Ideal profiling

Novel Techniques in Sensory Characterization and Consumer Profiling

Volumn , Issue , 2014, Pages 85-136

  Worch, Thierry ^a   Punter, Pieter H ^b  

^a QI Statistics   (United Kingdom)

^b OP and P Product Research   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84929483065     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1201/b16853     Document Type: Chapter

References (51)

1. Booth, D.A., Conner, M.T., and Marie, S. 1987. Sweetness and food selection: Measurement of sweeteners’ effects on acceptance. In Sweetness, ed. J. Dobbing, pp. 143-160. London, U.K.: Springer-Verlag.
2. Borgognone, M.G., Bussi, J., and Hough, G. 2001. Principal component analy-sis in sensory analysis: Covariance or correlation matrix? Food Quality and Preference 12: 323-326.
3. Brandt, M.S., Skinner, E.Z., and Coleman, J.A. 1963. Texture profile method. Journal of Food Science 28: 404.
4. Cadoret, M. and Husson, F. 2012. Construction and evaluation of confidence ellipses applied at sensory data. Food Quality and Preference 28: 106-115.
5. Cadoret, M., Lê, S., and Pagès, J. 2009. A Factorial Approach for Sorting Task data (FAST). Food Quality and Preference 20: 410-417.
6. Cadoret, M., Lê, S., and Pagès, J. 2011. Statistical analysis of hierarchical sorting data. Journal of Sensory Studies 26: 96-105.
7. Coombs, C.H. 1964. A Theory of Data. New York: Wiley.
8. Cooper, H.R., Earle, M.D., and Triggs, C.M. 1989. Ratios of ideals-A new twist to an old idea. In Product Testing with Consumers for Research Guidance. ASTM STP 1035, ed. L.S. Wu, pp. 54-63. Philadelphia, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials.
9. Dairou, V. and Sieffermann, J.M. 2002. A comparison of 14 jams characterized by conventional profile and a quick original method, the Flash Profile. Journal of Food Science 67: 826-834.
10. Danzart, M. 1998. Quadratic model in preference mapping. Fourth Sensometric Meeting, Copenhagen, Denmark, August 1998.
11. Danzart, M. 2009. Cartographie des préférences. In Evaluation sensorielle, manuel méthodologique, 3rd edn., ed. SSHA, pp. 443-450. Paris, France: Lavoisier.
12. Dehlholm, C., Brockhoff, P.B., Meinert, L., Aaslyng, M.D., and Bredie, W.L.P. 2012. Rapid descriptive sensory methods: Comparison of free multiple sort-ing, partial napping, napping, flash profiling and conventional profiling. Food Quality and Preference 26: 267-277.
13. Delarue, J., Danzart, M., and Sieffermann, J.M. 2010. Revisiting the definition of preference in preference mapping studies. In KEER 2010 Proceedings, Paris, France.
14. Ennis, D.M. 2005. Analytic approaches to accounting for individual ideal point. IFPress 82: 2-3.
15. Hoggan, J. 1975. New product development. MBAA Technical Quarterly 12: 81-86.
16. Husson, F., Josse, J., and Pagès, J. 2010. Principal component methods-Hierarchical clustering-partitional clustering: Why would we need to choose for visualizing data? Technical Report-Agro campus, retrieved from http://www.agrocampus-ouest.fr/math (retrieved October 30, 2012).
17. Husson, F., Lê, S., and Pagès, J. 2011. Clustering. In Exploratory Multivariate Analysis by Example Using R, eds. F. Husson, S. Lê, and J. Pagès, pp. 169-204. London, U.K.: CRC Press.
18. Husson, F., Le Dien, S., and Pagès, J. 2001. Which value can be granted to sensory profiles given by consumers? Methodology and results. Food Quality and Preference 12: 291-296.
19. Husson, F., Le Dien, S., and Pagès, J. 2005. Confidence ellipse for the sensory profiles obtained with principal component analysis. Food Quality and Preference 16: 245-250.
20. Lawless, H.T. 1989. Exploration of fragrance categories and ambiguous odors using multidimensional scaling and cluster analysis. Chemical Senses 14: 349-360.
21. Lê, S. and Husson, F. 2008. SensoMineR: A package for sensory data analysis. Journal of Sensory Studies 23: 14-25.
22. Lê, S., Josse, J., and Husson, F. 2008. FactoMineR: An R Package for multivariate analysis. Journal of Statistical Software 25: 1-18.
23. MacFie, H.J., Bratchell, N., Greenhoff, K., and Vallis, L.V. 1989. Designs to bal-ance the effect of order of presentation and first-order carry-over effects in hall tests. Journal of Sensory Studies 4: 129-148.
24. Meullenet, J.F., Lovely, C., Threlfall, R., Morris, J.R., and Striegler, R.K. 2008. An ideal point density plot method for determining an optimal sensory profile for Muscadine grape juice. Food Quality and Preference 19: 210-219.
