I
Food Sensory and Evaluation
Why Consumers Choose Certain Foods & Beverages
Nutrition 205
Parisa Mohammad
March 25, 2013
1
Abstract
Sensory Evaluations are used by obtaining data from human senses such as taste, smell, sight, touch and hearing. Although people's tastes and preferences are considered subjective, the data received from sensory evaluations can be used objectively to increase product acceptance.
Participants were for!y three untrained students found at the San Diego State University majoring in Foods and Nutrition. The study was performed in the Foods and Nutrition Laboratory located
at San Diego State University. A series oftests were performed to learn about sensory evaluations. These tests included Color Association/Perception of Beverage. The samples shown were light yellow, dark yellow, chartreuse, dark chartreus and emerald green. The study was based only on sight without any students being able to touch, smell or taste any of the liquids. Participants were asked a series of questions regarding the perceived colors of the beverages. Then a series of Differential tests were given using either samples of apple juice with varying
degrees of sourness or vanilla wafer cookies. These tests included a paired comparison test, triangle test, scoring test, ranking test and duo trio test. The last series of tests given were descriptive tests using samples of goldfish crackers, almonds, raisins and marshmallows. Participants were asked to choose one word to describe each samples appearance, flavor, texture, aroma, consistency and mouth feel. The results of the sensory evaluations showed that ~ participants prefer lightly colored beverages as opposed to dark vibrant colors which are more ~ associated with sweetness and artificiality. The majority of participants were able to taste the ~ difference of varying amounts of citric acid added to apple juice. Overall students were able to a...._rDr;.. use subjective opinions to form objective test results. ~ • 'Q
C1coci s l
2
Sensory Evaluations are used by obtaining data from human senses such as taste, smell, ?, ~(!) ~" "ZP l ~
sight, touch and hearing. Although people's tastes and preferences are considered subjective, the
data received from sensory evaluations can be used objectively to increase sales of a product.
Sensory Evaluation is an essential tool for thousands of food companies to increase their profits
and ensure product acceptance. Sensory evaluations can be divided into three categories;
effective, affective and perception.
Effective testing deals with objective questions such as, "Which product differs from the
standard?" An example of effective testing is used in The Duo Trio test where participants are
given a standard sample of food and two unknown samples, one of which is the same type of
sample as the standard and one is somehow different. Participants are then asked to choose
which unknown sample is different from the standard sample. Discrimination tests such as
triangle, paired comparison and ranking are all considered effective tests. (f3YOW01 ZO\ 0
An example of an effe~tive ranking test can be found in Aleson-Carbonell and others
study, Quality characteristics of a non-fermented dry-cured sausage formulated with lemon
albedo. This study was used to determine acceptance of a reduced fat sausage product using
varying amounts and varieties of lemon albedo. Thirty untrained panelists consumed six different
samples of sausage made with varying amounts of lemon albedo. Half of them were made with
raw albedo and half were made with cooked albedo. They were ranked using the original sausage
as the control. The categories they were ranked for were color intensity, flavor intensity, sour
taste, saltiness, fattiness, hardness, crumbliness, juiciness and grittiness. The results were that
saltiness and fattiness were not affected by the addition of albedo. Juiciness perception decreased
with the use of albedo as did flavor intensity. The overall conclusion was that higher amounts of
albedo resulted in products with lower sensory qualit<" (Aleson-Carbonell, 2004),
\ W ha:t-~ HJ IS f'V\Q_QJ) ~
3
Affective testing deals more with personal preference and can be found in test that use
descriptive terms and any test using a hedonic scale. A study published by Mark Biener in 2010
focused on the acceptance of rice fortified with iron and used an affective test. "The Acceptance
Test evaluated general rice appearance, color, aroma and taste by 43 non-trained judges, using a
7-point hedonic scale with extremes ranging from "really disliked" and "really liked.""(Biener,
2010) They also used the Duo Trio test which is an example of effective testing in which they
found that, "there were no significant differences between .the analyzed samples of conventional """
rice and UR rice." Using both effective and affective tests Biener found that overall the iron did h
not alter the sensory characteristics of the final product, and the iron-fortified rice was well ~-1, accepted.-ihS '<h_QO.A''~ +l..._oJ-, . . \
The third sensory evaluation test is called perception. More often than not consumers are
unable to taste products at the grocery store before they purchase them so they must rely on other
indicators such as color, packaging and size to form a decision as whether or not to purchase that
item. A study called The Influence of Color and Label Information on Flavor Perception states,
"Previous research that has manipulated either the color of, or labeling information associated
with, foods and beverages has shown that each of these factors can si gnifican tl y influence----~ !J YQ
perceptual and preferential responses to them." In this study 30 participants rated 12 chocolate $e._
M&M candies of varying colors. They were told that these chocolates were a new product and
were asked to rate the intensity of their flavor. Participants rated brown colored M&M' s as being
significantly chocolatier than the green M&M's. 'rm:s=incrgases1Fiai valic~the saying, :::yfrif
~qyee$s:;.r "These results illustrate that flavor perception involves the combining of
l ~~~
4
chemosensory i'nformation with both visual (color) information and cognitive, expectancy-based
(label) inputs." (Shankar, 2009)
Not only are sensory evaluation tests used to choose the best product for the consumer
but they can also be used to ensure the participants in the study have high discrimination ability
for taste. In a study called Descriptive Profile of Peach Nectar Sweetened with Sucrose and
Different Sweeteners, panelists were first given a triangle test using peach nectar samples with a
significant difference of 0.1% sweetener. "The sensory panel was selected by the discrimination
ability of the subjects, reproducibility of judgments and agreement with the other members of the
group" (Cardoso, 2008) this was to ensure that participants were able to distinguish tastes well
enough to be a valid participan.t.
