Free choice and conventional profiling of commercial black filter coffees to explore consumer perceptions of character

Filter coffees from ground bean blends are key drink products in the out-of-home market. To explore how sensory characters were perceived in 12 commercial coffee blends, free choice profiling of black, unsweetened and sweetened coffees was effected. This yielded three generalised Procrustes product spaces that explained limited variance. However a derived vocabulary was used in subsequent conventional profiling of black, unsweetened coffee generating a principal component product space that explained 70% variance. Comparisons showed that roast height was the dominant factor in discrimination, followed by Robusta content. The coffee profiling vocabulary, had terms suited to understanding consumer evaluations of sensory character in retailed coffees, consisted of 26 attributes: six for aroma; 13 for flavour by mouth, or taste; four for after-taste; and three for mouthfeel.

[1]  John R. Piggott,et al.  Free choice profiling in consumer research , 1991 .

[2]  H. Macfie,et al.  DESIGNS TO BALANCE THE EFFECT OF ORDER OF PRESENTATION AND FIRST-ORDER CARRY-OVER EFFECTS IN HALL TESTS , 1989 .

[3]  A European sensory and consumer study—A case study on coffee , 1998 .

[4]  J. Piggott.  Statistical procedures in food research , 1986 .

[5]  David M.H. Thomson,et al.  THE APPLICATION OF TWO FREE‐CHOICE PROFILE METHODS TO INVESTIGATE THE SENSORY CHARACTERISTICS OF CHOCOLATE , 1989 .

[6]  John R. Piggott,et al.  A COMPARISON OF FREE-CHOICE PROFILING AND THE REPERTORY GRID METHOD IN THE FLAVOR PROFILING OF CIDER , 1992 .

[7]  R. Pangborn,et al.  Taste discrimination vs hedonic response to sucrose in coffee beverage. An interlaboratory study , 1978 .

[8]  Harry T. Lawless,et al.  Descriptive analysis of complex odors: reality, model or illusion? , 1999 .

[9]  B. G. Lyon.  Development of Chicken Flavor Descriptive Attribute Terms Aided by Multivariate Statistical Procedures , 1987 .

[10]  R. Pangborn,et al.  DIFFERENCE TASTE THRESHOLDS FOR SUCROSE IN WATER AND IN ORANGE JUICE: AN INTERLABORATORY STUDY , 1976 .

[11]  Conor M. Delahunty,et al.  DEVELOPMENT AND LEARNING PROCESS OF A SENSORY VOCABULARY FOR THE ODOR EVALUATION OF SELECTED DISTILLED BEVERAGES USING DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS , 2001 .

[12]  Gillian M. Arnold,et al.  A comparison of the aromas of six coffees characterised by conventional profiling, free‐choice profiling and similarity scaling methods , 1985 .

[13]  I. Flament,et al.  Coffee flavor chemistry , 2001 .

[14]  E. Hunter,et al.  Sensory evaluation of fermented milks: vocabulary development and the relations between sensory properties and composition and between acceptability and sensory properties , 1992 .

[15]  D. V. Byrne,et al.  DEVELOPMENT OF A SENSORY VOCABULARY FOR WARMED‐OVER FLAVOR: PART I. IN PORCINE MEAT , 1999 .

[16]  Rinantonio Viani,et al.  Espresso coffee : the chemistry of quality , 1995 .

[17]  Harry T. Lawless,et al.  THE IMPORTANCE OF LANGUAGE IN DESCRIBING PERCEPTIONS , 1986 .

[18]  J. Gower.  Generalized procrustes analysis , 1975 .

[19]  Halliday J.H. MacFie,et al.  Relationships between perceived sensory properties and major preference directions of 12 varieties of apples from the Southern Hemisphere , 1996 .

[20]  Anthony A. Williams,et al.  The use of free-choice profiling for the evaluation of commercial ports , 1984 .