Methodological challenges in sensory characterization

Current Opinion in Food Science

Volumn 3, Issue , 2015, Pages 1-5

  Ares, Gastón ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD DE LA REPÚBLICA   (Uruguay)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84924289539     PISSN: 22147993     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cofs.2014.09.001     Document Type: Review

References (34)

1. Lawless H.T., Heymann H. Sensory Evaluation of Food. Principles and Practices 2010, Springer.
2. Stone H., Sidel J.L. Sensory Evaluation Practices 2004, Elsevier Academic Press.
3. Murray J.M., Delahunty C.M., Baxter I.A. Descriptive sensory analysis: past, present and future. Food Res Int 2001, 34:461-471.
4. Varela P., Ares G. Sensory profiling, the blurred line between sensory and consumer science. A review of novel methods for product characterization. Food Res Int 2012, 48:893-908.
5. Valentin D., Chollet S., Lelièvre M., Abdi H. Quick and dirty but still pretty good: a review of new descriptive methods in food science. Int J Food Sci Technol 2012, 47:1563-1578.
6. Varela P., Ares G. Introduction. Novel Techniques in Sensory Characterization and Consumer Profiling 2014, 1-8. CRC Press. P. Varela, G. Ares (Eds.).
7. Meyners M., Castura J. Check-all-that-apply questions. Novel Techniques in Sensory Characterization and Consumer Profiling 2014, 271-306. CRC Press. P. Varela, G. Ares (Eds.).
8. Meyners M., Castura J.C., Carr B.T. Existing and new approaches for the analysis of CATA data. Food Qual Prefer 2013, 30:309-319.
9. Redline C.D., Lankford C.P. Eye-movement analysis: a new tool for evaluating the design of visually administered instruments (paper and web). Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section of the American Statistical Association 2001, Available at www.amstat.org/Sections/Srms/Proceedings/y2001/Proceed/00248.pdf.
10. Vitu F. On the role of visual and oculomotor processes in reading. The Oxford Handbook of Eye Movements 2011, 731-750. Oxford University Press. S.P. Liversedge, I.D. Gilchrist, S. Everling (Eds.).
11. Ares G., Etchemendy E., Antúnez L., Vidal L., Giménez A., Jaeger S.R. Visual attention by consumers to check-all-that-apply questions: insights to support methodological development. Food Qual Prefer 2013, 32:210-220.
12. Patris B., Gufoni V., Chollet S., Valentin D. Impact of training on strategies to realize a beer sorting task: behavioral and verbal assessments. New Trends in Sensory Evaluation of Food and Non-food Products 2007, Vietnam National University-Ho chi Minh City Publishing House. D. Valentin, D.Z. Nguyen, L. Pelletier (Eds.).
13. Courtney S.M. Short-term memory: psychological and neural aspects. Encyclopedia of Behavioral Neuroscience 2010, Academic Press. G. Koob, M. Le Moal, R. Thompson (Eds.).
14. Chollet S., Lelièvre M., Abdi H., Valentin D. Sort and beer: everything you wanted to know about the sorting task but did not dare to ask. Food Qual Prefer 2011, 22:507-520.
15. Chollet S., Valentin D., Abdi H. Free sorting task. Novel Techniques in Sensory Characterization and Consumer Profiling 2014, 207-228. CRC Press. P. Varela, G. Ares (Eds.).
16. Jaeger S.R., Wakeling I.N., MacFie H.J.H. Behavioural extensions to preference mapping: the role of synthesis. Food Qual Prefer 2000, 11:349-359.
17. Tomic O., Forde C., Delahunty C., Næs T. Performance indices in descriptive sensory analysis-a complimentary screening tool for assessor and panel performance. Food Qual Prefer 2013, 28:122-133.
18. Brockhoff P.B., Schlich P., Skovgaard I. Taking individual scaling differences into account by analyzing profile data with the Mixed Assessor Model. Food Qual Prefer 2015, 39:156-166.
19. Bavay C., Brockhoff P.B., Kuznetsova A., Maître I., Mehinagic E., Symoneaux R. Consideration of sample heterogeneity and in-depth analysis of individual differences in sensory analysis. Food Qual Prefer 2014, 32:126-131.
20. Ares G., Varela P. Comparison of novel methodologies. Novel Techniques in Sensory Characterization and Consumer Profiling 2014, 365-389. CRC Press. P. Varela, G. Ares (Eds.).
21. de Silva G.M.S. Basic Metrology for ISO 9000 Certification 2002, Butterworth Heinemann.
22. Blancher G., Clavier B., Egoroff C., Duineveld K., Parcon J. A method to investigate the stability of a sorting map. Food Qual Prefer 2012, 23:36-43.
23. Ares G., Tárrega A., Izquierdo L., Jaeger S.R. Investigation of the number of consumers necessary to obtain stable sample and descriptor configurations from check-all-that-apply (CATA) questions. Food Qual Prefer 2014, 31:135-141.
24. Robert P., Escoufier Y. A unifying tool for linear multivariate statistical methods: the RV coefficient. Appl Stat 1976, 25:257-265.
25. Vidal L., Cadena R.S., Antúnez L., Giménez A., Varela P., Ares G. Stability of sample configurations from projective mapping: how many consumers are necessary?. Food Qual Prefer 2014, 34:79-87.
26. Smilde A.K., Kiers H.A.L., Biljsma S., Rubingh C.M., van Erk M.J. Matrix correlations for high-dimensional data: the modified RV-coefficient. Bioinformatics 2009, 25:401-405.
27. Qannari E.M., Courcoux P., Faye P. Significance test of the adjusted Rand index. Application to the free sorting task. Food Qual Prefer 2014, 32:93-97.
28. Lawless H.T., Sheng N., Knoops S.S.C.P. Multidimensional scaling of sorting data applied to cheese perception. Food Qual Prefer 1995, 6:91-98.
29. Dairou V., Sieffermann J.-M. A comparison of 14 jams characterized by conventional profile and a quick original method, flash profile. J Food Sci 2002, 67:826-834.
30. Teillet E., Schlich P., Urbano C., Cordelle S., Guichard E. Sensory methodologies and the taste of water. Food Qual Prefer 2010, 21:967-976.
31. Ares G., de Saldamando L., Vidal L., Antúnez L., Giménez A., Varela P. Polarized projective mapping: comparison with polarized sensory positioning approaches. Food Qual Prefer 2013, 28:510-518.
32. Teillet E., Petit C., Urbano C., Delarue J. Dealing with regular development of products and sensory data aggregation: a possible methodology. The Asian Sensory and Consumer Research Symposium 2014.
33. Veinand B., Godefroy C., Adam C., Delarue J. Highlight of important product characteristics for consumers. Comparison of three sensory descriptive methods performed by consumers. Food Qual Prefer 2011, 22:474-485.
34. Hopfer H., Heymann H. A summary of projective mapping observations-the effect of replicates and shape, and individual performance measurements. Food Qual Prefer 2013, 28:164-181.