E-Senses, Panel Tests and Wearable Sensors: A Teamwork for Food Quality Assessment and Prediction of Consumer’s Choices

Abstract

At present, food quality is of utmost importance, not only to comply with commercial regulations, but also to meet the expectations of consumers; this aspect includes sensory features capable of triggering emotions through the citizen’s perception. To date, key parameters for food quality assessment have been sought through analytical methods alone or in combination with a panel test, but the evaluation of panelists’ reactions via psychophysiological markers is now becoming increasingly popular. As such, the present review investigates recent applications of traditional and novel methods to the specific field. These include electronic senses (e-nose, e-tongue, and e-eye), sensory analysis, and wearables for emotion recognition. Given the advantages and limitations highlighted throughout the review for each approach (both traditional and innovative ones), it was possible to conclude that a synergy between traditional and innovative approaches could be the best way to optimally manage the trade-off between the accuracy of the information and feasibility of the investigation. This evidence could help in better planning future investigations in the field of food sciences, providing more reliable, objective, and unbiased results, but it also has important implications in the field of neuromarketing related to edible compounds.

Wearable Sensors to Evaluate Autonomic Response to Olfactory Stimulation: The Influence of Short, Intensive Sensory Training

“…In more depth, this approach is deemed particularly useful in the food and drink industry, where the inter-connection between panel questionnaires, chemical sensors, and derived devices (e.g., e-Nose, e-Tongue, e-Eye)—with the study of emotions of panelists and consumers at large—is becoming key, as has been suggested [ 6 ]. At the same time, the interaction usually performed by a panelist or a consumer at large with a given edible compound (either food or beverage) should not be significantly altered by the application of a monitoring tool or by the use of gold standard, complex, wired instrumentation that is poorly feasible in the specific framework.…”

“…Traditionally, the decisions taken by consumers rely on the information projected from the environment into their human body. In such a framework, food scientists might not consider the influence of thinking processes on sensory assessment, mainly focusing on stimulus-dependent techniques (the so-called “bottom-up approach”), including scaling or triangle tests for evaluating smell, taste, and flavor [ 6 , 7 ]. Overall, this approach is mainly used when attempting to define the main sensory features of an edible compound for a precise group (e.g., a cohort characterized by a given culture or age).…”

“…To cope with this—and in particular to provide a practical, feasible, and affordable response to the requirements and needs of food technology industry in this specific domain—in the last few decades, faster, more affordable methodologies than descriptive analysis have been developed, including the flash profile (FP) method, Napping ® , sorting, projective mapping, intensity scales, and open-ended questions [ 5 ]. Beyond this, more recently, a research line has started to rise, aimed at studying the effectiveness of sensory training on panel performances at different degrees [ 1 , 6 , 13 , 14 ].…”

Utilization of Response Surface Methodology in Optimization of Proline Extraction from Castanea sativa Honey

“…Today, the determination of food quality is of considerable importance, not only to comply with commercial regulations but also to meet consumer expectations [1] . Nutritional, microbiological, and physicochemical properties are all important parameters when determining food quality.…”

Recent Applications of Potentiometric Electronic Tongue and Electronic Nose in Sensory Evaluation

“…Recently, novel methods, including electronic tongue and electronic nose (e-senses), have become an essential focus of researchers and many industries because they can serve as alternative methods to human sensory testing. This is because these e-senses can overcome the problems of sensory methods using human sensory panels, including subjectivity, panelists’ sensory fatigue, high expenses, and a more time-consuming method ( Modesti et al, 2022 ). Furthermore, these e-senses can be considered fast and valid alternative instruments compared to other analytical techniques, including spectroscopy, which are very sensitive, selective, and expensive, with needed pretreatment steps for sample preparation.…”