The Use of Standardized Flavor Languages and Quantitative Flavor Profiling Technique for Flavored Dairy Products

Sensory terminology is very important in descriptive analysis and perceptions are greatly influenced by the language. Definitions can be very useful for specifying and describing a sensation. However, many sensory attributes are not easily defined and physical reference standards can contribute a great deal to smoothing language problems. They can be used to develop the proper descriptive language, to reduce the amount of time required to train the sensory subjects, and to calibrate the panel in the use of the intensity scale, all the while providing documentation of the sensory terminology. The Quantitative Flavor Profiling (QFP) technique was applied to evaluate flavored cheese analog, yoghurt and sweetened milk samples. Specific standardized flavor languages were developed for each product type and included reference standards for each sensory descriptor. The results of QFP were analyzed by principal component analysis.

[1]  P. R. Laughlin,et al.  Discussion versus memory in cooperative group concept attainment. , 1967, Journal of Educational Psychology.

[2]  C. R. Stampanoni.  Influence of acid and sugar content on sweetness, sourness and the flavour profile of beverages and sherbets , 1993 .

[3]  Gail Vance Civille,et al.  A LEXICON OF POND-RAISED CATFISH FLAVOR DESCRIPTORS , 1987 .

[4]  Gail Vance Civille,et al.  A Standardized Lexicon of Meat WOF Descriptors , 1986 .

[5]  A. Noble,et al.  Profiling Zinfandel Wines by Sensory and Chemical Analyses , 1987, American Journal of Enology and Viticulture.

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

[7]  A. C. Noble,et al.  Modification of a Standardized System of Wine Aroma Terminology , 1987, American Journal of Enology and Viticulture.

[8]  Herbert L. Meiselman,et al.  Critical evaluation of sensory techniques , 1993 .

[9]  Einar Risvik,et al.  MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF CONVENTIONAL PROFILING DATA: A COMPARISON OF A BRITISH AND A NORWEGIAN TRAINED PANEL , 1992 .

[10]  Jean F. Caul,et al.  The Profile Method of Flavor Analysis , 1957 .

[11]  M. O'Mahony,et al.  Defining a Taste by a Single Standard: Aspects of Salty and Umami Tastes , 1987 .

[12]  Timothy H. Sanders,et al.  DEVELOPMENT OF A LEXICON FOR THE DESCRIPTION OF PEANUT FLAVOR , 1988 .

[13]  Mina R. McDaniel,et al.  SENSORY PANEL TRAINING AND SCREENING FOR DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS OF THE AROMA OF PINOT NOIR WINE FERMENTED BY SEVERAL STRAINS OF MALOLACTIC BACTERIA , 1987 .

[14]  Edgar Chambers,et al.  DETERMINATION OF THE SENSORY FLAVOR ATTRIBUTES OF AGED NATURAL CHEESE , 1993 .

[15]  E. Hunter,et al.  SENSORY PROPERTIES OF FERMENTED MILKS: OBJECTIVE REDUCTION OF AN EXTENSIVE SENSORY VOCABULARY , 1993 .

[16]  D. S. Reid,et al.  Reference Standards for Beer Flavor Terminology System , 1982 .

[17]  D. Homa,et al.  Role of feedback, category size, and stimulus distortion on the acquisition and utilization of ill-defined categories , 1984 .

[18]  M. O'Mahony,et al.  Group taste concept measurement: verbal and physical definition of the umami taste concept for Japanese and Americans , 1990 .

[19]  Michael O'Mahony,et al.  TASTE DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS: CONCEPT FORMATION, ALIGNMENT AND APPROPRIATENESS , 1990 .

[20]  Barbara A. Rainey.  IMPORTANCE OF REFERENCE STANDARDS IN TRAINING PANELISTS , 1986 .

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