AS 2542.2.

3:2014
ISO 4121:2003
AS 2542.2.3:2014
Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Sensory analysis

Part 2.3: Methodology—Guidelines for

the use of quantitative response scales
(rating)
 This Australian Standard® was prepared by Committee FT-022, Sensory Analysis of Food. It
was approved on behalf of the Council of Standards Australia on 18 November 2014.
This Standard was published on 17 December 2014.

The following are represented on Committee FT-022:

• Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry

• Australian Institute of Food Science and Technology
• Australian Society of Cosmetic Chemists
• Brewers Association of Australia and New Zealand
• Deakin University
• Defence Science and Technology Organisation
• Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Qld
• Food Technology Association of Australia
• National Association of Testing Authorities Australia
• National Measurement Institute
• University of Queensland
Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

This Standard was issued in draft form for comment as DR AS 2542.2.3:2014.

Standards Australia wishes to acknowledge the participation of the expert individuals that
contributed to the development of this Standard through their representation on the
Committee and through the public comment period.

Keeping Standards up-to-date

Australian Standards® are living documents that reflect progress in science, technology and
systems. To maintain their currency, all Standards are periodically reviewed, and new editions
are published. Between editions, amendments may be issued.

Standards may also be withdrawn. It is important that readers assure themselves they are
using a current Standard, which should include any amendments that may have been
published since the Standard was published.

Detailed information about Australian Standards, drafts, amendments and new projects can
be found by visiting www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia welcomes suggestions for improvements, and encourages readers to

notify us immediately of any apparent inaccuracies or ambiguities. Contact us via email at
mail@standards.org.au, or write to Standards Australia, GPO Box 476, Sydney, NSW 2001.
 AS 2542.2.3:2014

Australian Standard®

Sensory analysis
Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Part 2.3: Methodology—Guidelines for

the use of quantitative response scales
(rating)

Originated as AS 2542.2.3—1988.
Previous edition 2007.
Third edition AS 2542.2.3:2014.

COPYRIGHT
© Standards Australia Limited
All rights are reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or copied in any form or by
any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, without the written
permission of the publisher, unless otherwise permitted under the Copyright Act 1968.
Published by SAI Global Limited under licence from Standards Australia Limited, GPO Box
476, Sydney, NSW 2001, Australia
ISBN 978 1 74342 922 8
 AS 2542.2.3:2014 ii

PREFACE

This Standard was prepared by Standards Australia Committee FT-022, Sensory Analysis of Food to
supersede AS 2542.2.3:2007, Sensory analysis, Part 2.3: Specific methods—Guidelines for the use of
quantitative response scales (rating).
The objective of this Standard is to provide guidelines describing quantitative response scales (where
the response obtained indicates the intensity of perception) and their use when assessing samples.
This Standard is identical with, and has been reproduced from ISO 4121:2003, Sensory analysis—
Guidelines for the use of quantitative response scales.
Appendix ZA provides additional information on Clause 5, Response scales, by covering examples of
various types of rating scales and specimen answer forms.
As this Standard is reproduced from an International Standard, the following applies:
(a) In the source text ‘this International Standard’ should read ‘this Australian Standard’.
(b) A full point substitutes for a comma when referring to a decimal marker.
References to International Standards should be replaced by references to Australian Standards, as
Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

follows:
Reference to International Standard Australian Standard
ISO AS
5492 Sensory analysis—Vocabulary 2542 Sensory analysis
2542.3 Part 3: Vocabulary
6658 Sensory analysis—Methodology— 2542.1.1 Part 1.1: Methodology—General
General guidance guidance
8586 Sensory analysis—General guidelines 2542.1.3 Part 1.3: General guidelines for the
for the selection, training and selection, training and monitoring of
monitoring of assessors, Parts 1 and 2* selected assessors and expert sensory
assessors
8587 Sensory analysis—Methodology— 2542.2.6 Part 2.6: Methodology—Ranking
Ranking
Only normative references that have been adopted as Australian Standards have been listed.
The term ‘informative’ has been used in this Standard to define the application of the annex or
appendix to which it applies. An ‘informative’ annex or appendix is only for information and
guidance.

