Comparison of three sensory profiling methods based on consumer perception: CATA, CATA with intensity and Napping®

Abstract The present study compares three profiling methods based on consumer perceptions in their ability to discriminate and describe eight beers. Consumers (n = 135) evaluated eight different beers using Check-All-That-Apply (CATA) methodology in two variations, with (n = 63) and without (n = 73) rating the intensity of the checked descriptors. With CATA, consumers rated 38 descriptors grouped in seven overall categories (berries, floral, hoppy, nutty, roasted, spicy/herbal and woody). Additionally 40 of the consumers evaluated the same samples by partial Napping® followed by Ultra Flash Profiling (UFP). ANOVA- and Discriminant Partial Least Square Regression (A-PLSR, D-PLSR) were used to evaluate the discriminative ability of the methods and descriptors. A-PLSR results showed that all samples were perceived as different in all three methods, whereas D-PLSR showed that all three methods had similar numbers of discriminating descriptors. For the two CATA variants, 29 and 24 descriptors for without and with rating intensity were significant, for Napping/UFP the number was 26. Multiple Factor Analysis was used to derive an overall product map and to compare it to product configurations from individual methods. Both qualitative and quantitative analysis (comparison of RV coefficients of the MFA configurations) revealed a very high agreement of the three methods in terms of perceived product differences. RV coefficients were used to compare sample configurations obtained in the three descriptive methods. For all comparisons the RV coefficients varied between 0.90 and 0.97, indicating a very high similarity between all three methods. These results show that the precision and reproducibility of sensory information obtained by consumers by CATA is comparable to that of Napping. The choice of methodology for consumer descriptive methods should then be based on whether it is desired to have consumers articulate their own perception of descriptors, or if it sufficient to present them to an existing vocabulary. Napping is slower and more laborious, and better for explorative studies with smaller number of consumers whereas, CATA is faster, less labor-intensive and thus more suitable for larger groups of consumers.

[1]  Harry T. Lawless,et al.  Perceptual mapping of apples and cheeses using projective mapping and sorting. , 2010 .

[2]  Jérôme Pagès,et al.  Construction of a product space from the ultra-flash profiling method: application to 10 red wines from the Loire Valley. , 2009 .

[3]  Moonja P. Kim,et al.  The Method of Sorting as a Data-Gathering Procedure in Multivariate Research. , 1975, Multivariate behavioral research.

[4]  Gastón Ares,et al.  Identifying ideal products using three different consumer profiling methodologies. Comparison with external preference mapping , 2011 .

[5]  Davide Giacalone,et al.  Consumer-Based Product Profiling: Application of Partial Napping® for Sensory Characterization of Specialty Beers by Novices and Experts , 2013 .

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

[7]  Gastón Ares,et al.  APPLICATION OF TWO CONSUMER PROFILING TECHNIQUES TO COSMETIC EMULSIONS , 2010 .

[8]  Gastón Ares,et al.  CONSUMERS' TEXTURE PERCEPTION OF MILK DESSERTS. II – COMPARISON WITH TRAINED ASSESSORS' DATA , 2012 .

[9]  Einar Risvik,et al.  Evaluation of sensory profiling and projective mapping data , 1997 .

[10]  Gastón Ares,et al.  Are consumer profiling techniques equivalent for some product categories? The case of orange-flavoured powdered drinks , 2011 .

[11]  Young-Seung Lee,et al.  The application of check-all-that-apply (CATA) consumer profiling to preference mapping of vanilla ice cream and its comparison to classical external preference mapping , 2010 .

[12]  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 .

[13]  H. Simon,et al.  A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice , 1955 .

[14]  Magni Martens,et al.  Multivariate Analysis of Quality : An Introduction , 2001 .

[15]  Norman M. Bradburn,et al.  DO RESPONDENTS REALLY “MARK ALL THAT APPLY” ON SELF-ADMINISTERED QUESTIONS? , 1994 .

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

[17]  W. Bredie,et al.  “All-In-One Test” (AI1): A rapid and easily applicable approach to consumer product testing , 2013 .

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

[19]  J. Krosnick Response strategies for coping with the cognitive demands of attitude measures in surveys , 1991 .

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

[21]  Gastón Ares,et al.  Application of a check-all-that-apply question for the evaluation of strawberry cultivars from a breeding program. , 2010, Journal of the science of food and agriculture.

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

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

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

[25]  H. Martens,et al.  Modified Jack-knife estimation of parameter uncertainty in bilinear modelling by partial least squares regression (PLSR) , 2000 .

[26]  Harry T. Lawless,et al.  Multidimensional scaling of sorting data applied to cheese perception , 1995 .

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

[28]  Michael Meyners,et al.  Permutation tests: are there differences in product liking? , 2001 .

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