Discriminations of the A–Not A difference test improved when “A” was familiarized using a brand image

Kim, Min A; Chae, Ji Eun; Hout, Danielle van; Lee, Hye Seong

doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2011.06.007

Cited by 28 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For the comparisons across the various versions of the duo-trio, when the same cognitive decision process can be assumed, this d 0 can also be used as an index for test performance. Although all protocols should, in principle, produce the same d 0 estimates when used for food discrimination, one protocol can produce lower values than others due to differences in the operational test power (Chae, Lee, & Lee, 2010;Kim et al, 2010;Kim, Chae, van Hout, & Lee, 2012;Lee et al, 2009;Lee & Kim, 2008;Lee, van Hout, & Hautus, 2007a;Lee, van Hout, & O'Mahony, 2007c;Lee, van Hout, Hautus, & O'Mahony, 2007b). Thus, regarding on the various versions of duo-trio test, it is important to study the effects of the different reference schemes on test performance to investigate the operationally as well as statistically more powerful duo-trio protocol.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigation of operationally more powerful duo-trio test protocols: Effects of different reference schemes

Kim¹,

Lee²

2012

Food Quality and Preference

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigation of operationally more powerful duo-trio test protocols: Effects of different reference schemes

Kim¹,

Lee²

2012

Food Quality and Preference

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The A-Not A difference test can be superior to the triangle test, duo-trio test, and same-difference test in terms of statistical power [17]. It is used to measure the overall sensory difference of one or more products from a reference sample A (OC-control) using a sureness rating [17,18]. Participants were asked to state on ballot papers whether the sample poured was A or, not A.…”

Section: Sensory Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The sensory session began when wines (50 mL) were poured into clear ISO wine glasses and participants were asked to familiarise themselves with the wines retronasally. To improve the panelists' overall sensory perception of samples, a familiarisation session took place [17]. After 20 min of familiarising themselves with the wines, panelists had a 20-minute break and cleansed their palates with distilled water and unsalted crackers.…”

Section: Sensory Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Wine Style and Sugar Addition in liqueur d’expedition (dosage) Solutions on Traditional Method Sparkling Wine Composition

Kemp

Hogan

et al. 2017

Beverages

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of wine style and cane sugar addition in the liqueur d'expedition (dosage) solution on volatile aroma compounds (VOCs) in traditional method sparkling wine. There were 24 bottles of each treatment produced. Treatments were sparkling wine zero dosage (ZD); NV sparkling wine + sugar (BS); unoaked still Chardonnay wine + sugar (UC); Pinot noir 2009 sparkling wine + sugar (PN); Niagara produced Brandy + sugar (B) and Icewine (IW). The control treatment in the sensory analysis was an oaked still Chardonnay wine + sugar (OC) because the zero-dosage wine was not suitable for a difference test that compared wines with sugar to one without. Standard wine chemical parameters were analysed before disgorging and after liqueur d'expedition was added and included; pH, titratable acidity (TA g/L), alcohol (v/v %), residual sugar (RS g/L), free and total SO 2 and total phenolics (A.U.). Volatile aroma compounds (VOCs) analysed by Headspace Solid-Phase Micro-Extraction Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (HS-SPME-GC-MS) included two alcohols, and six ethyl esters. ZD wines had the highest foam height and highest dissolved oxygen level. Sugar affected VOC concentrations in all treatments at five weeks post-disgorging, but by 15 weeks after liqueur d'expedition addition, the wine with added sugar had similar VOC concentrations to the ZD wines. The type of wines used in the dosage solutions had more influence on VOC concentrations than sugar addition.

show abstract

“…; Kim and Lee ; Kim et al . ), perform the specified versions of difference tests with larger M and N values. In these cases, the stable embedded memories would not be so readily forgotten as would be the more temporary and less stable memories required for general discrimination tests with untrained consumers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimation of Thurstonian Models for Various Forced‐Choice Sensory Discrimination Methods as a Form of the “M + N” Test

Bi¹,

Lee

O’Mahony

2014

Journal of Sensory Studies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Psychometric functions for discrimination tests, which connect probabilities of correct response, pc, with Thurstonian discriminal distances, d′, are of theoretical and practical significance. This paper uses a computer‐intensive approach to produce simulation‐derived psychometric functions for the “M + N” test, which is a generalization and can be considered as a framework of many forced‐choice methods. The paper demonstrates and describes chance probabilities in different situations for the “M + N” test. The paper compares the performances of the specified and unspecified “M + N” test with the M = N test. The paper provides novel tables for pc and d′ for four specific versions of the “M + N” test: the specified “two‐out‐of‐five” test (i.e., the “M + N” test with M = 3 and N = 2); the unspecified “one‐out‐of‐four” test (i.e., the “M + N” test with M = 3 and N = 1); the specified and unspecified octad tests (i.e., the “M + N” test with M = N = 4). The corresponding B values, for calculation of the variances of d' for the tests, are also provided. The concept and practice of pseudo‐correct response, i.e., forgiveness introduced by Ennis, are discussed and generalized. Practical Applications Considering the constraints imposed by the products and the circumstances of the business objective, different forms of various difference test method might be selected as the most suitable design. The proposed Thurstonian modeling approach using a simulation‐derived psychometric function makes it possible to drive psychometric functions for any one of the more than 40 different versions of the “M + N” test. This paper shows that a simulation‐derived psychometric function is compatible with an exact psychometric function. R/S‐Plus codes for the simulation‐derived psychometric functions are also developed and provided. Using this technique, various versions of commonly used sensory difference test methods, including the 2‐AFC, triangle and tetrad, can be compared with many more versions of difference test methods. In addition, using the supplied R/S‐Plus codes, the Thurstonian sensory difference measure, d′, can be computed easily and quickly for various forms of the “M + N” test.

show abstract

Discriminations of the A–Not A difference test improved when “A” was familiarized using a brand image

Cited by 28 publications

References 34 publications

Investigation of operationally more powerful duo-trio test protocols: Effects of different reference schemes

Investigation of operationally more powerful duo-trio test protocols: Effects of different reference schemes

The Impact of Wine Style and Sugar Addition in liqueur d’expedition (dosage) Solutions on Traditional Method Sparkling Wine Composition

Estimation of Thurstonian Models for Various Forced‐Choice Sensory Discrimination Methods as a Form of the “M + N” Test

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About