Pivot profile method: What is the influence of the pivot and product space?

Food Quality and Preference

Volumn 61, Issue , 2017, Pages 6-14

  Lelièvre Desmas, Maud ^a   Valentin, Dominique ^b   Chollet, Sylvie ^a  

^a Cité scientifique   (France)

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

Author keywords

Descriptive method; Free description, beer; Pivot profile; Reference

Indexed keywords

EID: 85019157112     PISSN: 09503293     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2017.05.002     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Abdi, H., Valentin, D., O'Toole, A.J., & Edelman, B. (2005). DISTATIS: The analysis of multiple distance matrices (pp. 42–47). Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society: International Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. San Diego, CA, USA.
2. Abdi, H., Valentin, D., Chollet, S., Chrea, C., Analyzing assessors and products in sorting tasks: DISTATIS, theory and application. Food Quality and Preference 18 (2007), 627–640.
3. Antúnez, L., Vidal, L., de Salamando, L., Giménez, A., Ares, G., Comparison of consumer-based methodologies for sensory characterization: Case study with four sample sets of powered drinks. Food Quality and Preference 56 (2017), 149–163.
4. Ares, G., Antúnez, L., Bruzzone, F., Vidal, L., Pineau, B., Beresford, M.K., 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 45 (2015), 75–86.
5. Ares, G., Antúnez, L., Oliveira, D., Alcaire, F., Berget, I., Næs, T., et al. Pole selection in Polarized Sensory Positioning: Insights from the cognitive aspects behind the task. Food Quality and Preference 46 (2015), 48–57.
6. Bárcenas, P., Pérez Elortondo, F.J., Albisu, M., Projective mapping in sensory analysis of ewes milk cheeses: A study on consumers and trained panel performance. Food Research International 37 (2004), 723–729.
7. Blancher, G., Clavier, B., Egoroff, C., Duineveld, K., Parcon, J., A method to investigate the stability of a sorting map. Food Quality and Preference 23 (2012), 36–43.
8. Cadoret, M., Husson, F., Construction and evaluation of confidence ellipses applied at sensory data. Food Quality and Preference 28 (2013), 106–115.
9. Chollet, S., Valentin, D., & Abdi, H. (2014). Free sorting task. In P. Varela & Arès, G. (Eds.), Novel techniques in sensory characterization and consume profiling (pp. 207–227). Boca Raton: CRC Press.
10. Dairou, V., Sieffermann, J.-M., A comparison of 14 jams characterized by conventional profile and a quick original method, the Flash Profile. Journal of Food Science 67:2 (2002), 826–834.
11. De Salamando, L., Antúnez, L., Torres-Moreno, M., Giménez, A., Ares, G., Reliability of polarized projective mapping with consumers. Journal of Sensory Studies 30 (2015), 280–294.
12. Dehlholm, C. (2014). Projective mapping and Napping. In P. Varela & Arès, G. (Eds.), Novel techniques in sensory characterization and consume profiling (pp. 229–253). Boca Raton: CRC Press.
13. Dehlholm, C., Brockhoff, P.B., Bredie, L.P., Confidence ellipses: A variation based on parametric bootstrapping applicable on Multiple Factor Analysis results for rapid graphical evaluation. Food Quality and Preference 26 (2012), 278–280.
14. Delarue, J. (2014). Flash Profile. In P. Varela & Arès, G. (Eds.), Novel techniques in sensory characterization and consume profiling (pp. 175–205). Boca Raton: CRC Press.
15. Delarue, J., Sieffermann, J.-M., Sensory mapping using Flash profile. Comparison with a conventional descriptive method fort the evaluation of the flavor of fruit dairy products. Food Quality and Preference 15 (2004), 383–392.
16. Fonseca, F.G.A., Esmerino, E.A., Tavares Filho, E.R., Ferraz, J.P., da Cruz, A.G., Bolini, H.M.A., Novel and successful free comments method for sensory characterization of chocolate ice cream: A comparative study between pivot profile and comment analysis. Journal of Diary Science 99 (2016), 3408–3420.
17. Hopfer, H., Heymann, H., A summary of projective mapping observations – The effect of replicates and shape, and individual performance measurements. Food Quality and Preference 28 (2013), 164–181.
18. Kostov, B., Bécue-Bertaut, M., Husson, F., An original methodology for the analysis and interpretation of word-count based methods: Multiple factor analysis for contingency tables complemented by consensual words. Food Quality and Preference 32 (2014), 35–40.
19. Lebart, L., Piron, M., Morineau, A., Statistique exploratoire multidimensionnelle. Visualisation et inférence en fouille de données. 2006, Dunod, Paris.
20. Louw, L., Oelofse, S., Næs, T., Lambretchts, M., van Rensburg, P., Nieuwoudt, H., Trained sensory panelists’ response to product alcohol content in the projective mapping task: Observations on alcohol content, products complexity and prior knowledge. Food Quality and Preference 34 (2014), 37–44.
21. Nestrud, M.A., Lawless, H.T., Recovery of subsampled dimensions and configurations derived from napping data by MFA and MDS. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 73 (2011), 1266–1278.
22. Patris, B., Gufoni, V., Chollet, S. & Valentin, D. (2007). Impact of training on strategies to realize a beer sorting task: behavioral and verbal assessments (pp. 17–29). In D. Valentin, D.Z. Nguyen & L. Pelletier (Eds.) New trends in Sensory Evaluation of Food and Non-Food Products. Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam: Vietnam National University-Ho chi Minh City Publishing House.
23. Risvik, E., McEwan, J.A., Redbottena, M., Evaluation of sensory profiling and projective mapping. Food Quality and Preference 8 (1997), 63–71.
24. Teillet, E. (2014). Polarized Sensory Positioning Methodologies. In P. Varela & Arès, G. (Eds.), Novel techniques in sensory characterization and consume profiling (pp. 255–270). Boca Raton: CRC Press.
25. Teillet, E., Schlich, P., Urbano, C., COrdelle, S., Guichard, E., Sensory methodologies and the taste of water. Food Quality and Preference 21:8 (2010), 967–976.
26. Thuillier, B., Valentin, D., Marchal, R., Dacremont, C., Pivot profile: A new descriptive method based on free description. Food Quality and Preference 42 (2015), 66–77.
27. Valentin, D., Chollet, S., Lelièvre, M., Abdi, H., Quick and dirty but still pretty good: a review of new descriptive methods in food science. International Journal of Food Science and Technology 47:8 (2012), 1563–1578.
28. 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 48 (2012), 893–908.
29. Varela, P., Svartebekk Myhrer, K., Naes, T., & Hersleth, M. (2014). The best of both worlds: rapidity and enhanced discrimination with a trained panel. Exploration of global and partial PSP with a descriptive step. In 6th European Conference on Sensory and Consumer Research, 7–10 September 2014, Copenhagen, Denmark.