* ISO 8586, Parts 1 and 2 were revised and amalgamated in 2012 to become ISO 8586, Sensory analysis—General
guidelines for the selection, training and monitoring of selected assessors and expert sensory assessors, which was
adopted as AS 2542.1.3:2014.
 AS 2542.2.3:2014 iii

Contents Page
CONTENTS
Foreword ............................................................................................................................................................ iv
1 Scope...................................................................................................................................................... 1
2 Normative references ........................................................................................................................... 1
3 Terms and definitions........................................................................................................................... 1
4 General considerations ........................................................................................................................ 3
5 Response scales ................................................................................................................................... 3
5.1 General ................................................................................................................................................... 3
5.2 Numerical and verbal response scales............................................................................................... 3
5.3 Dynamic response scales .................................................................................................................... 4
5.4 Pictorial response scales ..................................................................................................................... 4
6 Choice of response scale..................................................................................................................... 5
6.1 General ................................................................................................................................................... 5
6.2 Choice of unipolar or bipolar response scale.................................................................................... 5
6.3 Choice of continuous or discrete response scale............................................................................. 5
6.4 Equality of the response scale intervals ............................................................................................ 6
6.5 Quality of the measurements obtained using response scales....................................................... 6
6.6 Statistical analysis ................................................................................................................................ 6
Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Annex A (informative) Application examples .................................................................................................. 7

Bibliography ....................................................................................................................................................... 9

© ISO 2003 — All rights reserved iii

Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

AS 2542.2.3:2014
iv

NOTES
 AS 2542.2.3:2014 1
INTERNATIONAL STANDARD ISO 4121:2003(E)
AUSTRALIAN STANDARD

Sensory analysis
Sensory
Part 2.3: analysis — Guidelines for the use of quantitative
response scales
Methodology—Guidelines for the use of quantitative response scales
(rating)

1 Scope
This International Standard provides guidelines describing quantitative response scales (where the response
obtained indicates the intensity of perception) and their use when assessing samples.

It is applicable to all quantitative assessment, whether global or specific and whether objective or hedonic.

It is intentionally limited to the most commonly used measurement scales for sensory assessment.
Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

It is necessary to distinguish between two common uses of the term “scale”: response scale (see 3.1), and
measurement scale (see 3.5).

NOTE Annex A gives examples of an application.

2 Normative references
The following referenced documents are indispensable for the application of this document. For dated
references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references, the latest edition of the referenced
document (including any amendments) applies.

ISO 5492, Sensory analysis — Vocabulary

ISO 6658, Sensory analysis — Methodology — General guidance

ISO 8586-1, Sensory analysis — General guidance for the selection, training and monitoring of assessors —
Part 1: Selected assessors

ISO 8586-2, Sensory analysis — General guidance for the selection, training and monitoring of assessors —
Part 2: Experts

ISO 8587, Sensory analysis — Methodology — Ranking

3 Terms and definitions

For the purposes of this document, the terms and definitions given in ISO 5492 and the following apply.

3.1
response scale
means (e.g. numerical, verbal or pictorial) by which an assessor registers a quantitative response

NOTE 1 In sensory analysis, this is a device or tool to capture the reaction of an assessor to some property such that it
can be converted into numbers.

NOTE 2 The term “scale” is widely used as being equivalent to the expression “response scale”.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

© ISO 2003 — All rights reserved 1
 ISO
AS4121:2003(E)
2542.2.3:2014 2

3.2
measure, verb
record the quantity of a property

3.3
measurement
action of measuring

3.4
measurement
number resulting from the action of measuring

3.5
measurement scale
formal relationship (e.g. ordinal, interval or ratio) between a property (e.g. the intensity of a sensory
perception) and the numbers used to represent values of the property (e.g. numbers registered by the
assessors or derived from the assessors' responses)

NOTE The term “scale” is widely used as being equivalent to the expression “measurement scale”.

3.5.1
ordinal scale
Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

scale in which the order of the values allocated corresponds to the order of the intensities perceived for the
property being assessed

NOTE The size of the difference between two values cannot be assumed to reflect the difference between the
perceived intensities. Neither can the ratio of two values be assumed to reflect the ratio of the perceived intensities.

EXAMPLES Richter scale of earthquake intensity and Beaufort scale of wind strength.

3.5.2
interval scale
scale which, in addition to possessing the attributes of an ordinal scale, is distinguished by the fact that equal
differences between numerical values correspond to equal differences between properties measured (in
sensory analysis, perceived intensities)

NOTE Larger values correspond to larger perceived intensities and the size of the difference between two values
reflects the size of the difference in perceived intensity of the property being measured. However, a numerical value of
zero may not indicate a total absence of the property and the ratio of two values cannot be assumed to reflect the ratio of
the perceived intensities.

