Lawless H., Heymann H. Sensory evaluation of food: Principles and practices 2010, Springer, New York, NY.
26. Lee H., O'Mahony M. The evolution of a model: A review of Thurstonian and conditional stimulus effects on difference testing. Food Quality and Preference 2007, 18(2):369-383.
27. Lee H., Van Hout D., Hautus M. Comparison of performance in the A-Not A, 2-AFC, and same-different tests for the flavor discrimination of margarines: The effect of cognitive decision strategies. Food Quality and Preference 2007, 18(6):920-928.
28. Macmillan N.A., Creelman C.D. Detection theory: A user's guide 2005, Cambridge University Press, New York.
29. Masuoka S., Hatjopoulos D., O'Mahony M. Beer bitterness detection: Testing Thurstonian and sequential sensitivity analysis models for triad and tetrad methods. Journal of Sensory Studies 1995, 10(3):295-306.
30. Meilgaard M., Civille G., Carr B. Sensory evaluation techniques 2007, Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton, Florida.
31. Næs T., Brockhoff P., Tomić O. Statistics for sensory and consumer science 2010, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., West Sussex, UK.
32. O'Mahony M. Who told you the triangle test was simple?. Food Quality and Preference 1995, 6(4):227-238.
33. O'Mahony M., Masuoka S., Ishii R. A theoretical note on difference tests: Models, paradoxes and cognitive strategies. Journal of Sensory Studies 1994, 9:247-272.
34. Rousseau B., Ennis D.M. A Thurstonian model for the dual pair (4IAX) discrimination method. Perception & Psychophysics 2001, 63:1083-1090.
35. Rousseau B., Ennis D. Why proportion of discriminators is method-specific. IFPress 2007, 10(3):2-3.
36. Rousseau B., O'Mahony M. Sensory difference tests: Thurstonian and SSA predictions for vanilla flavored yogurts. Journal of Sensory Studies 1997, 12(2):127-146.
37. Schlich P. Risk tables for discrimination tests. Food Quality and Preference 1993, 4(3):141-151.
38. Stillman J. Response selection, sensitivity, and taste-test performance. Perception & Psychophysics 1993, 54:190-194.
39. Stone H., Bleibaum R., Thomas H.A. Sensory evaluation practices 2012, Academic Press, New York. 4th ed.
40. Tedja S., Nonaka R., Ennis D., O'Mahony M. Triadic discrimination testing: Refinement of Thurstonian and sequential sensitivity analysis approaches. Chemical Senses 1994, 19(4):279-301.
41. Thurstone L. A law of comparative judgment. Psychological Review 1927, 34(4):273-286. 10.1037/h0070288.
42. Ura S. Pair, triangle and duo-trio test. Reports of Statistical Application Research, Japanese Union Scientists and Engineers 1960, 7:107-119.
43. van Hout D., Hautus M., Lee H. Investigation of test performance over repeated sessions using signal detection theory: Comparison of three nonattribute-specified difference tests 2-AFCR, A-NOT A and 2-AFC. Journal of Sensory Studies 2011, 26(5):311-321.