Experiment 16 Sensory Evaluation

The jellies (20 sets) were submitted to a sensory panel (ten panellists from the laboratory staff with some experience in sensory evaluation) requested to give a score (from low to high in a non-structured 10 cm scale) to each of the following characteristics aroma (intensity), taste (sweet, acid and intensity), texture (hardness, spreadability) and overall acceptance. 

Alternatively produced products have in common that their unique selling proposition is not directly visible to the consumer. Only additional information will identify the nature of the origin or the production process of these foods (Oude Ophuis, 1993). Within a sensory evaluation of free range pork under different conditions of experience and awareness, labelling and prior experience of the product have favourable influence on the sensory evaluation of free range pork for a number of attributes. The author assumes that contextual elements are very important in the sensory evaluation of fresh foods. 

Number of Types of Citrus Products Per Session. Should ever the occasion arise when more than one type of citrus product requires sensory evaluation, it is best to schedule a separate session for each product or group of like products. The human mind has a great tendency for automatic comparison and carryover of one experience to the next which in the case of sensory evaluation is not good should two or more dissimilar products be compared at one session. 

Sensory Analysis. Oat oils and isolates from these oils were sensorially evaluated. Oils from the Magne variety, both crude and heated, were analysed by a panel consisting of 12 to 14 persons who were selected from the laboratory staff. Most of them had previous experience with sensory analysis. Four oat oils, one from crude oats, one heated oil from crude oats and two oils from roasted oats see Figure 1, were subjected to the triangle test followed by descriptive analysis (14, 15). 

One of the most important things to learn in sensory evaluation is that "experience" is critical in making methodology decisions. Years of sensory testing on one product or one product... 

Sensory evaluation of the relative strengths of each taste (sweet, sour, umami, salty, bitter and brothy) among beef, pork and chicken soups prepared after storage showed that the intensity of umami and brothy tastes was weakest in beef soup (Fig. 5) (Rhue, M.R., University of Tokyo, unpublished data.). There was less Glu in beef than in pork and chicken. The addition of Glu into beef soup to bring up the Glu concentration equal to those in pork and chicken soups made the umami and brothy tastes in the beef soup similar to those in pork and chicken soups. From this observation, Glu seemes to play a very important role in the umami and brothy tastes of meats. This experiment showed that other free amino acids also contribute somewhat to the meaty taste. 

The sensory evaluation of the jams was carried out by 60 potential consumers and the attributes appraised (appearance, aroma, texture, color, flavor and global impression) judged using a structured 9 point hedonic scale (1= disliked extremely to 9= liked extremely). The experiment was applied to a balanced complete block design according to Stone and Sidel (2004), and 20 g of each treatment presented in plastic cups codified with three digit numbers. The tests were carried out in individual booths in the food sensory analysis laboratory. The results were submitted to an analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the differences between the averages compared by the test of Tukey at 5% of probability (Cochram Cox, 1992). 

The complicated olfactory system in humans and animals can detect and differentiate the presence of an odour even at trace levels [187]. Sensory evaluation is one of the important parameters for environmental monitoring, quality assessment for food, wine and beverages, and clinical diagnosis, as well as for the control of many cosmetics and fermentation processes [188-190]. Typically, sensory evaluation in odour as well as food/ wine testing is performed by a panel of well-trained professionals based upon their sense of smell, taste, experience and mood. However, the human olfactory system is very sensitive but not selective. 

This chapter is the result of more than 15 years of experience of sensory evaluation in the car industry. During this time period, a great number of sensory and consumer studies have been conducted by the sensory science team of the Renault R D department. Such studies have rarely been published in the sensory science literature, although there have been a few communications in conferences (Astruc and Blumenthal, 2004 Astruc et al, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 Blumenthal, 2004, 2008 Blumenthal and Bouillot, 2007, 2010 Blumenthal and Dairou, 2007 Blumenthal et ah, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2003, 2004 Boivin and Blumenthal, 2009 Dairou et al., 2003 Herbeth, 2007 Herbeth and Blumenthal, 2007, 2010 Herbeth et al., 2007 Petiot et al., 2010). This chapter is thus an opportunity to step back and share our experience on the use of sensory analysis, through three selected examples. We believe that this experience will be of profit to the reader in other domains of application. 

