On the analysis of Rate-All-That-Apply (RATA) data

Food Quality and Preference

Volumn 49, Issue , 2016, Pages 1-10

  Meyners, Michael ^a   Jaeger, Sara R ^b   Ares, Gastón ^c  

^a PROCTER AND GAMBLE COMPANY   (United States)

^b THE NEW ZEALAND INSTITUTE FOR PLANT AND FOOD RESEARCH LIMITED   (New Zealand)

^c UNIVERSIDAD DE LA REPÚBLICA   (Uruguay)

Author keywords

ANOVA; CA; Check All That Apply (CATA); PCA; Randomization test; Rate All That Apply (RATA)

Indexed keywords

EID: 84988407779     PISSN: 09503293     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.11.003     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Ares G., Antúnez L., Bruzzone F., Vidal L., Giménez A., Pineau B., et al. Comparison of sensory product profiles generated by trained assessors and consumers using CATA questions: Four case studies with complex and/or similar samples. Food Quality and Preference 2015, 45:75-86.
2. Ares G., Bruzzone F., Vidal L., Cadena R.S., Giménez A., Pineau B., et al. Evaluation of a rating-based variant of Check-All-That-Apply questions: Rate-All-That-Apply (RATA). Food Quality and Preference 2014, 36:87-95.
3. 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 Quality and Preference 2014, 32:210-220.
4. Ares G., Jaeger S.R. Check-All-That-Apply questions: Influence of attribute order on sensory product characterization. Food Quality and Preference 2013, 28:141-153.
5. Ares G., Jaeger S.R. Check-All-That-Apply (CATA) questions with consumers in practice. Experimental considerations and impact on outcome. Rapid sensory profiling techniques and related methods 2015, 227-245. Woodhead Publishing, Sawston, Cambridge. J. Delarue, J.B. Lawlor, M. Rogeaux (Eds.).
6. Beaton D., Fatt C.R.C., Abdi H. An ExPosition of multivariate analysis with the singular value decomposition in R. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 2014, 72:176-189.
7. Brown M.B., Forsythe A.B. Robust tests for equality of variances. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1974, 69:364-367.
8. Brunner E., Dette H., Munk A. Box-type approximations in nonparametric factorial designs. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1997, 92:1494-1502.
9. Bruzzone F., Vidal F., Antúnez L., Giménez A., Deliza R., Ares G. Comparison of intensity scales and CATA questions in new product development: Sensory characterisation and directions for product reformulation of milk desserts. Food Quality and Preference 2015, 44:183-193.
10. David H.A. The beginnings of randomization tests. The American Statistician 2008, 62:70-72.
11. Dravnieks A. Odor quality: Semantically generated multidimensional profiles are stable. Science 1982, 218:799-801.
12. Durbin J. Incomplete blocks in ranking experiments. British Journal of Statistical Psychology 1951, 4:85-90.
13. Eden T., Yates F. On the validity of Fisher's z test when applied to an actual example of non-normal data. The Journal of Agricultural Science 1933, 23:6-17.
14. Edgington E., Onghena P. Randomization tests 2007, Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL. 4th ed.
15. Fisher R.A. The design of experiments 1935, Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh.
16. Friedman M. The use of ranks to avoid the assumption of normality implicit in the analysis of variance. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1937, 32:675-701.
17. Friedman M. A correction: The use of ranks to avoid the assumption of normality implicit in the analysis of variance. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1939, 34:109.
18. Hothorn T., Bretz F., Westfall P. Simultaneous inference in general parametric models. Biometrical Journal 2008, 50:346-363.
19. Husson, F., Josse, J., Lê, S., & Mazet, J. (2015). FactoMineR: Multivariate exploratory data analysis and data mining. R package version 1.29. <>. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=FactoMineR.
20. Jaeger S.R., Ares G. RATA questions are not likely to bias hedonic scores. Food Quality and Preference 2015, 44:157-161.
