No abstract

No abstract

a b s t r a c tQuantitative descriptive analysis (QDA) is used to describe the nature and the intensity of sensory properties from a single evaluation of a product, whereas temporal dominance of sensation (TDS) is primarily used to identify dominant sensory properties over time. Previous studies with TDS have focused on model systems, but this is the first study to use a sequential approach, i.e. QDA then TDS in measuring sensory properties of a commercial product category, using the same set of trained assessors (n = 11). The main objectives of this study were to: (1) investigate the benefits of using a sequential approach of QDA and TDS and (2) to explore the impact of the sample composition on taste and flavour perceptions in blackcurrant squashes. The present study has proposed an alternative way of determining the choice of attributes for TDS measurement based on data obtained from previous QDA studies, where available. Both methods indicated that the flavour profile was primarily influenced by the level of dilution and complexity of sample composition combined with blackcurrant juice content. In addition, artificial sweeteners were found to modify the quality of sweetness and could also contribute to bitter notes. Using QDA and TDS in tandem was shown to be more beneficial than each just on its own enabling a more complete sensory profile of the products.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Background: Caffeine is included as a ''flavoring'' in over 60% of soft drinks consumed in the United States and its inclusion has come under scrutiny in recent years. Recent trends have seen an increase in products containing elevated caffeine levels, marketed as energy drinks, but few data are available regarding the impact of higher caffeine levels on sensory perception of beverages. Method: This study examined the ability of assessors to discriminate between caffeinated and noncaffeinated solutions of increasing complexity. Individual assessor's caffeine threshold levels were determined and a forced-choice triangle test methodology (BS ISO 4120:2004) was used to compare caffeinated (0.12 and 0.48 g/L; comparable to both standard and energy drink levels) and noncaffeinated model beverages. The model beverages increased in complexity from simple water solutions to glucose-sweetened solutions; citrus-flavored solutions; and flavored, sweetened, carbonated solutions. Results: Results indicated that caffeine discriminative ability was influenced primarily by complexity of the carrier beverage, although assessors with lower caffeine threshold levels were better discriminators in simpler beverages. In the more complex beverages (flavored, sweetened, carbonated), there was no evidence to suggest that caffeinated and noncaffeinated samples were perceivably different at the levels examined. Conclusion: This study raises questions regarding the inclusion of caffeine as a flavoring in standard soft drinks.

No abstract