Methods
Panelists
The panelists were all untrained San Diego State University Students majoring in Foods
and Nutrition and congruently enrolled in Nutrition 205 during the spring 2013 semester. There
were forty three students participating with a mean age of 22.2. To better analyze the results of
the study some basic information was gathered from the participants. The age range was 19 to
40+. 91 % were undergraduate students while 9% were graduate students. Of the 43 participants
only 14% were males with the other 84% being females. Only 1 (2.3%) of the 43 participants
was a smoker. 18% of the participants were married while 82% were single. Six of the 43
participants had food allergies which consisted of gluten, lactase, nuts and salmon.
/ Environment
The study was performed in the Foods and Nutrition Laboratory located at San Diego
State University. The doors were shut and participants were asked not to leave during the study.
Participants were seated in rows at individual desks. There were no dividers between
participants. The lighting was adequate and it was a comfortable temperature in the room. The
noise level during the study was fairly quiet as students were asked not to speak to one another.
The lab instructor and assistant were the ones giving directions while the first participant from
each row was passing out the food samples. In between different tests the instructors were
walking around refilling Di water for students to drink in between samples to cleanse their
5
6
palate. The study was divided into two sections with one beginning at nine a.m. and the other
beginning at one p.m.
Color Association/Perception of Beverage
) The first test conducted was the color association. It consisted of showing participants
five different colors of liquid inside clear glass beakers. The samples shown were light yellow,
dark yellow, chartreuse, dark chartreus and emerald green using approximately 500 ml of each.
The study was based only on sight without any students being able to touch, smell or taste any of
the liquids. Participants were asked to rank the beverages using a 5-point scale with five being
the most and one being the least. The categories they were asked to rank were perceived
sweetness, sourness, artificiality, most natural, beverage they would prefer to drink and which
beverage they would least prefer to drink. Participants were then asked which temperature they
would prefer to drink each colored beverage using hot, warm tepid or cold as options. Then
participants were asked whether or not they would actually drink each color of beverage. The
results were written down by students and then tallied by the Professor and Lab Assistant using
show of hands. At the end of the study the students were given the names of the beverages. Light
yellow was Mountain Dairy lemonade, dark yellow was Xtremo Citrico Vibrante Gatorade,
chartreuse was 350 ml of Lemon lime Gatorade plus 150 ml of Green Squall Powerade, dark
chartreuse was Green Squal Powerade and emerald green was Watermelon Gatorade.
Differential Tests v The next few study performed are categorized under Differential Tests and involves
comparison of two or more similar samples. All tests except for duo trio used apple juice as the
sample. Less thim 14 ounce of juice was given for each sample and was served in one ounce
white cups. For the Duo Trio test the samples used were vanilla wafers. Participants were also
given a Styrofoam cup of Di water in which they were instructed to drink between samples as a
palate cleanser.
The first test was the paired comparison where participants were given two samples of
apple juice labeled 635Tl and 573T2. They were then asked to determine which one was the
sourest. Sample 635Tl was pure apple juice while sample 573T2 was apple juice with 1% citric
acid added.
