Comparison of preference mapping techniques for the optimization of strawberry yogurt.

Many product optimization methods, known in general terms as preference mapping, have been described in the literature. However, a direct comparison of some of the different approaches (e.g., internal versus external mapping) has not been undertaken. This was attempted here by formulating strawberry yogurt prototypes according to an experimental design including three factors, investigating four approaches of optimization, comparing the sensory profiles of the ideal solutions and formulating the ideal solutions for validation with consumers. Results of this study show that the optimization methods did not yield identical ideal solutions but tended to agree on the ideal level for two of the three sensory dimensions investigated. These results warrant further investigation and comparison of the preference mapping methods available today. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS The research conducted in this study may be useful to consumer scientists and product developers as it provides a direct comparison of preference mapping methodology performance for the optimization of product formulations. Although the work is not intended to establish superiority of one method over another, it provides a template for others who may wish to compare these methodologies.

[1]  C. White,et al.  Effect of Sweeteners on the Quality and Acceptability of Yogurt , 1986 .

[2]  M. McDaniel,et al.  Sensory Ratings of Commercial Plain Yogurts by Consumer and Descriptive Panels , 1991 .

[3]  L. Rothman,et al.  17 – The use of just-about-right (JAR) scales in food product development and reformulation , 2007 .

[4]  Yogurt Thickness: Effects on Flavor Perception and Liking , 2002 .

[5]  M. Drake,et al.  EFFECTS OF SWEETENER, SWEETENER CONCENTRATION, AND FRUIT FLAVOR ON SENSORY PROPERTIES OF SOY FORTIFIED YOGURT , 2001 .

[6]  H. Macfie 23 – Preference mapping and food product development , 2007 .

[7]  Harry T. Lawless,et al.  Lack of effect of taste and nutrition claims on sensory and hedonic responses to a fat-free yogurt , 1997 .

[8]  Edgar Chambers,et al.  Hedonic scales are a better predictor than just-about-right scales of optimal sweetness in lemonade , 1998 .

[9]  N. Martin,et al.  Flavored yogurt complex viscosity influences real-time aroma release in the mouth and sensory properties. , 2006, Journal of agricultural and food chemistry.

[10]  W. Kolanowski,et al.  Relative importance of texture properties in the sensory quality and acceptance of natural yoghurts , 2005 .

[11]  M. McDaniel,et al.  Correlation of descriptive and consumer panel flavor ratings for commercial prestirred strawberry and lemon yogurts , 1991 .

[12]  K. B. Qvist,et al.  Relation between sensory texture analysis and rheological properties of stirred yogurt , 1999, Journal of Dairy Research.

[13]  M. Martens,et al.  Sensory properties of low fat yoghurts. Part A: Effect of fat content, fermentation culture and addition of non-fat dry milk on the sensory properties of plain yoghurts , 2003 .

[14]  Z. Vickers,et al.  EFFECT OF YOGURT SWEETNESS ON SENSORY SPECIFIC SATIETY , 1998 .

[15]  N. M. Faber,et al.  Simple improvement of consumer fit in external preference mapping , 2003 .

[16]  R. K. Striegler,et al.  An ideal point density plot method for determining an optimal sensory profile for Muscadine grape juice , 2008 .

[17]  David B. MacKay,et al.  Probabilistic unfolding models for sensory data , 2001 .

[18]  G. Corrieu,et al.  Physical properties and microstructure of yoghurts supplemented with milk protein hydrolysates , 2005 .