EXAMPLES Celsius and Fahrenheit temperature scales.

3.5.3
ratio scale
scale which has the properties of an interval scale but for which, in addition, the ratio between the values
allocated to two stimuli is equal to the ratio between the perceived intensities of these stimuli

NOTE 1 With this scale, a numerical value of zero designates total absence of the property.

NOTE 2 The ratio scale is the only case for which it is meaningful to say that one result is, for instance, ten times as
great as another.

EXAMPLES Kelvin temperature scale, mass and length scales.

2 www.standards.org.au © ISO 2003 — ©

AllStandards
rights reserved
Australia
 AS 2542.2.3:2014 3 ISO 4121:2003(E)

3.6
referencing
use of one or more specified standards to designate particular values (numeric or semantic) on the response
scale

NOTE 1 A specified concentration of sucrose in water may correspond to a specified numerical value on a scale of
sweetness.

NOTE 2 A reference is not always physical (e.g. a hedonic ideal).

3.7
end effect
tendency of assessors to under-use or over-use the extremities of the response scale

NOTE The most usual end effect is for assessors to avoid using the highest and lowest scale values, one reason
being to leave responses available for future, extreme samples that do not, in fact, occur.

4 General considerations
All methodologies that use response scales should take the following into account:
Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

 the usual general conditions under which sensory analyses should be carried out; refer in particular to the
International Standards concerning general guidance for sensory analysis (ISO 6658), layout of test
rooms intended for sensory analysis (ISO 8589), selection and training of assessors and experts
(ISO 8586-1 and ISO 8586-2);

 specific standards that use the relevant scale, for example, sensory profiles (ISO 6564, ISO 13299) or
classification (ISO 8587).

5 Response scales

5.1 General

A distinction can be made between numerical, verbal, dynamic and pictorial scales. However, all types of
response scale are usually translated into numbers for the purposes of analysis and interpretation (see
Figure 1).

5.2 Numerical and verbal response scales

Numerical and verbal response scales are the types most commonly used in sensory analysis. Some
examples are shown in Figure 1. For more details, see [4] and [5].

Each assessor gives a response either by selecting it on a questionnaire (e.g. by circling the appropriate
response or by marking the appropriate box) or by producing it (e.g. by writing down a number to represent
the perceived intensity or by marking a position on a line).

Line scales permit unlimited fineness of differentiation among responses and are examples of continuous
scales, whereas category scales allow only certain predefined responses and are examples of discrete scales
(see 6.3).

© ISO 2003 — All rights reserved

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia 3
 ISO
AS4121:2003(E)
2542.2.3:2014 4
Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Figure 1 — Examples of response scales

5.3 Dynamic response scales

Dynamic response scales are continuous scales used, for example, to record the intensity of a perception as it
changes over time. The assessor may move a cursor along an intensity scale using a computer mouse or
joystick, or may adjust a potentiometer, or the spacing of his or her fingers.

5.4 Pictorial response scales

Pictorial response scales are discrete scales. They are often presented in the form of a series of stylized faces
that illustrate different expressions from extreme liking to extreme dislike. They are often used for hedonic
tests conducted with children whose reading and/or understanding capacities are limited.

The assessor indicates the face to the person conducting the experiment or selects it himself/herself. The
various expressions are then converted into numbers in order to be processed (see [6]).

4 www.standards.org.au © ISO 2003 — ©

AllStandards
rights reserved
Australia
 AS 2542.2.3:2014 5 ISO 4121:2003(E)

6 Choice of response scale

6.1 General

The choice of response scale depends on the objectives of the study, the products being studied and the
panel.

Whatever response scale is adopted, it is necessary that it be

 easily understood by the assessors,

 easy to use,

 discriminating, and

 unbiased.

6.2 Choice of unipolar or bipolar response scale

The polarity of a scale is defined by the location of the neutral or zero point:
Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

 in a unipolar scale, the neutral or zero point is located at one end of the scale;

 in a bipolar scale, the neutral or zero point is located at the centre of the scale.

A bipolar scale is used when the intensity of a property can differ in either direction from a neutral or ideal
value. For example, a bipolar scale may run from “Not sweet enough” to “Too sweet”, whereas a unipolar
scale may run from “Not at all sweet” to “Extremely sweet”.

When constructing bipolar scales, an inappropriate choice of scale anchors can produce a scale that does not
form a true continuum and has no logical centre point. Avoid the use of anchors that are not based on a single
attribute (e.g. “dark brown” to “bright red”) unless they lie on a recognized sequence of stages or grades of the
product.