~he triang~t was given using three samples of apple juice labeled 777C 1, 542E2 and
112H9. Two of the samples were the same and one was different. Participants were asked to
decipher which sample was different. Samples 777C1 and 542E2 were both 100% apple juice
while sample 112H9 had 1% citric acid added.
The scoring test was given using three samples of apple juice. The first sample labeled
was the reference sample which was given a four on a scale of one to seven for sourness, one
being the sourest and seven being the least sour. The other two samples labeled 420M and S723
were unknown and participants were asked to place them on the same scale of one to seven
based on how sour they tasted. The reference sample had 2.5% citric acid. The sample labeled
420M had 1% citric acid while sample S727 had 5% citric acid.
For the ~participants were given five samples of apple juice labeled 555 D7,
695 F8, 543 K8, 495 P2 and 192 L3. Participants were asked to rank the samples on a scale of
one to five using one as the sourest and five as the least sour. Then participants were asked to
rank the samples in order of preference on a scale of one to five usihg one as the most preferred
7
8
and five as the least preferred. The samples had different dilutions of apple juice to citric acid.
Sample 555 D7 was 10% citric acid, 192 L3 was 5% citric acid, 695 F8 was 2.5% citric acid, 543
K8 was 1% citric acid and 495 P2 had 0% citric acid.
The Duo Trio test was conducted using samples of vanilla wafers. The first sample given - -contained one cookie placed in a one ounce container which was set as the standard and was
labeled 8175. Then two more cookies were given each in the same containers with the labels
6104 and 1108. Participants were asked to identify which cookie was different from the standard
and why. The options that were given for why was dryness, crunchiness or less vanilla flavor.
The standard and sample 1108 were both Nabisco Nilla Wafers while sample 6104 was Smart
and Final 's generic/brand First Street Vanilla Wafers.
Descriptive Test~
In the Descriptive test panelist were to evaluate four different foods using descriptive
words. The foods chosen were marshmallows, almonds, goldfish crackers and raisins. The
samples were served in one ounce white disposable cups with two to four pieces of each food per
container. Samples were to be evaluated based on different categories such as appearance, flavor,
texture, aroma, consistency and mouth feel. There were predetermined descriptive words
available for each category with approximately four to eleven different options for panelists to
choose.
Statistical Analysis J The professor and lab assistants counted the results by a show of hands for the beverage
color test, scoring test, ranking test and descriptive test. The results for the paired comparison,
triangle and duo trio tests were written down by each participant and then turned into the lab
9
assistant who then tallied the results. The results were put into an excel spreadsheet for better
assessment. ~() rt<d OJ ~
Results
Color Association/Perception of Beverage
All43 panelists participated in the color association/perception of beverage study. The
Results for the sweetness test can be found in figure 1. The~ajority of panelists chose dark (z )~ J.
yellow (31%) and emerald green (28%) as the colors that looked the sweetest. Chartreuse (9%)
and light yellow( 11%) were chosen the least.
Figure 1- Results of perceived sweetness of a beverage judged by color.
Perceived Sweetness
Emerald Green 28%
Dark Chartreuse 21%
-------Light Yellow
------ 11%
Dark Yellow 31%
9%
Light Yellow
Dark Yellow
• Chartreuse
• Dark Chartreuse
• Emerald Green
The results of the perceived sourness of beverage colors can be found in Figure 2. The
Majority of participants perceived Light Yellow (58%) as the sourest of all colors. 18% chose
dark yellow while 12% chose dark chartreuse. The least chosen were Chartreuse (7%) and
emerald green (5% ).
10
Figure 2- Results of perceived sourness of a beverage judged by color.
Perceived Sourness 5% Light Yellow
Dark Yellow
• Chartreuse
11
• Dark Chartreuse
• Emerald Green
The results of perceived artificiality can be found in figure 3. The majority of panelists at
79% chose Emerald Green as the most artificial colored beverage. 14% chose dark chartreuse
and 5% chose chartreuse. Only 2% chose dark yellow and 0 participants chose light yellow as
most artificial.
Figure 3- Results of perceived most artificial beverage judged by color.
Perceived ArtificiaUty o%\2% Light Yellow
Dark Yellow
• Chartreuse
• Dark Chartreuse
• Emerald Green
The results of the most perceived natural beverage were very high for light yellow with
91 % of participant's votes. Only 7% of participants chose Dark Yellow while only 2% chose
chartreuse. None of the participants chose dark chartreuse or emerald green as the most natural
looking beverage.
igure 4- Results of perceived most natural beverage judged by color.
