Could Time-Intensity by a trained panel be replaced with a progressive profile done by consumers? A case on chewing-gum

Food Quality and Preference

Volumn 48, Issue , 2016, Pages 274-282

  Galmarini, M V ^a,b,d   Symoneaux, R ^c   Visalli, M ^d   Zamora, M C ^a,b   Schlich, P ^d  

^a PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA ARGENTINA   (Argentina)

^b Facultad de Ciencias Naturales e Instituto M Lillo   (Argentina)

^c UPSP GRAPPE   (France)

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

Author keywords

Consumers; Dynamic methods; In home test; Progressive profile; Temporal description

Indexed keywords

EID: 84946592839     PISSN: 09503293     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.10.006     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Bingham A.F., Birch G.G., de Graaf C., Behan J.M., Perring K.D. Sensory studies with sucrose-maltol mixtures. Chemical Senses 1990, 15:447-456.
2. Clark C.C., Lawless H.T. Limiting response alternatives in time-intensity scaling: An examination of the halo-dumping effect. Chemical Senses 1994, 19:583-594.
3. Cliff M., Heymann H. Development and use of time-intensity methodology for sensory evaluation: A review. Food Research International 1993, 26:375-385.
4. Devezeaux de la vergne M., Van delft M., Van develde F., Van boekel M.A.J.S., Stieger M. Dynamic texture perception and oral processing of semi-solid food gels: Part 1: Comparison between QDA, progressive profiling and TDS. Food Hydrocolloids 2015, 43:207-217.
5. Duizer L.M., Bloom K., Findlay C.J. Dual-attribute time-intensity sensory evaluation: A new method for temporal measurement of sensory perceptions. Food Quality and Preference 1997, 8:261-269.
6. Eilers P.H.C., Dijksterhuis G.B. A parametric model for time-intensity curves. Food Quality and Preference 2004, 15:239-245.
7. Galmarini M.V., Symoneaux R., Visalli M., Zamora M.C., Schlich P. Static vs. dynamic liking in chewing gum: A new approach using a background task and a natural setting. Food Quality and Preference 2015, 40B:381-386.
8. Garrido D., Calviño A., Hough G. A parametric model to average time-intensity taste data. Food Quality and Preference 2001, 12:1-8.
9. Husson F., Josse J., Le S., Mazet J. FactoMineR: Multivariate exploratory data analysis and data mining with R. R Package Version 2013, 1:102-123.
10. Husson F., le Dien S., Pagès J. Which value can be granted to sensory profiles given by consumers? Methodology and results. Food Quality and Preference 2001, 12:291-296.
11. ISO 1999. Guide for the characterization of the evolution of the intensity of a sensory attribute during the time. Sensory analysis. Geneva, Switzerland.
12. Jack F.R., Piggott J.R., Paterson A. Analysis of textural changes in hard cheese during mastication by progressive profiling. Journal of Food Science 1994, 59:539-543.
13. Kuesten C., Bi J., Feng Y. Exploring taffy product consumption experiences using a multi-attribute time-intensity (MATI) method. Food Quality and Preference 2013, 260-273.
14. Labbe D., Gilbert F., Antille N., Martin N. Sensory determinants of refreshing. Food Quality and Preference 2009, 20:100-109.
15. Labbe D., Schlich P., Pineau N., Gilbert F., Martin N. Temporal dominance of sensations and sensory profiling: A comparative study. Food Quality and Preference 2009, 20:216-221.
16. Lawless H.T., Heymann H. Sensory evaluation of food: Principles and practices 1998, International Thomson Publishing Services Ltd.
17. Lawless H., Heymann H. Descriptive analysis. Sensory evaluation of food 1999, Springer, US.
18. Lee W., Pangborn M. Time-intensity: The temporal aspects of sensory perception. Food Technology 1986, 40:78-82.
19. Lenzi S., Kar S., Michaelidou T.A., Harvey J.E., Beam M.A., McCormick D.T., Campomanes-Marin J.P. Chewing gum compositions providing flavor release profiles. EP Patent 2012, 2(403):349.
20. Martin C., Visalli M., Lange C., Schlich P., Issanchou S. Creation of a food taste database using an in-home "taste" profile method. Food Quality and Preference 2014, 36:70-80.
21. McGowan B.A., Lee S.Y. Comparison of methods to analyze time-intensity curves in a corn zein chewing gum study. Food Quality and Preference 2006, 17:296-306.
22. Ovejero-López I., Bro R., Bredie W.L.P. Univariate and multivariate modelling of flavour release in chewing gum using time-intensity: A comparison of data analytical methods. Food Quality and Preference 2005, 16:327-343.
23. Peltier C., Visalli M., Schlich P. Comparison of canonical variate analysis and principal component analysis on 422 descriptive sensory studies. Food Quality and Preference 2015, 40, Part B:326-333.
24. Piggott J.R. Dynamism in flavour science and sensory methodology. Food Research International 2000, 33:191-197.
25. Pineau N., Schlich P., Cordelle S., Mathonnière C., Issanchou S., Imbert A., Köster E. Temporal dominance of sensations: Construction of the TDS curves and comparison with time-intensity. Food Quality and Preference 2009, 20:450-455.
26. Prescott J. Flavour as a psychological construct: Implications for perceiving and measuring the sensory qualities of foods. Food Quality and Preference 1999, 10:349-356.
27. Chewing gums- global strategic business report 2014, Research-and-Markets, Guinness Center, Dublin, Ireland.
28. Saint-Eve A., Déléris I., Feron G., Ibarra D., Guichard E., Souchon I. How trigeminal, taste and aroma perceptions are affected in mint-flavored carbonated beverages. Food Quality and Preference 2010, 21:1026-1033.
29. Saint-Eve A., Déléris I., Panouillé M., Dakowski F., Cordelle S., Schlich P., et al. How texture influences aroma and taste perception over time in candies. Chemosensory Perception 2011, 4:32-41.
30. Song J.H., Knutsen H.A., Broderick K.B., Seielstad D.A. Flavor releasing cores and their use in chewing gum. EP Patent 2010, 2(083):638.
31. Stone H., Sidel J.L. Sensory evaluation practices 2003, Academic Press.
32. Thomas A., Visalli M., Cordelle S., Schlich P. Temporal drivers of liking. Food Quality and Preference 2015, 40, Part B:365-375.
33. van der Klaauw N.J., Frank R.A. Scaling component intensities of complex stimuli: The influence of response alternatives. Environmental International 1996, 22:21-31.
34. 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.
35. Worch T., Lê S., Punter P. How reliable are the consumers? Comparison of sensory profiles from consumers and experts. Food Quality and Preference 2010, 21:309-318.
36. Zellner D., Durlach P. What is refreshing? An investigation of the color and other sensory attributes of refreshing foods and beverages. Appetite 2002, 39:185-186.