THREE SCALING METHODS FOR CONSUMER RATING OF SALT INTENSITY

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

This study aimed to identify a scaling technique, which would offer the greatest degree of discrimination and accuracy in an evaluation of soup samples, varying in salt concentration (0.3, 0.8 and 1.3% salt). A Seven Point Category Scale, a 100 mm Line scale and non-modulus Magnitude Estimation were used to evaluate samples by consumers (n = 36).A Friedman Two-Way ANOVA and a Wilcoxon Signed Ranks test were applied to the data to compare discriminatory ability and accuracy of the scaling techniques. Results revealed that each of the techniques could be used to discriminate between samples (P
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)263-274
JournalJournal of Sensory Studies
Volume17
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2002

Bibliographical note

Reference text: British Standards Institute. 1989. British standard guide to design of test rooms for sensory analysis of food — BS 7138, pp. 1–9, British Standards Institute, London .
CESERANI, V., KINTON, R. and FOSKETT, D. 2000. Practical Cookery, 9th Ed., pp. 114 and 144, Hodder and Stoughton, London .
DE LA HUNTY, A. 1995. The COMA report on nutritional aspects of cardiovascular disease: the scientific evidence. Brit. Food J. 97(9), 30–32.
CrossRefDREWNOWSKI, A., AHLSTROM HENDERSON, S., DRISCOLL, A. and ROLLS, B.J. 1996. Salt taste perceptions and preferences are unrelated to sodium consumption in healthy older adults. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 96, 471–474.
CrossRef,PubMed,CAS,Web of Science®GALVEZ, F.G.F. and RESURRECCION, A.V.A. 1990. Comparison of three descriptive analysis scaling methods for the sensory evaluation of noodles. J. Sensory Studies 5, 251–263.
Direct Link:AbstractPDF(601K)
GIBSON, J.M.A., ARMSTRONG, G.A. and McILVEEN, H. 2000. A case for reducing salt in processed foods. Nutr. Food Sci. 30(4), 167–173.
CrossRefGIOVANNI, M.E. and PANGBORN, R.M. 1983. Measurement of taste intensity and degree of liking of beverages by graphic rating scales and magnitude estimation. J. Food Sci. 48, 1175–1181.
Direct Link:AbstractPDF(1090K)ReferencesWeb of Science®
GRAY, J., ARMSTRONG, G., GIBSON, J. and KIRK-SMITH, M. 2000. Sensory scaling — a comparison of trained vs untrained panellists for magnitude estimation. Appetite 35, 199.
IFST (Institute of Food Science and Technology) 1999. Salt : Position Statement, IFST.
LANE, H.L., CANTANIA, A.C. and STEVENS, S.S. 1961. Voice level: autophonic scale, perceived loudness and the effect of side tone. J. Acoustic Soc. Am. 33, 160–167.
CrossRef,Web of Science®,ADSLAWLESS, H.T. and HEYMANN, H. 1998. Sensory Evaluation of Food — Principles and Practices, pp. 217 and 225, Chapman and Hall, New York .
LAWLESS, H.T. and MALONE, G.J. 1986a. The discriminative efficiency of common scaling methods. J. Sensory Studies 1, 85–89.
Direct Link:AbstractPDF(622K)References
LAWLESS, H.T. and MALONE, G.J. 1986b. A comparison of rating scales: Sensitivity, replicates and relative measurement. J. Sensory Studies 1, 155–174.
Direct Link:AbstractPDF(705K)References
LITTLE, A.C. and BRINNER, L. 1984. Taste responses to saltiness of experimentally prepared tomato juice samples. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 84(9), 1022–1027.
PubMed,CAS,Web of Science®MEILGAARD, M., CIVILLE, G.V. and CARR, B.T. 1991. Sensory Evaluation Techniques, pp. 53–55, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida .
MOSKOWITZ, H.R. 1974. Sensory evaluation by magnitude estimation. Food Technol. 28(11), 16–21.
Web of Science®MOSKOWITZ, H.R. and SIDEL, J.L. 1971. Magnitude and Hedonic Scales of food acceptability. J. Food Sci. 36, 677–680.
Direct Link:AbstractPDF(420K)ReferencesWeb of Science®
PERYAM, D.R. and PILGRIM, F.J. 1957. Hedonic scale method of measuring food preferences. Food Technol. 11, 9–14.
PIGGOTT, J.R., SIMPSON, S.J. and WILLIAMS, S.A.R. 1998. Sensory analysis. Intern. J. Food Sci. Technol. 33, 7–18.
Direct Link:AbstractPDF(174K)Web of Science®
SHEPHERD, R., FARLEIGH, C.A. and LAND, D.G. 1984a. Preference and sensitivity to salt taste as determinants of salt intake. Appetite 5, 187–197.
PubMed,CAS,Web of Science®SHEPHERD, R., FARLEIGH, C.A. and LAND, D.G. 1984b. The relationship between salt intake and preferences for different salt levels in soup. Appetite 5, 281–290.
PubMed,CAS,Web of Science®SIDEL, J.L. and STONE, H. 1993. The role of sensory evaluation in the food industry. Food Qual. Pref. 4, 65–73.
CrossRefSTEVENS, S.S. 1975. Psychophysics: An Introduction to Its Perceptual, Neural and Social Prospects, pp. 29–31, John Wiley, New York .
Web of Science® Times Cited: 15WHITWORTH, M. 2001. Season of discontent. Food Manufacture 76(5), 32–33.

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'THREE SCALING METHODS FOR CONSUMER RATING OF SALT INTENSITY'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this