Most Natural
Light Yellow
Dark Yellow
• Chartreuse
• Dark Chartreuse
• Emerald Green
12
When asked which beverage the participants would most prefer to drink the majority
(63%) chose light yellow. The next most popular choice was dark yellow with 21 % of votes .
Chartreuse and dark chartreuse each got 7% of the votes while emerald green was only the most
preferred by 2%.
Figure 5- Results of participant's most preferred colored beverage in percentages.
Most Preferred Beverage Light Yellow
Dark Yellow
• Chartreuse
• Dark Chartreuse
• Emerald Green
The least preferred beverage results can be seen in figure 6. The majority of panelists
(67%) chose emerald green as their least preferred beverage followed by 12% choosing dark
yellow. 9% of participants chose dark yellow and 7% chose dark chartreuse. Only 5% of
participants chose light yellow as their least preferred beverage.
Figure 6- Results of participant's least preferred colored beverage in percentages.
Least Preferred Beverage
Light Yellow
Dark Yellow
• Chartreuse
• Dark Chartreuse
• Emerald Green
13
Participants were then asked which temperature they would choose to drink the different
colored beverages at. The majority of participants would chose to drink the beverages cold with
percentages varying from 88%-98%. For the temperatures of tepid, warm and hot the percentage
of participants varied from 0%-19%. The results of this study can be seen in full detail in Figure
6.
Light yellow
Dark Yellow
Chartreuse
Cold
98%
93%
88%
Tepid
5.00%
12%
19%
Warm
5.00%
0%
5%
Hot
2.00%
7%
0%
When asked whether or not participants would drink a beverage of light yellow color the
majority (86%) said yes while only 14% said no. The amount of participants willing to drink the
beverages declined as the colors became darker. 53% of participants would drink dark yellow
and 49% would drink chartreuse. 43% would drink dark chartreuse while only 26% would drink
the emerald green beverage. Full results can be seen in figure 7 below.
14
Figure 7- Percentage of participants who would drink the different colored liquids.
120%
100%
80%
60%
40% Yes
20% 26%
0%
Light Yellow Dark Yellow Chartreuse Dark Emerald Green J Chartreuse
--
Paired Comparison
All 43 participants chose sample 573T2 which contained 1% citric acid as the sourest
when compared to sample 635T 1 which had no citric acid added.
Triangle Test r+ c;::r: I
When participants werf.~choose whic~a~le of apple juice was ditferent from
the other two, forty-two of the forty-three participants chose correctly. Only one participant
thought that sample 542 E2 which contained 0% citric acid was different from samples 777 Cl
(0% citric acid) and 112 H9 ( 1% citric acid)
Scoring Test
In the scoring test participants were given a reference apple juice (2.5% citric acid) with a
rank of 4 and asked to place samples 420M and S723 into a category on a scale of 1 to 7 based
on sourness. The scale used 1 being the sourest and 7 as the least sour. The majority of
participants (98%) placed sample S723 which contained 5% citric acid in categories 1-3, which
are sourer than the reference. There was one person which consis~ed of 2% who placed this
15
sample at a category 5 which is less sour than the reference sample. 100% of participants placed
sample 420M, which contained the least amount of citric acid ( 1%) in categories 5-7 which
means they thought it tasted less sour than the reference. None of the participants thought that
either sample had the same amount of sourness as the reference which was categorized as a Four.
Full results can be viewed below in figure 8.
r 01\V -b I
1\ rr-~.1 Figure 8- Scoring of perceived sourness ~ .......-.... ~~!-I '--~ f'.....J V '<.) 5~ ,.
u • n=43 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Total % Total % Total % Total % Total % Total % Total %
420M (1% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 8 19% 27 63% 8 19%
5723 (5%) 20 47% 19 44% 3 7% 0 0% 1 2% 0 0% 0 0%
Ranking
All 43 students participated in ranking five different samples of varying sourness on a
scale of one to five. Sample 555 D7 which was 10% citric acid was ranked by 93% of
participants in category 1 as most sour. 192 L3 was 5% citric acid and was ranked as number 2
on the sourness scale by 84% of the participants. 695 F8 was 2.5% citric acid and was ranked as
number 3 on the sourness scale by 74% of participants. 77% of participants chose 543 K8 which
consisted of 1% citric acid as being number 4 while 90% chose sample 495 P2 which contained
no citric acid as the least sour by categorizing it as number 5. The complete results can be found
in figure 9 The figures highlighted are the correct matches (fj,_j ('___.
