Comparison of rapid sensory characterization methodologies for the development of functional yogurts.

Functional food development is a long, complex, expensive and risky process. Methodologies that provide reliable information about the sensory characteristics of the developed products in short time frames can speed up the product development process and contribute to the success of the developed products in the marketplace. In this context, the aim of the present work was to compare three rapid methodologies for sensory characterization with descriptive analysis during the development of low-fat functional yogurts, enriched with probiotics and prebiotics. Eight low-fat probiotic yogurts enriched with a prebiotic ingredient were formulated following a 23 full factorial design with the following factors: sugar concentration, prebiotic ingredient and stabilizer concentration. A panel of 9 trained assessors evaluated samples using descriptive analysis. Besides, the yogurts were evaluated by 3 groups of 81 consumers using three rapid methodologies: check-all-that-apply (CATA) questions, projective mapping and polarized sensory positioning. The three rapid methodologies provided similar information on the main differences among samples. However, several differences can be highlighted. Sample configurations from CATA questions were the most similar to those provided by descriptive analysis, whereas projective mapping provided the least similar configurations. The three methodologies also differed in their ability to detect differences among samples due to formulation variables and the stability of sample configurations.

[1]  Gastón Ares,et al.  Temporal aspects of yoghurt texture perception , 2013 .

[2]  Juyun Lim,et al.  Qualitative differences of divalent salts: multidimensional scaling and cluster analysis. , 2005, Chemical senses.

[3]  Gastón Ares,et al.  Check-all-that-apply (CATA) responses elicited by consumers: Within-assessor reproducibility and stability of sensory product characterizations , 2013 .

[4]  Paula Varela,et al.  Exploring consumer product profiling techniques and their linkage to a quantitative descriptive analysis. , 2010 .

[5]  Edward B. Manoukian,et al.  Mathematical nonparametric statistics , 1986 .

[6]  Conor M. Delahunty,et al.  Descriptive sensory analysis: past, present and future , 2001 .

[7]  Dave Plaehn,et al.  CATA penalty/reward , 2012 .

[8]  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 .

[9]  Ivanne Soufflet,et al.  A comparison between industrial experts' and novices' haptic perceptual organization: a tool to identify descriptors of the handle of fabrics , 2004 .

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

[11]  John Prescott,et al.  Flavour as a psychological construct: implications for perceiving and measuring the sensory qualities of foods , 1999 .

[12]  Gastón Ares,et al.  Visual attention by consumers to check-all-that-apply questions: Insights to support methodological development , 2014 .

[13]  D. Muir,et al.  Rheology and sensory profiling of set‐type fermented milks made with different commercial probiotic and yoghurt starter cultures , 2003 .

[14]  Gastón Ares,et al.  Investigation of the number of consumers necessary to obtain stable sample and descriptor configurations from check-all-that-apply (CATA) questions , 2014 .

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

[16]  Pascal Schlich,et al.  Sensory methodologies and the taste of water. , 2010 .

[17]  Dominique Valentin,et al.  IMPACT OF TRAINING ON BEER FLAVOR PERCEPTION AND DESCRIPTION: ARE TRAINED AND UNTRAINED SUBJECTS REALLY DIFFERENT? , 2001 .

[18]  T. Ringrose.  Bootstrap confidence regions for correspondence analysis , 2012 .

[19]  Barbara Bigliardi,et al.  Innovation trends in the food industry: The case of functional foods , 2013 .

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

[21]  J. Delarue,et al.  Highlight of important product characteristics for consumers. Comparison of three sensory descriptive methods performed by consumers , 2011 .

[22]  Jérôme Pagès,et al.  Testing the significance of the RV coefficient , 2008, Comput. Stat. Data Anal..

[23]  Damien Brémaud,et al.  An alternative to external preference mapping based on consumer perceptive mapping , 2006 .

[24]  A. Tárrega,et al.  Effect of blends of short and long-chain inulin on the rheological and sensory properties of prebiotic low-fat custards , 2010 .