6.3 Choice of continuous or discrete response scale

6.3.1 Continuous scale

Assessors may be asked to make numerical responses on a continuous scale, meaning that numbers with
fractional parts can be used. Line scales are typically 15 cm (6 in) long, labelled at each end with the extreme
values of the attribute being assessed. The assessor responds by marking the line in the position
corresponding to the perceived intensity. The marked position is converted to a number by the analyst.

A continuous scale gives assessors an opportunity to express small differences in judgement. On the other
hand, the task may seem more difficult than using a category scale and transcription of the data takes longer
unless an automatic data acquisition system is available.

6.3.2 Discrete scale

In the case of discrete scales, it has been observed that:

 the smaller the number of categories, the greater the end effect, which therefore diminishes the
discriminatory capacity of the scale (see [7]);

 assessors with little training consider a discrete (9-point) scale easier to use than a continuous (15 cm)
scale (see [8]);

© ISO 2003 — All rights reserved

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia 5
 ISO
AS4121:2003(E)
2542.2.3:2014 6

 9-point hedonic scales may be more discriminating than 7- or 5-point scales (see [9] and [10]);

 the response times of the assessors and the repeatability of responses are independent of the number of
graduations (see [9] and [10]).

6.4 Equality of the response scale intervals

There is no direct relationship between the response scale used and the measurement scale that corresponds
to the values recorded. Thus the same response scale can lead to values that are only ordinal (unequal
intervals) or that are on an interval scale (equal intervals).

In sensory analysis, it is the perception of a property that is assessed, not the property itself, and it is
impossible to be certain that equality of the intervals has been achieved. While it is quite usual to interpret the
results as if they correspond to an interval or ratio measurement scale, this interpretation should be expressed
in each specific case as a working hypothesis.

6.5 Quality of the measurements obtained using response scales

Irrespective of the response scale, the quality of the measurements depends on the manner in which they
were obtained. The aspects to be considered are as follows.
Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

a) Training level of the assessors

See ISO 8586-1 and ISO 8586-2.

Assessors should be trained to represent equal differences in perception by equal differences on the
response scale and to use the entire response scale in a homogeneous manner in order to minimize end
effects.

Assessors may also be trained to associate particular levels of perception with corresponding scale
values, particularly in sensory profiling.

b) Presentation of the samples

See the general considerations relative to presentation of samples in ISO 6658.

6.6 Statistical analysis

For statistical processing of the recorded data, see ISO 8587 for the Friedman test and standard textbooks
(such as [11]) for analysis of variance.

6 www.standards.org.au © ISO 2003 — ©

AllStandards
rights reserved
Australia
 AS 2542.2.3:2014 7 ISO 4121:2003(E)

Annex A
(informative)

Application examples

A.1 Objective and procedure

The objective is to quantify the differences in sweetness among five samples of chocolate bar.

First take the following decisions.

a) Should the presentation of samples be monadic or comparative?

b) Which response scale will be used?

c) Which measurement scale will be assumed?

Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

A.2 Example 1
This shows a comparative presentation using a unipolar, continuous response scale.

An example of a reply form is shown in Figure A.1. An interval scale measurement is assumed.

Figure A.1 — Reply form for Example 1

© ISO 2003 — All rights reserved

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia 7
 ISO
AS4121:2003(E)
2542.2.3:2014 8

A.3 Example 2
This shows a sequential, monadic presentation using a numerical, unipolar, discrete response scale.

Each sample will have its own response form, for example as shown in Figure A.2. An interval scale
measurement is assumed.
Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Figure A.2 — Reply form for Example 2

The choice of the type of response scale depends on the assessors' degree of training and on the objectives
of the study. It does not depend on the method of presentation being comparative or monadic.

