Consumer-Based Product Profiling: Application of Partial Napping® for Sensory Characterization of Specialty Beers by Novices and Experts

Napping® is an inexpensive and rapid method for sensory characterization, suitable for both trained and untrained subjects. In the study presented, the method was applied on 9 specialty beers. Subjects were 17 consumers without any training as sensory panelists, of whom 8 were beer experts and 9 novices. The aim was to explore the usability of the Napping® method by untrained consumers and to analyze differences between beer novices and experts in their ability to discriminate and describe the products. The method succeeded in discriminating between the beers, revealing sensory descriptors responsible for the differences. Analysis of differences between the two groups showed that the experts had higher agreement with regard to sample differences (significantly higher mean RV-coefficient, 0.61 vs. 0.41 for non-experts, p = 0.013). The results support the usability of Napping® as a fast method for sensory characterization, with the advantage of providing a product characterization based on consumer descriptions, thus better reflecting consumers' experience with the product.

[1]  Dominique Valentin,et al.  Analyzing assessors and products in sorting tasks: DISTATIS, theory and applications , 2007 .

[2]  Jérôme Pagès,et al.  Inter-laboratory comparison of sensory profiles: methodology and results , 2001 .

[3]  Victoire Dairou,et al.  A Comparison of 14 Jams Characterized by Conventional Profile and a Quick Original Method, the Flash Profile , 2002 .

[4]  Einar Risvik,et al.  Projective mapping: A tool for sensory analysis and consumer research , 1994 .

[5]  Gastón Ares,et al.  Comparison of two sensory profiling techniques based on consumer perception , 2010 .

[6]  Sébastien Lê,et al.  FactoMineR: An R Package for Multivariate Analysis , 2008 .

[7]  Lawrence L. Garber,et al.  Measuring consumer response to food products , 2003 .

[8]  Jérôme Pagès,et al.  Comparison of three sensory methods for use with the Napping® procedure: Case of ten wines from Loire valley , 2008 .

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

[10]  Harry T. Lawless,et al.  Sensory Evaluation of Food , 1999 .

[11]  C. E. Dalgliesh,et al.  Beer Flavor Terminology1 , 1979 .

[12]  H. Schutz.  Consumer data—sense and nonsense , 1999 .

[13]  Dominique Valentin,et al.  Sort and beer: Everything you wanted to know about the sorting task but did not dare to ask , 2011 .

[14]  Gary Evans,et al.  Exploratory Multivariate Analysis by Example Using R , 2011 .

[15]  Per B. Brockhoff,et al.  Rapid descriptive sensory methods – Comparison of Free Multiple Sorting, Partial Napping, Napping, Flash Profiling and conventional profiling , 2012 .

[16]  J. Pagès,et al.  Recueil direct de distances sensorielles : application à l'évaluation de dix vins blancs du Val-de-Loire , 2003 .

[17]  Jérôme Pagès,et al.  Collection and analysis of perceived product inter-distances using multiple factor analysis: Application to the study of 10 white wines from the Loire Valley , 2005 .

[18]  Sébastien Lê,et al.  SENSOMINER : A PACKAGE FOR SENSORY DATA ANALYSIS , 2008 .

[19]  C. E. Dalgliesh,et al.  BEER FLAVOUR TERMINOLOGY1 , 1979 .

[20]  J. Pagès,et al.  Procrustes multiple factor analysis to analyse the overall perception of food products , 2006 .

[21]  Harry T. Lawless,et al.  Sensory Evaluation of Food: Principles and Practices , 1998 .

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

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

[24]  Guillermo Hough,et al.  Overcoming the issues in the sensory description of hot served food with a complex texture. Application of QDA®, flash profiling and projective mapping using panels with different degrees of training , 2011 .

[25]  P. Robert,et al.  A Unifying Tool for Linear Multivariate Statistical Methods: The RV‐Coefficient , 1976 .