21. Jaeger S.R., Chheang S.L., Jin D., Bava C.M., Gimenez A., Vidal L., et al. Check-All-That-Apply (CATA) responses elicited by consumers: Within-assessor reproducibility and stability of sensory product characterizations. Food Quality and Preference 2013, 30:56-67.
22. Kruskal W.H., Wallis W.A. Use of ranks in one-criterion variance analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1952, 47:583-621.
23. Kunert, J., Meyners, M., & Erdbrügge, M. (2002). On the applicability of ANOVA for the analysis of sensory data. In C. Duby & J.P. Cassar (Eds.), Actes des 7èmesJournées Européennes Agro-Industrie et Méthodes Statistiques (pp. 129-134). Lille, January 16-18, 2002.
24. Lehmann E.L. Nonparametrics: Statistical methods based on ranks 1975, Holden Day, San Francisco, CA.
25. Lemon J. Plotrix: A package in the red light district of R. R-News 2006, 6(4):8-12.
26. Levene H. Robust tests for equality of variances. Contributions to probability and statistics: Essays in honor of Harold Hotelling 1960, 278-292. Stanford University Press. I. Olkin, H. Hotelling (Eds.).
27. Lim J. Hedonic scaling: A review of methods and theory. Food Quality and Preference 2011, 22:733-747.
28. Mann H.B., Whitney D.R. On a test of whether one of two random variables is stochastically larger than the other. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 1947, 18:50-60.
29. Meyners M., Castura J.C., Carr B.T. Existing and new approaches for the analysis of CATA data. Food Quality and Preference 2013, 30:309-319.
30. Meyners M., Castura J.C. Check-all-that apply questions. Novel techniques in sensory characterization and consumer profiling 2014, 271-305. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. P. Varela, G. Ares (Eds.).
31. Meyners M., Pineau N. Statistical inference for temporal dominance of sensations data using randomization tests. Food Quality and Preference 2010, 21(7):805-814.
32. O'Brien R.G. A general ANOVA method for robust test of additive models for variance. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1979, 74:877-880.
33. O'Brien R.G. A simple test for variance effects in experimental designs. Psychological Bulletin 1981, 89:570-574.
34. Pitman E.J.G. Significance tests which might be applied to samples from any populations. Supplement to the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 1937, 4:119-130.
35. Pitman E.J.G. Significance tests which might be applied to samples from any populations. II The correlation coefficient test. Supplement to the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 1937, 4:225-232.
36. Pitman E.J.G. Significance tests which might be applied to samples from any populations. III The analysis of variance test. Biometrika 1938, 29:322-335.
37. R Core Team R: A language and environment for statistical computing 2015, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, .
38. Reinbach H.C., Giacalone D., Ribeiro L.M., Bredie W.L.B., Frøst M.B. Comparison of three sensory profiling methods based on consumer perception: CATA, CATA with intensity and Napping. Food Quality and Preference 2014, 32:160-166.
39. Robert P., Escoufier Y. A unifying tool for linear multivariate statistical methods: The RV coefficient. Applied Statistics 1976, 25:257-265.
40. Sawyer F.M., Cardello A.V., Prell P.A. Consumer evaluation of the sensory properties of fish. Journal of Sensory Studies 1988, 53:12-18.
41. Schutz H.G., Cardello A.V. A labeled affective magnitude (LAM) scale for assessing food liking/disliking. Journal of Sensory Studies 2001, 16:117-159.
42. Shapiro S.S., Wilk M.B. An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika 1965, 52:591-611.
43. Sudman S., Bradburn N.M. Asking questions 1992, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
44. Vidal L., Tárrega A., Antúnez L., Ares G., Jaeger S.R. Comparison of Correspondence Analysis based on Hellinger and chi-square distances to obtain sensory spaces from Check-All-That-Apply (CATA) questions. Food Quality and Preference 2015, 43:106-112.
45. Wilcoxon F. Individual comparisons by ranking methods. Biometrics Bulletin 1945, 1:80-83.
46. Williams E.J. Experimental designs balanced for the estimation of residual effects of treatments. Australian Journal of Scientific Research, Series A 1949, 2:149-168.