8 www.standards.org.au © ISO 2003 — ©

AllStandards
rights reserved
Australia
 AS 2542.2.3:2014 9 ISO 4121:2003(E)

Bibliography

[1] ISO 6564, Sensory analysis — Methodology — Flavour profile methods

[2] ISO 8589, Sensory analysis — General guidance for the design of test rooms

[3] ISO 13299, Sensory analysis – Methodology – General guidance for establishing a sensory profile

[4] LAWLESS, H.T. and HEYMANN, H.H. Sensory evaluation of food: Principles and practices. Chapman and
Hall, New York, 1998

[5] MEILGAARD, M., CIVILLE, G.V. and CARR, B.T. Sensory evaluation techniques, 3rd ed. CRC Press,
London, 1999

[6] SPAETH, E.E., CHAMBERS, E.IV and SCHWENKE, J.R. A comparison of acceptability scaling methods for
use with children. Product Testing with Consumers for Research Guidance: Special Consumer Group.
ASTM STP I 1 55, L. S. Wu and A. D. Gelinas, Eds. American Society for Testing and Materials,
Philadelphia, 1992
Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

[7] KÖSTER, E.P. Odeurs et désodorisation dans l'environnement. Martin, G. and Lafont, P. Eds.,
Lavoisier, Tec. & Doc. , 1991

[8] LAWLESS, H. and MALONE, G. The discriminative efficiency of common scaling methods. J. Sensory
Studies, 1, 1986, pp. 85-98

[9] JONES, L.V., PEYRAM D.R. and THURSTONE L.L. Development of a scale for measuring soldiers' food
preferences. Food Research, 20, 1955, pp. 512-520

[10] KROLL, B.J. Evaluating rating scales for sensory testing with children. Food Technology. 11, 1990,
pp. 78-86

[11] LEA, P., NÆS, T. and RØDBOTTEN, M. Analysis of variance for sensory data. Wiley, New York, 1997

© ISO 2003 — All rights reserved

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia 9
 AS 2542.2.3:2014 10

APPENDIX ZA
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR AUSTRALIAN STANDARD
(Informative)

ZA1 SCOPE
This Appendix provides additional examples of rating scales and response forms to supplement the
information given in Clause 5 and Annex A. These examples have been found to be suitable when
applied in Australia.

ZA2 EXAMPLES OF RATING SCALES

13 - p o i n t f o r 9 - point for 6 - point for

r a t i n g s we e t n e s s rating intensity a f l avo u r n o t e

E x tr e m e l y E x tr e m e l y Ve r y
swe e t strong pronounced
Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Pr o n o u n c e d

Ve r y s t r o n g N oti c e a b l e
Ve r y
swe e t S l i g ht

M o d e r a te Ve r y s l i g ht

N ot
M o d e r a te l y d e te c t a b l e
swe e t S l i g ht

A b s e nt
S li g htly
swe e t

No
swe e tn e s s

FIGURE ZA1 UNIPOLAR CATEGORY SCALES

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 AS 2542.2.3:2014 11

N o swe e tn e s s M o d e r ate l y swe et E x t r e m e l y swe e t

A b s e nt M o d e r a te Extremely strong

N ot d e te c t a b l e Ve r y p r o n o u n c e d

FIGURE ZA2 GRAPHIC RATING SCALES FOR MEASUREMENT OF SENSORY INTENSITY

Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

9 - point 13 - p o i n t

L ike ex t r e m e l y Extremely good

L ike ve r y m u c h

L ike m o d e r a te l y Ve r y g o o d

L ike s li g htl y

N e ithe r like / di s like Good

D i s like s li g htl y

D i s like m o d e r a te l y S a ti s fa c to r y

D i s like ve r y m u c h

D i s like ex tr e m e l y Po o r

Ve r y p o o r

E x tr e m e l y p o o r

5 - point facial hedonic:

FIGURE ZA3 CATEGORY SCALES FOR MEASUREMENT OF HEDONIC TONE

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 AS 2542.2.3:2014 12

D i s like ex tre m e l y N e i th e r like L ike ex tre m e l y

n o r d i s l i ke

E x tr e m e l y p o o r S a ti s fa c to r y E x tr e m e l y g o o d

FIGURE ZA4 GRAPHIC RATING SCALES FOR MEASUREMENT OF HEDONIC TONE

ZA3 SPECIMEN RESPONSE FORMS

D a te Time Name

Pl e a s e t a s te th e s e s u c r o s e s o l u ti o n s i n th e o r d e r s p e c i f i e d a n d r a te th e d e g r e e of
Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

swe etn e s s o n th e s c a l e s p r ovi d e d b e l ow.

Af te r yo u h ave t a s te d e a c h s u f f i c i e ntl y, s p i t i t o u t i n th e p a p e r c u p p r ovi d e d,
th e n r i n s e o u t yo u r m o u th th o r o u g h l y wi th wate r b efo r e p r o c e e di n g to th e n ex t s a m p l e.