25. Meullenet, J.F., Xiong, R., and Findlay, C.J. 2007. Multivariate and Probabilistic Analyses of Sensory Science Problems, 1st edn. Ames, IA: IFT Press, Blackwell Publishing.
26. Moskowitz, H.R. 1972. Subjective ideals and sensory optimization in evaluating perceptual dimensions in food. Journal of Applied Psychology 56: 60-66.
27. Moskowitz, H.R. 1996. Experts versus consumers: A comparison. Journal of Sensory Studies 11: 19-37.
28. Moskowitz, H.R. 1997. Base size in product testing: A psychophysical viewpoint and analysis. Food Quality and Preference 8: 247-255.
29. Moskowitz, H.R. and Sidel, J.L. 1971. Magnitude and hedonic scales of food acceptability. Journal of Food Science 36: 677.
30. Moskowitz, H.R., Stanley, D.W., and Chandler, J.W. 1977. The eclipse method: Optimizing product formulation through a consumer generated ideal sensory profile. Canadian Institute of Food Science Technology Journal 10: 161-168.
31. Nestrud, M. 2012. Product landscaping the Bayesian Way: Uncovering the evalu-ative dimensions of consumers. In Oral Presentation at the Third Society of Sensory Professionals Conference, Jersey City, NJ, October 10-12.
32. Pagès, J. 2005. Collection and analysis of perceived product inter-distances using multiple factor analysis: Application to the study of 10 white wines from the Loire Valley. Food Quality and Preference 16: 642-649.
33. Pagès, J., Cadoret, M., and Lê, S. 2010. The Sorted Napping: A new holistic approach in sensory evaluation. Journal of Sensory Studies 25: 637-658.
34. Perrin, L., Symoneaux, R., Maître, I., Asselin, C., Jourjon, F., and Pagès, J. 2008. Comparison of three sensory methods for use with the Napping® procedure: Case of ten wines from Loire Valley. Food Quality and Preference 19: 1-11.
35. R Development Core Team 2012. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/(retrieved September 2012).
36. Rothman, L. and Parker, M. 2009. Just-About-Right JAR Scales: Design, Usage, Benefits and Risks. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International, Manual MNL-63-EB.
37. Sieffermann, J.M. 2002. Flash profiling. A new method of sensory descriptive analysis. In AIFST 35th Convention, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia, July 21-24.
38. Stone, H. and Sidel, J.L. 2004. Sensory Evaluation Practices. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
39. Stone, H., Sidel, J., Oliver, S., Woosley, A., and Singleton, R.C. 1974. Sensory evaluation by quantitative descriptive analysis. Food Technology 28: 24-34.
40. Szczesniak, A., Loew, B.J., and Skinner, E.Z. 1975. Consumer texture profile technique. Journal of Food Science 40: 1253-1256.
41. Van Trijp, H.C., Punter, P.H., Mickartz, F., and Kruithof, L. 2007. The quest for the ideal product: Comparing different methods and approaches. Food Quality and Preference 18: 729-740.
42. Williams, A.A. and Langron, S.P. 1984. The use of free-choice profiling for the evaluation of commercial ports. Journal of Science of Food Agriculture 35: 558-568.
43. Worch, T. 2012. The Ideal Profile Analysis: From the validation to the statistical analysis of Ideal Profile data. PhD document, retrieved from www.opp.nl/uk/.
44. Worch, T., Crine, A., Gruel, A., and Lê, S. 2014. Analysis and validation of the Ideal Profile Method: Application to a skin cream study. Food Quality and Preference, 32: 132-144.
45. Worch, T., Dooley, L., Meullenet, J.F., and Punter, P.H. 2010a. Comparison of PLS dummy variables and Fishbone method to determine optimal product characteristics from ideal profiles. Food Quality and Preference 218: 1077-1087.
46. Worch, T. and Ennis, J.M. 2013. Investigating the single ideal assumption using Ideal Profile Method. Food Quality and Preference 29: 40-47.
47. Worch, T., Lê, S., and Punter, P. 2010b. How reliable are the consumers? Comparison of sensory profiles from consumers and experts. Food Quality and Preference 21: 309-318.
48. Worch, T., Lê, S., Punter, P., and Pagès, J. 2012a. Assessment of the consistency of ideal profiles according to non-ideal data for IPM. Food Quality and Preference 24: 99-110.
49. Worch, T., Lê, S., Punter, P., and Pagès, J. 2012b. 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 26: 74-80.
50. Worch, T., Lê, S., Punter, P., and Pagès, J. 2012c. Construction of an Ideal Map IdMap based on the ideal profiles obtained directly from consumers. Food Quality and Preference 26: 93-104.
51. Xiong, R. and Meullenet, J.F. 2006. A PLS dummy variable approach to assess the impact of jar attributes on liking. Food Quality and Preference 17: 188-198.