Fig"" 9- R•nklng• of •pple '""• <ontolnlng ""'' •<ld In vocylng •mo""" by ••"~ /1 /"-~---~
Sa mples 1- Most Sour 2 3 4 5~Least Sour 1: b---1/ (%)cit ri c acid Total % Total % Total % Total % Total % -
55507 (10%) 40 93% 0 0% 2 5% 0 0% 1 2%
695 F8 (2.5%) 1 2% 7 16% 32 74% 3 7% 0 0%
543 K8 (1%) 2 5% 0 0% 6 14% 33 77% 2 5%
495 P2 (O) 0 0% 0 0% 1 3% · 4 9% 39 90%
192 l3 (5%) 2 5% 36 84% 3 7% 0 0% 0 0%
16
Duo-Trio
The Duo Trio test had only 41 participants due to two participants with food allergies.
Eighty Three percent of participants chose the correct cookie that differed from the standard.
This different cookie used was the generic store brand. Seventeen percent of participants
thought that the same Nabisco Nilla Wafer was different from the standard Nabisco Nilla Wafer.
The participants' then chose an adjective to describe what they thought was the biggest
di~ between the standard and the chosen different sample. 47% thought that crunchiness
was the biggest differential between the two while 35% thought that the vanilla flavor was the
biggest difference. Only 14% thought that dryness was the biggest variance. Figure 10 can be
seen below for further detail.
Figure 10
L Duo Trio- Which sainple is
different from the standard?
17%
n=41
Descriptive
Generic Brand (Differential)
Nabisco Nilla Wafer (Standard)
fla.\rhv is that sample J different?
Dryness
Crunchiness
• Less Vanilla Flavor
For descriptive tests the participants tasted samples of goldfish crackers, raisins, almonds
and mini marshmallows. They were asked to choose a word that best described appearance,
flavor, texture, aroma and mouthfeel. There were 41 participants sampling the goldfish. Figure
17
ll shows the top three adjectives chosen to describe the product for each category. 32% chose
"golden brown" as the best way to describe appearance while 24% chose "dry" and 12% chose
"symmetric". For Flavor the majority (71 %) chose "salty" while 15% chose "sharp". Only 5%
chose "flat" as the best word to describe flavor. For texture almost half (49%) chose "crisp",
while 37% chose "crunchy" and 10% chose "flaky". 44% of participants thought that there was
"nothing" for aroma and 41 % the aroma was "flavory" . 1 2% thought that the aroma was "burnt".
44% of participants thought that the consistency was brittle while 12% thought that it was thin.
Another 12% thought that cheezy was the best way to describe consistency. The majority (71 %)
of participants chose crisp as the mouthfeel while 17% chose crunchy. 7% of participants chose
., f. gritty as the best way to describe mouthfeel.
j, \}J
'11 f .::1 '"' L •.
Figure-11 _L \.JI f.l..ll. r;r~
Goldfish n=41 I u ~
Appearance Flavor Texture Aroma Consistency Mouthfeel Golden
Brown 13 32% Salty 29 71% Crisp 20 49% Nothing 18 44% Britt I e 18 44% Crisp 29 71%
Dry 10 24% Sharp 6 15% Crunchy 15 37% Flavory 17 41% Thin 5 12% Crunchy 7 17%
Symmetric 5 12% Flat 2 5% Flaky 4 10% Burnt 5 12% Cheezy 5 12% Gritty 3 7%
There were 42 participants sampling the raisins. Figure 12 shows the top three adjectives
used to describe the raisins for each category. For appearance 22% of participants chose the word
"sticky" while 17% chose the word "dry". Another 17% chose to describe the appearance as
"sunken". The majority of participants (66%) chose the word "sweet" to describe the flavor
while 22% chose "fruity" and 5% chose "bitter". 39% chose "gummy" as the best way to
describe texture while 29% chose chewy and 10% chose tender. For aroma 37% chose "sweet"
while 32% chose "fruity" and 15% thought there was no aroma. The majority (63 %) of
participants thought the consistency was chewy while 24% thought it was "gummy" and 10%
18
chose "rubbery". For mouthfeel, 49% of participants thought the raisins were sticky while 20%
thought they were smooth and 15% thought they felt slimy.
