A Comparison of Two Methods for Generating Descriptive Attributes with Trained Assessors: Check-All-That-Apply (CATA) vs. Free Choice Profiling (FCP)

Journal of Sensory Studies

Volumn 31, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 163-176

  Lazo, Oxana ^a   Claret, Anna ^a   Guerrero, Luis ^a  

^a IRTA   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FOOD TECHNOLOGY;

DESCRIPTORS; FISH SPECIES; FREE CHOICE PROFILING; MULTI-DIMENSIONAL SPACE; PRODUCT DESCRIPTIONS; PRODUCT LOCATION; SENSORY MODALITY; SENSORY PROFILES;

FISH;

EID: 84960146201     PISSN: 08878250     EISSN: 1745459X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/joss.12202     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Adams, J., Williams, A., Lancaster, B., and Foley, M. 2007. 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 2007, Minneapolis.
2. Ares, G., Dauber, C., Fernández, E., Giménez, A. and Varela P. 2014. Penalty analysis based on CATA questions to identify drivers of liking and directions for product reformulation. Food Qual. Pref. 32, 65-76.
3. Ares, G., Antúnez, L., Bruzzone, F., Vidal, L., Giménez, A., Pineau, B., Beresford, M.K., Jin, D., Paisley, A.G., Chheang, ET AL. 2015. Comparison of sensory product profiles generated by trained assessors and consumers using CATA questions: Four case studies with complex and/or similar samples. Food Qual. Pref. 45, 75-86
4. Bencze, A., Kvåle, A., Mørkøre, T., Rørvik, K.A., Hallbjoørn, S. and Thomassen, S. 1998. Process yield, colour and sensory quality of smoked Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) in relation to raw material characteristics. Food Res. Int. 31, 601-609.
5. Brandt, M.A., Skinner, E.Z. and Coleman J.A., 1963. Texture profile method. J. Food Sci. 28, 404-409.
6. Budiu R. 2014. Memory Recognition and Recall in User Interfaces. Retrieved from http://www.nngroup.com. Accessed on 1 July 2014.
7. Cabeza, R., Kapur, S., Craik, F.I.M., Mcintosh, A.R., Houle, S., and Tulving, E. 1997. Functional neuroanatomy of recall and recognition: A petstudy of episodic memory. J. Cognitive Neurosci. 9, 254-265.
8. Cain, W.S. 1979. To know with the nose: Keys to odor identification. Science 203, 467-470.
9. Cairncross, S.E. and Sjostrom, L.B. 1950. Flavor profiles: A new approach to flavor problems. Food Technol. 4, 308-331.
10. Campo, E., Ballester, J., Langlois, J., Dacremont, C. and Valentin, D. 2010. Comparison of conventional descriptive analysis and a citation frequency-based descriptive method for odor profiling: An application to Burgundy Pinot noir wines. Food Qual. Pref. 21, 44-55.
11. Cardenas A., Sveinsdottir, K., and Martinsdottir, E. 2007. Development of Quality Index Method (QIM) scheme for fresh cod (Gadus morhua) fillets and application in shelf life study. Food Control. 18, 352-358.
12. Cardinal, M., Cornet, J., Donnay-Moreno, C., Gouygou, J.P., Bergé, J.P., Rocha, E., Soares, S., Escórcio, C., Borges, P. and Valente, L.M.P. 2011. Seasonal variation of physical, chemical and sensory characteristics of sea bream (Sparus aurata) reared under intensive conditions in Southern Europe. Food Control. 22, 574-585.
13. Delarue, J. and Sieffermann, JM. 2004. Sensory mapping using flash profile. Comparison with a conventional descriptive method for the evaluation of the flavor of fruit dairy products. Food Qual. Pref. 15, 383-392.
14. Dooley, L., Lee, Y. and Meullenet, JF. 2010. The application of check-all-that-apply (CATA) consumer profiling to preference mapping of vanilla ice cream and its comparison to classical external preference mapping. Food Qual. Pref. 21, 394-40.
15. Farmer, L., Mc Connell, J. and Kilpatrick, D. 2000. Sensory characteristics of farmed and wild Atlantic salmon. Aquaculture 187, 105-125
16. Fichet, B., Piccolo, D., Verde, R. and Vichi, M. 2011. Classification and multivariate analysis for complex data structures studies in classification, data analysis, and knowledge organization. pp 335-342. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
17. Giacalone, D., Bom Frost, M., Bredie, W., Pineau, B., Hunter, D., Paisley, A., Beresford, M. and Jaeger, S. 2015. Situational appropriateness of beer is influenced by product familiarity. Food Qual. Pref. 39, 16-27.
18. Giogios, K., Grigorakis, K. and Kalogeropoulos, N. 2013. Organoleptic and chemical quality of farmed meagre (Argyrosomus regius) as affected by size. Food. Chem. 141, 3153-3159.
19. Gou, P., Guerrero, L. and Romero, A. 1998. The effect of panel selection and training on external preference mapping using a low number of samples. Food Sci. Tech. Int. 4, 85-90.
