Just-about-right and ideal scaling provide similar insights into the influence of sensory attributes on liking

Food Quality and Preference

Volumn 37, Issue , 2014, Pages 71-78

  Li, Bangde ^a   Hayes, John E ^a   Ziegler, Gregory R ^a  

^a PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Coffee; Consumer behavior; Formulation; Milk; Product development; Scaling bias

Indexed keywords

EID: 84901357061     PISSN: 09503293     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.04.019     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Ares G., Barreiro C., Giménez A.N.A. Comparison of attribute liking and JAR scales to evaluate the adequacy of sensory attributes of milk deserts. Journal of Sensory Studies 2009, 24(5):664-676.
2. Booth D.A., Thompson A., Shahedian B. A robust, brief measure of an individual's most preferred level of salt in an ordinary foodstuff. Appetite 1983, 4(4):301-312.
3. Epler S., Chambers E., Kemp K.E. Hedonic scales are a better predictor than just-about-right scales of optimal sweetness in lemonade. Journal Sensory Studies 1988, 13:191-197.
4. Gacula M. Incomplete block designs design and analysis of sensory optimization 2008, Food & Nutrition Press Inc., [pp. 35-44].
5. Gacula M., Rutenbeck S., Pollack L., Resurreccion A.V.A., Moskowitz H.R. The just-about-right intensity scale: Functional analyses and relation to hedonics. Journal of Sensory Studies 2007, 22(2):194-211.
6. Gilbert J.M., Young H., Ball R.D., Murray S.H. Volatile flavor compounds affecting consumer acceptability of kiwifruit. Journal of Sensory Studies 1996, 11(3):247-259.
7. Goldman, A. (2005). Ideal scaling, an alternative to Just-about-right scales. Paper presented at the 6th Pangborn sensory science symposium, Harrogate, North Yorkshire, UK.
8. Hoggan J. Ideal profile technique in new product development with beer. MBAA Technical Quarterly 1975, 12(2):81-86.
9. Keast S.J.R., Hayes J.E. Successful sodium reduction. The World of Food Ingredients 2011, http://www.foodingredientsfirst.com/magazine-digits/Successful-Sodium-Reduction.html.
10. Lawless H.T., Heymann H. Sensory evaluation of food: Principles and practices 2010, Springer.
11. Lawless H.T. Odour description and odour classification revisited. Food acceptability 1988, 27-40. Elsevier Applied Science, London. D.M.H. Thomson (Ed.).
12. Li, B. (2011). Improvements on Just-About-Right (JAR) scales as product optimization tools using Kano modeling concepts. (1500430 M.S.), University of Arkansas, Ann Arbor. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I database.
13. Li B., Hayes J.E., Ziegler G.R. Interpreting consumer preferences: Physicohedonic and psychohedonic models yield different information in a coffee-flavored dairy beverage. Food Quality and Preference 2014, 36:27-32.
14. Lovely C., Meullenet J.F. Comparison of preference mapping techniques for the optimization of strawberry yogurt. Journal of Sensory Studies 2009, 24(4):457-478.
15. Mandel J. The validation of measurement through interlaboratory studies. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems 1991, 11(2):109-119.
16. Mcbride R.L., Booth D.A. Using classical psychophysics to determine ideal flavor intensity. Journal of Food Technology 1986, 21(6):775-780.
17. Meilgaard M.C., Civille G.V., Carr B.T. Sensory evaluations techniques 2007, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
18. Moskowitz H.R. The sweetness and pleasantness of sucroses. The American Journal of Psychology 1971, 84(3):387-405.
19. Moskowitz H.R. Sensory directionals for pizza: A deeper analysis. Journal of Sensory Studies 2001, 16(6):583-600.
20. Moskowitz H.R., Muñoz A.M., Gacula M.C. Hedonics, just-about-right, purchase and other scales in consumer tests viewpoints and controversies in sensory science and consumer product testing 2008, Food & Nutrition Press Inc., [pp. 145-172].
21. Pangborn R.M., Guinard J.X., Meiselman H.L. Evaluation of bitterness of caffeine in hot chocolate drink by category, graphic, and ratio scaling. Journal of Sensory Studies 1989, 4(1):31-53.
22. Peryam D.R., Pilgrim F.J. Hedonic scale method of measuring food preferences. Food Technology 1957, 11(9):A9-A14.
23. Pfaffmann C. Wundt's schema of sensory affect in the light of research on gustatory preferences. Psychological Research 1980, 42(1-2):165-174.
24. Popper R., Gibes K. Workshop summary: Data analysis workshop: Getting the most out of just-about-right data - Abstracts. Food Quality and Preference 2004, 15(7-8):891-899.
25. Popper R., Kroll R.D. Just-About-Right scales in consumer research. Chemical Senses 2005, 7(3):3-6.
26. Rossi F. Assessing sensory panelist performance using repeatability and reproducibility measures. Food Quality and Preference 2001, 12(5-7):467-479.
27. Rothman L., Parker M.J. Just-About-Right (JAR) scales: Design, usage, benefits, and risks 2009, American Society for Testing & Materials.
28. Shepherd R., Smith K., Farleigh C.A. The relationship between intensity, hedonic and relative-to-ideal ratings. Food Quality and Preference 1989, 1(2):75-80.
29. Stone H., Sidel J.L. Sensory evaluation practices 2004, Elsevier Academic Press, San Diego, California.
30. van Trijp H.C.M., Punter P.H., Mickartz F., Kruithof L. The quest for the ideal product: Comparing different methods and approaches. Food Quality and Preference 2007, 18(5):729-740.
31. Vickers Z., Holton E., Wang J. Effect of yogurt sweetness on sensory specific satiety. Journal of Sensory Studies 1998, 13(4):377-388.
32. Vickers Z., Holton E., Wang J. Effect of ideal-relative sweetness on yogurt consumption. Food Quality and Preference 2001, 12(8):521-526.
33. Worch T., Dooley L., Meullenet J.F., Punter P.H. Comparison of PLS dummy variables and Fishbone method to determine optimal product characteristics from ideal profiles. Food Quality and Preference 2010, 21(8):1077-1087.
34. Worch T., Ennis J.M. Investigating the single ideal assumption using Ideal Profile Method. Food Quality and Preference 2013, 29(1):40-47.
35. Worch T., Le S., Punter P., Pages J. Assessment of the consistency of ideal profiles according to non-ideal data for IPM. Food Quality and Preference 2012, 24(1):99-110.
36. Worch T., Le S., Punter P., Pages J. Extension of the consistency of the data obtained with the Ideal Profile Method: Would the ideal products be more liked than the tested products?. Food Quality and Preference 2012, 26(1):74-80.
37. Worch T., Le S., Punter P., Pages J. Ideal Profile Method (IPM): The ins and outs. Food Quality and Preference 2013, 28(1):45-59.
38. Xiong R., Meullenet J.F. A PLS dummy variable approach to assess the impact of jar attributes on liking. Food Quality and Preference 2006, 17(3-4):188-198.