Figure-12 <T-~ -~ ~1'3~~ ~~ -
Raisins n=42
Appearance Flavor Texture Aroma Consistency Mouthfeel
Sticky 9 22% Sweet 27 66% Gummy 16 39% Sweet 15 37% Chewy 26 63% Sticky 20 49%
Dry 7 17% Fruity 9 22% Chewy 12 29% Fruity 13 32% Gummy 10 24% Smooth 8 20%
Sunken 7 17% Bitter 2 5% Tender 4 10% Nothing 6 15% Rubbery 4 10% Slimy 6 15%
There were 41 participants in the almond sampling and descriptive study. Figure 13
shows the top three words used to describe the almonds for each category. For appearance 37%
thought they were "golden brown" while 22% thought they looked "dry". A different 22%
thought the almonds looked "light brown". 67% thought the flavor of the almonds was "nutty"
while 12% thought they tasted stale and 7% thought the flavor was flat. For texture 24% thought
they were crunchy while 20% thought they were hard and 20% described the texture as "firm". A
large majority of participant~ (88%) thought that there was no aroma while 5% thought the
aroma was "flavory" and 2% thought that it was "burnt". There were equal votes (46%) for
"chewy" and "thick" for consistency and only 2% thought the consistency was "buttery". The
majority (61%) of participants thought the mouthfeel was "crunchy" while 22% thought that it
'1 was "gritty" 7o/t. thought the mouthfeel was "crisp,"
~~~ 0 ~ ,/
r- Wx_~&-Figure-13
~ ~II .'-J
Almonds n=41 I Appearance Flavor Texture Aroma Consistency Mouthfeel Golden
Brown 15 37% Nutty 28 68% Crunchy 10 24% None 36 88% Chewy 19 46% Crunchy 25 61%
Dry 9 22% Stale 5 12% Hard 8 20% Flavory 2 5% Th ick 19 46% Gritty 9 22% Light
Brown 9 22% Flat 3 7% Firm 8 20% Burnt 1 2% Buttery 1 2% Crisp 3 7%
19
There were 41 Participants that tested the marshmallows and chose the best descriptive
word for each category. The majority (83%) thought the appearance was "puffy" while 7%
thought it was "smooth" and another 7% thought that they appeared "dry". 76% of participants
chose "sweet" as the flavor while 12% chose "floury" and 5% chose "pasty". For texture 30% of
participants chose "velvety" while 22% chose "springy" and 22% chose "moist". A large
majority (80%) of participants thought the aroma was "sweet" while 17% thought that there was
no aroma and 2% voted the aroma as "flowery". The consistency most chosen was "gummy" at
34% while 22% thought it was "chewy". 15% thought the consistency was "buttery". Most
participants (70%) thought the mouthfeel was smooth. 12% chose sticky as the best way to
describe mouthfeel and 7% chose "slimy". The top three results of descriptive terms for
marshmallows can be found below in figure 14.
'-fl ?\_&
Figure-14 ~ .,... ~j
Mar~hmallow n=41 '--/l Appearance Flavor Texture Aro ma Consistency Mouthfeel
Puffy 34 83% Sweet 31 76% Velvety 12 30% Sweet 33 80% Gummy 14 34% Smooth 30 73%
Smooth 3 7% Floury 5 12% Springy 9 22% Nothing 7 17% Chewy 9 22% Sticky 5 12%
Dry 3 7% Pasty 2 5% Moist 9 22% Flowery 1 2% Buttery 6 15% Slimy 3 7%
20
Discussion
Color Perception/Beverage Association
All 43 participants were able to take part in the .color association study. The results of the
perceived sweetness test shows that the dark yellow and emerald green were perceived to be
sweeter compared to the chartreuse and light yellow. This could be due to the fact that many
candies and sweets are often very bright vibrant colors to gain children's attention and
participants correlated those colors to higher amounts of sugar. The perceived sourness was
significantly high for light yellow at 58% and fairly low for the other colors. This might be
associated to the color of lemonade and its prominent sour taste.
Emerald green was voted the most artificial color by a significant amount while light
yellow was perceived to be the most natural by a significant amount. This can be explained by
the previous comment about light yellow being the color of natural lemonade and the color
emerald green being very rare in natural foods. There are many foods found naturally that are
different shades of green but none as bright as emerald green which explains why participants
perceive it to be artificially colored.
