Pivot© profile: A new descriptive method based on free description

Food Quality and Preference

Volumn 42, Issue , 2015, Pages 66-77

  Thuillier, Bertrand ^a,b   Valentin, Dominique ^c,d   Marchal, Richard ^e   Dacremont, Catherine ^c,d  

^a ABT Informatique   (France)

^b UNIV LILLE   (France)

^c CENTRE DES SCIENCES DU GOÛT ET DE L ALIMENTATION   (France)

^d UNIVERSITÉ DE BOURGOGNE   (France)

^e UNIVERSITÉ DE REIMS CHAMPAGNE ARDENNE   (France)

Author keywords

Champagne; Fast descriptive method; Free description; Pivot profile; Referential method; Simulation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84922222368     PISSN: 09503293     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.01.012     Document Type: Review

References (31)

1. Adams J., Williams A., Lancaster B., Foley M. Advantages and uses of check-all-that-apply response compared to traditional scaling of attributes for salty snacks. 7th Pangborn Sensory Science Symposium, 12-16 August, Minneapolis, MN, USA 2007.
2. Ares G., Jaeger S.R. Check-all-that-apply questions: Influence of attribute order on sensory product characterization. Food Quality and Preference 2013, 28(1):141-153.
3. Campo E., Ballester J., Langlois J., Dacremont C., Valentin D. Comparison of conventional descriptive analysis and a citation frequency-based descriptive method for odor profiling: An application to Burgundy Pinot noir wines. Food Quality and Preference 2010, 21:44-55.
4. Chou S.M., Paplinski A.P., Gustafsson L. Speaker-dependent bimodal integration of Chinese phonemes and letters using multimodal self-organizing networks. International Joint Conference on Neural Network, 12-17 August, Orlando, FL, USA 2007, 248-253.
5. de Saldamando L., Delgado J., Herencia P., Giménez A., Ares G. Polarized sensory positioning: Do conclusions depend on the poles?. Food Quality and Preference 2013, 29(1):25-32.
6. Faurion A. Factors of quantitative variation in taste sensitivity. Annales d'Otolaryngologie et Chirurgie Cervico-faciale 1989, 106(4):278-280.
7. Faye P., Brémaud D., Durand Daubin M., Courcoux P., Giboreau A., Nicod H. Perceptive free sorting and verbalization tasks with naive subjects: An alternative to descriptive mappings. Food Quality and Preference 2004, 15:781-791.
8. Giboreau A., Dacremont C. Le profil sensoriel: d'un savoir-faire empirique à des questions théoriques en psychologie cognitive. Psychologie Française 2003, 48:69-78.
9. Giboreau A., Dacremont C., Guerrand S., Dubois D. Décrire: Identifier ou catégoriser ?. Le sentir et le dire 2009, 211-232. L'Harmattan, Paris. D. Dubois (Ed.).
10. Katz D. The world of touch (L. E. Krueger, Trans.) 1989, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, Original work published 1925.
11. Lancaster B., Foley M. Determining statistical significance for choose-all that-apply question responses. 7th Pangborn Sensory Science Symposium, 12-16 August, Minneapolis, MN, USA 2007.
12. Lawless H.T., Sheng N., Knoops S.S.C.P. Multidimensional scaling of sorting data applied to cheese perception. Food Quality and Preference 1995, 6:91-98.
13. Lê S., Josse J., Husson F. FactoMineR: An R package for multivariate analysis. Journal of Statistical Software 2008, 25(1):1-18.
14. Menashe I., Man O., Lancet D., Gilad Y. Different noses for different people. Nature Genetics 2003, 34(2):143-144.
15. Ng M., Chaya C., Hort J. Beyond liking: Comparing the measurement of emotional response using EsSense profile and consumer defined check-all-that-apply methodologies. Food Quality and Preference 2013, 28(1):193-205.
16. Ng M., Chaya C., Hort J. The influence of sensory and packaging cues on both liking and emotional, abstract and functional conceptualisations. Food Quality and Preference 2013, 28(2):146-156.
17. Normand S. Les mots de la dégustation du champagne: Analyse sémantique d'un discours professionnel 2002, CNRS editions, Paris.
18. Pagès J. Recueil direct de distances sensorielles: Application à l'évaluation de dix vins blancs de Val de Loire. Science des Aliments 2003, 23:679-888.
19. 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.
20. R Development Core Team R: A language and environment for statistical computing, ISBN 3-900051-07-0 2007, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
21. 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.
22. Robert P., Escoufier Y. A unifying tool for linear multivariate statistical methods: The RV coefficient. Applied Statistics 1976, 25:257-265.
23. Sauvageot F. L'intensité. Evaluation sensorielle - Manuel méthodologique 1998, Lavoisier, Paris.
24. Sieffermann J.M. Le profil Flash: Un outil rapide et innovant d'évaluation sensorielle descriptive. L'innovation: de l'idée au succès - Douzièmes rencontres AGORAL, 22-23 mars, Tec & Doc, Lavoisier, Paris 2000, 335-340.
25. Symoneaux R., Galmarini M.V., Mehinagic E. Comment analysis of consumer's likes and dislikes as an alternative tool to preference mapping. A case study on apples. Food Quality and Preference 2012, 24(1):59-66.
26. Teillet E., Schlich P., Urbano C., Cordelle S., Guichard E. Sensory methodologies and the taste of water. Food Quality and Preference 2010, 21:967-976.
27. Thomson D.M.H., McEwan J.A. An application of the repertory grid method to investigate consumer perceptions of foods. Appetite 1988, 10(3):181-193.
28. Thuillier, B. (2007). RÔle du CO2 dans l'appréciation organoleptique des champagnes - Expérimentation et apports méthodologiques (Ph.D. dissertation). France: Université de Reims.
29. Valentin D., Chollet S., Lelièvre M., Abdi H. Quick and dirty but still pretty good: A review of new descriptive methods in food science. International Journal of Food Science & Technology 2012, 47:1563-1578.
30. 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.
31. Williams A.A., Langron S.P. The use of free choice profiling for the evaluation of commercial ports. Journal of Science and Food Agriculture 1984, 35:558-568.