Our panel is composed of ten assessors five test drivers (T1-T5) and five consumers (C1-C5). Consumers means people who are not trained to evaluate their gearshift sensations, although they have had previous experience in sensory evaluation while driving they could also be considered as sensory panellists. ... 

Second (see Fig. 24.3), as a user s experience is dynamic and context-dependent [23, 25], it is inevitable to consider how multiple contexmal factors may influence user experience. For example, companionship is a powerfid factor to have an impact on user experience [26]. It also requires attention that a user s multi-sensory experience may vary dynamically at different usage phases [27, 28]. Without tackling the contextual factors, user experience or evaluation may become ecologically invalid [29]. In addition, it is better to avoid treating a product as a starting... 

Fig. 24.5 The context-based multi-sensory experience system (CMSES). Note Scenario cobuilding (based on a user s real situation). (B) Customized scenario(s) (for the user to exptaience the product) Feedback of individual differences regarding usage context (J) Context-based user-product interaction (user experienee) Feedback of (multi-sensory) user experience and evaluation Design and marketing strategies concerning user experience Context-based multi-sensory experience design...

During mastication, the structure breaks down and the sensory perception of the texture reflects such breakdown processes. Various subjective tests for sensory evaluation are used, e.g. manual texture (touching) by a light pressure with forefinger, visual texture, and mouthfeel during manipulation of the sample in the mouth. To relate the rheological characteristics of the product to the above sensory evaluation, experiments must be carried out under various deformation conditions. 

Sensory Evaluation Figure 5.3 shows the mean acceptance scores obtained for French fries, chicken and fish sticks fried in different oils. Consumer panel is a subjective type of measurement because panellists are not trained and assessment is based on previous experience of each panellist. Here some skewed results are acceptable because experience of each panellist is different within particular group of assessors. Main oil on the market will make consumers familiar to its characteristics and cause acceptance at the higher level, whereas consumers for which type oil is not known have tendency to score lower. For example, it can be canola oil for Canadians and for Americans soyabean oil. 

In general, quality is assessed by quantifiable traits that are more or less related to specific attributes of the product and the production process. Moreover, the assessment depends on the information delivered by the sensory organs. Information is filtered and evaluated by the brain depending on the specific information provided but also on the concept of understanding that already exists in the cerebral cortex (Singer, 2000). A mental representation of a sensory event can shape neural processes that underlie the formulation of the actual sensory experience. Thus, the subjective sensory experience is shaped by interactions between expectations and incoming sensory information. 

This article contains a detailed summary of the experiments carried out by LCA Coates Lorilleux aimed at evaluating the sensorial perception thresholds of ethyl acetate (and other solvents) used in rotogravure printing of flexible packaging for food. The methodological approach applied in the present study can be deemed a valid tool of study for the organoleptic behaviour of solvents and/or volatile compounds other than ethyl acetate that may be present inflexible materials. 8 refs. 

In the case of pineapples, the 12 odorants listed in Table 16.7 were dissolved in water in concentrations equal to those determined in the fruit [50]. Then the odour profile of this aroma model was evaluated by a sensory panel in comparison to fresh pineapple juice. The result was a high agreement in the two odour profiles. Fresh, fruity and pineapple-like odour notes scored almost the same intensities in the model as in the juice. Only the sweet aroma note was more intense in the model than in the original sample [50]. In further experiments, the contributions of the six odorants showing the highest OAV (Table 16.7) were evaluated by means of omission tests [9]. The results presented in Table 16.8 show that the omission of 4-hydroxy-2,5-dimethyl-3(2H)-furanone, ethyl 2-methylbutanoate or ethyl 2-methylpropanoate changed the odour so clearly that more than half of the assessors were able to perceive an odour difference between the reduced and the complete aroma model. Therefore, it was concluded that these compounds are the character-impact odorants of fresh pineapple juice. 

---