Due to all participants in the study being Food and Nutrition Majors it is not surprising
that many chose the natural looking beverage to also be the most preferred. Light yellow was
voted most preferred beverage most likely due to it being a natural color associated with real
foods. Inversely emerald green was chosen as the least preferred beverage. Natural foods without
artificial colors and preservatives are receiving more demand today especially from consumers
who are interested in health and nutrition. Ifttte-participaRt!'i l:lad e~roup of teenage btry'S- a
.,_,,me intense vibmnt cotm such as~ ffi'"• ..Us""""•• ~nost prefer~~
~· -'-er;'h}:>
'c
•
21
When participants were asked which temperature they would prefer to consume the
colored beverages the majority of consumers chose cold regardless of the color. The results of
this study directly correlate with many other studies including one by Catriona Burdon titled
Influence of Beverage Temperature on Palatability and Fluid Ingestion during Endurance
Exercise. This study was used to investigate the influence of beverage temperature on
palatability. The results showed that cool beverage temperatures ( <22 °C) significantly increased
fluid palatability, fluid consumption, and hydration during exercise vs. control (>22°C). (Burdon,
20 12). The fact that zero participants would choose to drink a chartreuse or dark chartreuse ~ colored beverage hot is not surprising because it is very rare that you would drink a beverage of ~ vivid green color hot. Most beverages served hot are coffee, tea or milk. The fact that one person o/ would choose to drink the emerald green beverage hot, but not the chartreuse or dark chartreuse
hot, is an interesting observation.
This study could have been improved if cond or third component of
smell or taste. Maybe the visual colors wo ts while the aromas of the
beverage would provide the opposite. It w ld be an interest" g study to show how aroma would
affect visual perception. \;e~ For the Paired Comparison test all participants were able to correctly identify the sourest
beverage which had 1% citric acid when compared to the sample without any added citric acid.
Although it is highly likely that the majority of students were able to distinguish the difference
between the two beverages it could be an error in testing due to the fact that participants raised
their hands to provide the results of the study. If one more students were truly unable to
distinguish the difference they might have just raised their hands when other participants did.
22
?S@ AI ~ 'F
For the triangle test all except one student was able to distinguish which sample was
different from the standard. This could be due to the fact that the student really did perceive the
taste differently from everyone else but could also be an error in providing samples or the student
could have mixed them up upon receiving them. The collection of data could also be inaccurate
by the student raising his or her hand at the wrong time.
All participants were able to determine that the sample with 1% acetic acid was less
acidic than the standard with 2.5% acid. One out of forty three participants thought that the
sample with 5% acetic acid was less acidic than the standard with 2.5 % acetic acid . Again this
could be due to an error is passing out samples or an error in the participant mixing them up. An
error in reporting the result could have also occurred.
~Test ~--7
The majority of participants were able to determine where on a scale of 1-5 the samples
belonged according to their sourness. It seemed as though the results were more accurate when
judging the extremes such as the least sour or the sourest while there were more errors in judging
ranking the in between. This could be due to taste fatigue as at this point participants had tasted
over eight samples of apple juice with varying levels of sourness.
23
The duo trio test only had 41 participants due to food allergies. The majority of
participants (83%) were able to match the two similar cookies and choose the cookie that was
different. It is very likely that the standard and the differential were very similar in taste and
texture therefore some participants were unable to determine the difference. It could also be due
to taste fatigue. Almost half of the participants reported that the biggest difference between the
two samples was crunchiness.
These studies could be improved by having the students tested in a professional sensory
evaluation lab with separate work spaces where you are unable to see other participants. It could
also be improved by having the results written down instead of given in a group setting which
might cause students to change their answers or not give their full attention. Another way to
make the discriminative tests more efficient was to label the samples instead of verbally naming
the sample and having the participant try to remember which one is which. This could cause
multiple errors in assessing the samples and relaying the results.
Only 41 participants sampled the goldfish due to two panelists with food allergies. To
ensure the same standard number of panelists used for each experiment the instructors could
have disqualified those with food allergies or provided alternative samples to test. Most
participants though the goldfish appeared golden brown, dry and symmetrical. The majority of
participants thought that the flavor was salty with a few choosing sharp or flat. The texture was
most often described as crisp, crunchy and flaky. Many participants thought that there was no
aroma to describe the goldfish while a few thought they smelled flavory and burnt. There could
24
possibly be some inconsistencies with the goldfish samples due to the fact that each participant
only got two to four pieces. The majority of participants thought that the consistency was brittle
and the mouthfeel was crisp. These results seem to show just how different everyone's
perceptions and sense ·can be.