20. Gower, J.C. 1975. Generalized procrustes analysis. Psychometrika 40, 33-50.
21. Granitto, P.M., Biasioli, F., Endrizzi, I. and Gasperi, F. 2008. Discriminant models based on sensory evaluations: Single assessors versus panel average. Food Qual. Pref. 19, 589-595.
22. Greenacre, M., and Blasius, J. (1994). Correspondence Analysis in the Social Sciences. Academic Press Inc. San Diego CA.
23. Guerrero, L. 1996. Métodos descriptivos de análisis sensorial. II. Perfiles de libre elección real y simulada y perfiles de Consumidores. Alimentación, Equipos Y Tecnología. 15, 163-166.
24. Guerrero L., Romero, A. and Tous, J. 2001. Importance of generalized procrustes analysis in sensory characterization of virgin olive oil. Food Qual. Pref. 12, 515-520.
25. Guerrero, L., Claret, A., Verbeke, W., Enderli, G., Zakowska-Biemans, S., Vanhonacker, F., Issanchou, S., Sajdakowska, M., Signe, B., Scalvedi, L., ET AL. 2010. Perception of traditional food products in six European regions using free word association. Food Qual. Pref. 21, 225-233.
26. Hersleth, M., Næs, T., Guerrero, L., Claret, A., Recchia, AM., Dinnella, C., and Monteleone, E. 2013. Consumer perception of dry-cured ham - across-cultural study in Italy, Norway and Spain. J. Sens. Stud. 28, 450-466.
27. Hernández, M.D, López, M.B., álvarez, A., Ferrandini, E., García García, B. and Garrido, M.D. 2009. Sensory, physical, chemical and microbiological changes in aquacultured meagre (Argyrosomus regius) fillets during ice storage. Food Chem. 114, 237-245.
28. ISO. ISO Standard 8589:2007 Sensory analysis - General guidance for the design of test rooms, 2007.
29. Jack, F. and Piggott, JR. 1991. Free choice profiling in consumer research. Food Qual Pref. 3, 129-134.
30. Johnson, J. 2010. Designing with the Mind in Mind Simple Guide to Understanding User Interface Design Rules, Chap 9, pp. 109-117, 2nd Ed, Elsevier, Waltham, USA.
31. Kim, I., Kim, M., VAN DE Velden, M. and Lee, H. 2013. Psychological positioning of bottled tea products: A comparison between two kansei profiling techniques. Food Sci. Biotechnol. 22, 257-268.
32. Krishnan, H.S. 1999. Memory measures for pretesting advertisements: An integrative conceptual framework and a diagnostic template. J Consum. Psychol. 8, 1-37.
33. Lawless, H.T. 1999. Descriptive analysis of complex odors: reality, model or illusion? Food Qual. Pref. 10, 325-332.
34. Lawless, H.T. and Heymann, H. 2010. Sensory Evaluation of Food, Chap. 10, pp. 240-246, 2nd Ed., Springer, New York, NY.
35. Lea, P., Næs., T. and Rodbotten, M. 2001. Analysis of Variance for Sensory Data. Wiley, New York.
36. Losó, V., Gere, A. Györey, A., Kókai, Z. and Sipos, L. 2012. Comparison of the performance of a trained and an untrained sensory panel on sweetcorn varieties with the PanelCheck software. Applied Studies in Agribusiness and Commerce 1-2, 77-83.
37. Macfie, H., Bratchell, N., Greenhoff, K. and Vallis, L.V. 1989. Designs to balance the effect of order of presentation and first-order carry-over effects in hall tests. J. Sens Stud. 4, 129-148.
38. Martens, H. and Martens, M. 2001. Multivariate Analysis of Quality: An Introduction. Wiley, New York.
39. Meilgaard, M.C., Civille, G.V. and Carr, B.T. (1991). Sensory Evaluation Techniques, 2nd Ed., CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
40. Meullenet, J.F., Xiong, R. and Findlay, C. 2008a. Multivariate and Probabilistic Analyses of Sensory Science Problems. p. 45. IFT press Blackwell publishing, Ames, Iowa.
41. Meullenet, J. F., Lee, Y., and Dooley, L. 2008b. The application of check-all-that-apply consumer profiling to preference mapping of vanilla ice cream and its comparison to classical external preference mapping. The 9th Sensometric Meeting. The Sensometrics Society, St. Catherines, Canada.
42. Montouto, M., Fernández F., Vázquez, M.L. and Romero, M.A. 2002. Development of a sensory profile for the specific denomination "Galician potato." Food Qual. Pref. 13, 99-106.
43. Moskowitz, H., Muñoz, A. and Gacula, M. 2003. Viewpoints and Controversies in Sensory Science and Consumer Product Testing. Chapter 18, pp 313. Food and Nutrition Press Inc. Connecticut, USA.
44. Murray, J.M., Delahunty C.M., and Baxter, I.A. 2001.Descriptive sensory analysis: Past, present and future. Food Res. Int. 34, 461-471.
45. Nevid, J. Psychology: Concepts and Applications. 2012. 4th Ed., Chapter 6, p. 236, Cengage Learning, Wadsworth, USA.
