1999
DOI: 10.1201/9781439832271
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sensory Evaluation Techniques, Third Edition

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

6
2,488
0
321

Year Published

2000
2000
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2,441 publications
(2,829 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
6
2,488
0
321
Order By: Relevance
“…Sensory evaluation All the milk drink samples were evaluated for appearance/colour, flavour, consistency and mouthfeel and overall acceptability by 8 semi-trained panelists from the department using a 9-point hedonic scale (Meilgaard et al 1999) with scores ranging from liked extremely (9) to disliked extremely (1).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Sensory evaluation All the milk drink samples were evaluated for appearance/colour, flavour, consistency and mouthfeel and overall acceptability by 8 semi-trained panelists from the department using a 9-point hedonic scale (Meilgaard et al 1999) with scores ranging from liked extremely (9) to disliked extremely (1).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…where a is the proportion of participants who answered correctly, f is the proportion of participants who did not answer correctly and n is the number of participants (22,23) .…”
Section: Phase 1: Triangle Taste Testmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These are the most commonly used difference test parameters (21) . For acceptability testing, between 100 and 120 participants were required to detect differences at the 0·05 level of significance, which is a standard for acceptability testing in the sensory testing field (22) . A $US 25 incentive was given to participants.…”
Section: Consumer Recruitmentmentioning
confidence: 99%