Contents
• Food sensory science and evaluation: An overview
• Food sensory science:
  • Physiological and Psychological Foundations of Sensory Function
• General requirements in Food Sensory evaluation
  • Panelists selection
  • Sensory panel
  • Sensory evaluation: organization and operation
• Sensory evaluation: Discrimination testing
• Sensory evaluation: Descriptive analysis
• Sensory evaluation: Effective testing
• Data analysis in food sensory evaluation
• Determination of shelf life by sensory evaluation
Consumer Test Methods
     By test location
             Consumer Test
• Laboratory Tests
• Central Location Test (CLT)
• Special types of CLT: Mobile lab, cart
• Home-Use Test (HUT
           Laboratory Tests
• Most frequently used test
• Responses per product: at least 50
• Product number per sitting: 2-5
           Laboratory Tests
• Advantages
  ✓ Convenient location
  ✓ Laboratory Test
  ✓ Controlled conditions
  ✓ Rapid feedback
• Disadvantages
  ✓ Familiarity with product
  ✓ Limited information
Central Location Test, CLT
• The most frequently used consumer tests
  especially by those conducting Central
  Location Test (CLT) market research
  Central Location Test, CLT
• Conducted in shopping mall or location accessible
  to public
• Consumers: pre-recruited or intercepted
• 100 or more responses per product
• 1- 4 products
   Central Location Test, CLT
• Advantages
  ✓ Large number of respondents
  ✓ No employees used only “real” consumers
• Disadvantages
  ✓ Limited resources
  ✓ Limited controls
  ✓ Limited tasks performed
  ✓ Limited food preparation facilities
      Special Types of Customer
            Location Test
• The method that bring the advantages of both the
  laboratory test and the central location test in one test.
• The use of a mobile laboratory provides facilities for
  sample preparation and testing that can be
  environmentally controlled much like a permanent
  laboratory facility, yet provide the numbers and
  diversity of consumers that can be intercepted at a
  central location.
   Special Types of Customer
         Location Test
• Participants are usually recruited through
  intercepts made at the location where the mobile
  laboratory is parked.
• The test is usually run by sensory staff
      Special Types of Customer
            Location Test
• Advantages
  ✓ Large number of respondents
  ✓ No employees used, only “real” consumers
  ✓ The sample preparation and testing facilities may
   allow better control of the testing than many central
   location test facilities have to offer.
    Special Types of Customer
          Location Test
• Disadvantages
  ✓ The expense of the purchase and maintenance of
   the laboratory
  ✓ Logistical arrangements have to be made prior to
   the test for parking and use of power plug-ins
  ✓ Not all types of food can be tested in mobile lab.
Colmar Brunton's 12.5 m long,
    mobile research bus
       Home-Use Test, HUT
• Referred to as home placement or in-home placement
  tests.
• Require that the test be conducted in the participants’
  own homes.
• They provide testing conditions that are not
  researcher-controlled, thereby could yield the most
  variable results.
      Home-Use Test, HUT
• Use consumers or employees
• Responses per product
   depends on product
• Test preference, acceptance or performance
• Samples are tested under normal use conditions.
    Home-Use Test, HUT
• Advantages
 ❖ actual use conditions
 ❖ responses of entire household
 ❖ marketing information can be obtained
    Home-Use Test, HUT
• Disadvantages
  ✓ Little or no control
  ✓ Cost
  ✓ Greater “non-response” rates
  ✓ Time consuming
Reference
• “Sensory science is increasingly seen as providing
  the tools to understand those product
  characteristics important in determining
  consumer likes and dislikes”
“No matter how excellent a product is, from the
objective view of a scientist focusing on nutrition,
safety, stability and apparent functionality, a
product is not successful if it does not please the
consumer sufficiently to make him or her buy it”
                                           (Karel, 2000)