Order of tasting

E x tr e m e l y swe e t

Ve r y swe e t

M o d e r ate l y swe et

S li g htl y swe e t

N o swe e tn e s s at a ll

FIGURE ZA5 SWEETNESS RATING OF FOUR SUCROSE SOLUTIONS ON A 13-POINT

CATEGORY SCALE

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 AS 2542.2.3:2014 13

D a te Time Name

Pl e a s e t a s te th e s e s u c r o s e s o l u ti o n s i n th e o r d e r s p e c i f i e d b e l ow.
Af te r yo u h ave t a s te d e a c h s u f f i c i e ntl y, s p i t i t o u t, th e n r i n s e o u t yo u r m o u th
tho r o u g h ly wi th wate r b efo r e p r o c e e di n g to th e n ex t s a m p l e.

1. S a m p l e

N o swe e tn e s s M o d e r a te l y E x tr e m e l y
at a ll swe e t swe e t

2. S a m p l e

N o swe e tn e s s M o d e r a te l y E x tr e m e l y
at a ll swe e t swe e t

3. S a m p l e

N o swe e tn e s s M o d e r a te l y E x tr e m e l y
at a ll swe e t swe e t
Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

4. S a m p l e

N o swe e tn e s s M o d e r a te l y E x tr e m e l y
at a ll swe e t swe e t

FIGURE ZA6 SWEETNESS RATING OF FOUR SUCROSE SOLUTIONS ON A GRAPHIC RATING

SCALE

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 AS 2542.2.3:2014 14

Pr o d u c t

D a te Time Name

Pl e a s e t a s te th e s e s a m p l e s i n th e o r d e r s p e c i f i e d a n d r ate th e i r g e n e r a l
a c c e pt a b ili t y o n th e s c a l e s p r ovi d e d.

Order of tasting

Extremely good

Good

S a ti s fa c to r y

Po o r
Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

E x tr e m e l y p o o r

FIGURE ZA7 ACCEPTABILITY RATING OF THREE PRODUCT FORMULATIONS ON A 9-POINT

CATEGORY SCALE

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 AS 2542.2.3:2014 15

Pr o d u c t

D a te Time Name

Pl e a s e t a s te th e s e s a m p l e s i n th e o r d e r s p e c i f i e d a n d r ate th e i r g e n e r a l
a c c e pt a b ili t y o n th e s c a l e s p r ovi d e d.

1. S a m p l e

E x tr e m e l y S a ti s fa c to r y E x tr e m e l y
poor good

2. S a m p l e

E x tr e m e l y S a ti s fa c to r y E x tr e m e l y
poor good

3. S a m p l e
Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

E x tr e m e l y S a ti s fa c to r y E x tr e m e l y
poor good

FIGURE ZA8 ACCEPTABILITY RATING OF THREE PRODUCT FORMULATIONS ON A GRAPHIC

RATING SCALE

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

AS 2542.2.3:2014
16

NOTES
 Standards Australia
Standards Australia develops Australian Standards® and other documents of public benefit and national interest.
These Standards are developed through an open process of consultation and consensus, in which all interested
parties are invited to participate. Through a Memorandum of Understanding with the Commonwealth Government,
Standards Australia is recognized as Australia’s peak non-government national standards body.

For further information visit www.standards.org.au

Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Australian Standards®
Committees of experts from industry, governments, consumers and other relevant sectors prepare Australian
Standards. The requirements or recommendations contained in published Standards are a consensus of the views
of representative interests and also take account of comments received from other sources. They reflect the latest
scientific and industry experience. Australian Standards are kept under continuous review after publication and are
updated regularly to take account of changing technology.

International Involvement
Standards Australia is responsible for ensuring the Australian viewpoint is considered in the formulation of
International Standards and that the latest international experience is incorporated in national Standards. This role is
vital in assisting local industry to compete in international markets. Standards Australia represents Australia at both
the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC).

Sales and Distribution

Australian Standards®, Handbooks and other documents developed by Standards Australia are printed and
distributed under licence by SAI Global Limited.
Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

For information regarding the development of Standards contact:

Standards Australia Limited
GPO Box 476
Sydney NSW 2001
Phone: 02 9237 6000
Fax: 02 9237 6010
Email: mail@standards.org.au
Internet: www.standards.org.au

For information regarding the sale and distribution of Standards contact:

SAI Global Limited
Phone: 13 12 42
Fax: 1300 65 49 49
Email: sales@saiglobal.com

ISBN 978 1 74342 922 8

Accessed by VICTORIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY on 05 Apr 2017 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

This page has been left intentionally blank.