There were 42 participants sampling raisins. The appearance of the raisin seemed to get a
lot of different answers as the most common was sticky and only had 22% of the votes followed
by dry and sunken. The flavor was chosen predominantly as sweet and some chose fruity which
are both a very accurate description of raisins. The texture was chosen as gummy and chewy
which is also an accurate description. Some participants thought the aroma was sweet while
some participants thought that were was no aroma. This could be due to the fact that some
participants might have had a cold as there were a few participants coughing and sneezing
throughout the study. Their sense of smell and taste could have been diminished. The majority of
panelists described the texture as chewy and the mouthfeel as sticky.
The almonds were sampled by 41 panelists with most describing them as golden brown,
nutty and crunchy. Most participants thought there was no odor which can be hard to detect
when using a whole plain almond. 41 panelists also participated in sampling the marshmallow
which was described as looking fluffy and tasting sweet. The aroma was predominantly sweet
and the consistency was gummy. It makes sense to have a predetermined list of words for
students to choose from but some of them could have been chosen for lack of a better option.
The study might be improved by increasing the amount of words that participants can chose
from.
25
References
Aleson-Carbonell, L., Fermindez-L6pez, J., Sendra, E., Sayas-Barbeni, E. and Perez-Alvarez, J . A. (2004), Quality characteristics of a non-fermented dry-cured sausage formulated with lemon albedo. J. Sci. Food Agric., 84:2077-2084. doi: 10.1002/jsfa.1912
Beinner, Mark Anthony et al . Sensory evaluation of rice fortified with iron. Campinas, v. 30, n. 2, June 2010. Available from
Burdon, Catriona A. "Influence of Beverage Temperature on Palatability and Fluid Ingestion During Endurance Exercise: A Systematic Review." International Journal of Sports Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Mar. 2013.
Labbe, D. , Gilbert, F., Antille, N. , & Martin, N. (2009). Sensory determinants of refreshing. Food Quality and Preference, 20(2), 100-109.
Porto Cardoso, J.M. and Andre Bolini, H. M. (2008), Descriptive Profile of Peach Nectar Sweetened with Sucrose and Different Sweeteners. Journal of Sensory Studies, 23 : 804-816. aONG.llll/j.1715 4jflX..2~
Shankar, Maya U., Carmel A. Levitan, John Prescott, and Charles Spence. "The Influence of Color and Label Information on Flavor Perception." Chemosensory Perception 2.2 (2009): 53-58. Web. 18 Mar. 2013 .
LABORATORY REPORT EVALUATION FORM Nutrition 205
Student Name ~V\'SO.. \v'l.OhCAvYJvYlcd MECHANICS (20points)
Spelling Grammatical Usage Technical writing style Word Choice Punctuation Text Citation .. cif~ o.~rropn'o--~:ttp·'Z.) List of references . . . form/format • no \l'n K l .... '"' ~ '$
Professional appearance/overall quality~ o K
Appendices
CONTENT ( 1 00 points total)
Abstract ( 10 points) {0 Introduction (20 points) -~(CD..Jo!.._ __
Focus of review - Vexy 7\-):?r f -a }l pa.nct on s-t vd ~D..S Organization of review-~ocf Reference selection- ~1'-o- o.'fe.- wl-ru-> US~ ntt boo¥- NruO')~ ;T<l \\( f-1, Expansion beyond clasf waterial -'/.t<S ~r r~~
Methods (20 points) '1 ~\~ Clarity of description -Y\u...c::l 50~~~ ...... ~( ~--\~/t1-<6) Accuracy of description - f?\ood Organization - ~obh,.itru:H"~S ~~ -1- 2-D
Results (25 poin.ts) f -\9. A\\ st~ Appropnate data reduction -F~f!i!>f'g_f}041J p,\'1 . , ~ Appropriate tables/figures -la~ ~~ a<:.to.~(f.t~·,n,o~ cWa.i\ · . Clarit~ o~ tables/figures- Pvr +i-tlsL t\')s{d.R, iluL ~~onz.(rJ 0.,.~~4~1 Descnpt1ve/numerical data distinction -r,·'ft9.& Flow/development of the text Q
Discussion (25 r::>oints) . l . en r Companson/contrast w1th the literature-'-'12XY \•r.\-\e.Too much fo~us \ Correct interpretation of findings -~~c.1'~\-\~U~ .1.0) N~u to txp Identification of experimental error -'{-eS
SUBTOTAL OF FINAL EARNED POINTS MINUS ANY LATE PENALTY POINTS
FINAL TOTAL POINTS EARNED- POSSIBLE 120