46. Olsson, G., Olsen, R., Carlehöga, M. and Ofstad, R. 2003. Seasonal variations in chemical and sensory characteristics of farmed and wild Atlantic halibut (Hippoglossus hippoglossus). Aquaculture 217, 191-205
47. O'Mahony, M. 1986. Sensory Evaluation of Food: Statistical Methods and Procedures. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York.
48. Orban, F., Sinesio, F. and Paoletti, F. 1997. The functional properties of the proteins, texture and the sensory characteristics of frozen sea bream fillets (Sparus aurata) from different farming systems. LWT Food Sci. Tech. 30, 214-217.
49. Perrin, L. and Pagès, J. 2009. Construction of a product space from the ultra-flash profiling method: Application to 10 red wines from the Loire Valley. J. Sens. Stud. 24, 372-395.
50. Piggott, J.R. and Watson, M.P. 1992. A comparison of free-choice profiling and the Repertory Grid method in the flavor profiling of cider. J. Sens Stud. 7, 133-145.
51. Reinbach, H., Giacalone, D., Machado, L., Bredie, W. and Bom, M. 2014. Comparison of three sensory profiling methods based on consumer USA perception: CATA, CATA with intensity and Napping. Food Qual. Pref. 32, 160-166.
52. Rødbotten, M., Lea, P. and Ueland, O. 2009. Quality of raw salmon fillet as a predictor of cooked salmon quality. Food Qual. Pref. 20, 13-23.
53. Sieffermann, J.M. 2000. Le profil flash - Un outil rapide et innovant d'évaluation sensorielle descriptive. In AGORAL 2000, XIIèmes rencontres "L'innovation: de l'idée au success." pp. 335-340, Montpellier, France.
54. Stampanoni, C. 1994. The use of standardized flavor languages and quantitative flavor profiling techniques for flavored dairy products J. Sens. Stud. 9, 383-400.
55. Stampanoni, C., Piccinali, P. and Sigrist, S. 1996. The influence of fat, sugar and non-fat milk solids on selected taste, flavor and texture parameters of a vanilla ice-cream. Food QualPref, 7, 69-79.
56. Stejskal, V., Vejsada, P., Cepak, M., špička, J., Vacha, F., Kouril, J. and Policar, T. 2011. Sensory and textural attributes and fatty acid profiles of fillets of extensively and intensively farmed Eurasian perch (Perca fluviatilis L.) Food Chem. 129, 1054-1059.
57. Stolzenbach, S., Bredie, W. and Byrne, D. 2013. Consumer concepts in new product development of local foods: Traditional versus novel honeys. Food Res. Int. 52, 144-152
58. Stone, H., Sidel, J., Oliver, S., Woosley, A. and Singleton, R. C. 1974. Sensory evaluation by descriptive analysis. Food Tech. 28, 24-34.
59. Stone, H., Bleibaum, R. and Thomas, H. 2012. Sensory Evaluation Practices, 4th Ed., Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
60. Sveinsdottir, K., Martinsdóttir, E., Green-Petersen, D., Hyldig, G., Schelvis, R. and Delahunty, C. 2009. Sensory characteristics of different cod products related to consumer preferences and attitudes. Food Qual. Pref. 20, 120-132.
61. Sveinsdottir, K., Martinsdottir, E., Thorsdottir, F., Schelvis-Smit, A.A.M., Kole, A. and Thorsdottir, I. 2010. Evaluation of farmed cod products by a trained sensory panel and consumers in different test settings. J Sens. Stud. 25, 280-293.
62. Tuorila, H., Meiselman, H., Cardello, A. and Lesher, L. 1998. Effect of expectations and the definition of product category on the acceptance of unfamiliar foods Food Qual. Pref. 9, 421-430.
63. Valentin, D., Chollet, S., Lelièvre, M. and Abdi, H. 2012. Quick and dirty but still pretty good: A review of new descriptive methods in food science. Int J Food Sci. Tech. 47, 1563-1578.
64. Varela, P. and Ares, G. 2012. Sensory profiling, the blurred line between sensory and consumer science. A review of novel methods for product characterization. Food Res. Int. 48, 893-908.
65. Veinand, B., Godefroy, C., Adam, C. and Delarue, J. 2011. Highlight of important product characteristics for consumers. Highlight of important product characteristics for consumers. Comparison of three sensory descriptive methods performed by consumers. Food Qual. Pref. 22, 474-485.
66. Veiseth-Kent, E., Hildrum, K., Ofstad, R., Rørå, M., Lea, P. and Rødbotten, M. 2010. The effect of postmortem processing treatments on quality attributes of raw Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) measured by sensory and instrumental methods. Food Chem. 121, 275-281.
67. Walker, G. Sensory methods for food analysis. University of Teeside. Retrieved from http://sst-web.tees.ac.uk/ (accessed December 6, 2004).
68. Williams, A.A. and Langron, S.P. 1984. The use of Free-choice Profiling for the Evaluation of Commercial Ports. J. Sci. Food Agric. 35, 558-568.