[25]  Tormod Næs,et al.  Analysing sensory panel performance in a proficiency test using the PanelCheck software , 2009 .

[26]  D. Small,et al.  Odor/taste integration and the perception of flavor , 2005, Experimental Brain Research.

[27]  Daniel Granato,et al.  Sensory Analysis: Relevance for Prebiotic, Probiotic, and Synbiotic Product Development. , 2010, Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety.

[28]  Peter J. H. Jones,et al.  Functional food development: concept to reality , 2007 .

[29]  Davide Giacalone,et al.  Comparison of three sensory profiling methods based on consumer perception: CATA, CATA with intensity and Napping® , 2014 .

[30]  Per B. Brockhoff,et al.  Confidence ellipses: A variation based on parametric bootstrapping applicable on Multiple Factor Analysis results for rapid graphical evaluation , 2012 .

[31]  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 .

[32]  Gastón Ares,et al.  APPLICATION OF A CHECK‐ALL‐THAT‐APPLY QUESTION TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHOCOLATE MILK DESSERTS , 2010 .

[33]  G. Ares,et al.  Comparison of Novel Methodologies for Sensory Characterization , 2014 .

[34]  Andreas Rytz,et al.  Sorting procedure as an alternative to quantitative descriptive analysis to obtain a product sensory map , 2006 .

[35]  Herbert Stone,et al.  Sensory Evaluation Practices , 1985 .

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

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

[38]  M. Quigley,et al.  Determination of resistant short-chain carbohydrates (non-digestible oligosaccharides) using gas–liquid chromatography , 1999 .

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

[40]  John C. Castura,et al.  Existing and new approaches for the analysis of CATA data , 2013 .

[41]  Sylvie Chollet,et al.  Invited review Quick and dirty but still pretty good: a review of new descriptive methods in food science , 2012 .

[42]  A. Kelly,et al.  Influence of starter culture on flavor and headspace volatile profiles of fermented whey and whey produced from fermented milk. , 2005, Journal of dairy science.

[43]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[44]  István Siró,et al.  Functional food. Product development, marketing and consumer acceptance—A review , 2008, Appetite.

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

[46]  Gastón Ares,et al.  EXTERNAL PREFERENCE MAPPING OF COMMERCIAL ANTIAGING CREAMS BASED ON CONSUMERS' RESPONSES TO A CHECK‐ALL‐THAT‐APPLY QUESTION , 2011 .

[47]  Rosires Deliza,et al.  Consumer perception of probiotic yogurt: Performance of check all that apply (CATA), projective mapping, sorting and intensity scale , 2013 .

[48]  Jason Parcon,et al.  A method to investigate the stability of a sorting map , 2012 .

[49]  A. Ismail,et al.  Prebiotics as functional foods: A review , 2013 .

[50]  Sébastien Lê,et al.  Confidence ellipse for the sensory profiles obtained by principal component analysis , 2005 .

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

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

[53]  Ronan Symoneaux,et al.  Comment analysis of consumer’s likes and dislikes as an alternative tool to preference mapping. A case study on apples , 2012 .

[54]  G. Fitzgerald,et al.  Exposure, health information and flavour-masking strategies for improving the sensory quality of probiotic juice , 2006, Appetite.

[55]  Gastón Ares,et al.  Stability of sample configurations from projective mapping: How many consumers are necessary? , 2014 .

[56]  E. Costell,et al.  Impact of sensory differences on consumer acceptability of yoghurt and yoghurt-like products , 2011 .

[57]  Anne Saint-Eve,et al.  Impact of the olfactory quality and chemical complexity of the flavouring agent on the texture of low fat stirred yogurts assessed by three different sensory methodologies , 2004 .

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

[59]  Gastón Ares,et al.  Sensory profiling, the blurred line between sensory and consumer science. A review of novel methods for product characterization , 2012 .