EXPERIMENT 5 HEDONIC TEST SUMMARY In the food laboratory, the quality of food refers to characteristics in foods that can be subjectively evaluated by human senses. Physical and chemical properties of food are factors that measure food quality; however, measurement of these properties cannot always be quantitative or relevant when it comes to consumer perception and satisfaction. For these reasons, methods of food sensory evaluation have been developed for more subjective ways to measure food qualities including tests conducted in this experiment. One of them is hedonic test which are an extension of paired preference test. Three or more coded samples are presented simultaneously, sufficient in amount so that the panelists so that the panelist can re taste the product. The number of sample tasted is dependent upon the panelists’ span of attention and memory as well as physiological consideration. With untrained or naïve panelist, no more than four to six sample may be included in a test. The panelist is asked to assign an order to the sample according to his or her preference. Based on the experiment conducted, hedonic test conducted in the laboratory yielded fairly consistent results when measuring the intensity of likeness where food sample 1 has higher mean vale with 4.27 following with 20% of likeness from sample 3 and 10% for each sample 2 and sample 4.
INTRODUCTION Food acceptability is largely determined by the five human senses: sight, taste, smell, hearing, and touch. Knowledge of food acceptability is important for many reasons including the health, marketing, sales, and development of food products. All of these senses are important factors in food selection and perceived quality (Brown 2008). For these reasons, food sensory evaluation tests have been developed, evaluated and used in all areas of the food industry. Each method of sensory evaluation has advantages and disadvantages of their own which caused that the test is suitable for one kind of evaluations but not the other. In the food laboratory, the quality of food refers to characteristics in foods that can be subjectively evaluated by human senses. Physical and chemical properties of food are factors that measure food quality; however, measurements of these properties cannot always be quantitative or relevant when it comes to consumer perception and satisfaction. For these reasons, methods of food sensory evaluation have been developed for more subjective ways to measure food qualities including the tests conducted in this experiment. Sensory evaluation tests include 2 types of subjective testing: analytical and affective test. Analytical tests are used to detect differences and can involve using descriptive terms to differentiate food qualities. Affective tests evaluate personal preferences of individuals evaluating specific food products (Beathard, 2008). Hedonic tests are routinely used in the food industry to assess the acceptance of food products. The 9-point hedonic scale has been the tool of choice for the last 50 years. The production of new products and maintaining global competitiveness depends upon the success and consumer appeal of products. The most commonly used tool to quantify consumer acceptance is the 9-point hedonic scale. This scale has been developed 50 years ago (Jones et al., 1955, Peryam and Girardot, 1952 and Peryam and Pilgrim, 1957) and has been the tool of choice, since then, in both academia and industrial consumer research. Although this scale has been successfully used in the Western world, it is restricted to English speaking subjects. Accordingly, studies were conducted to translate it to other languages.
PROCEDURE
Firstly, the panelist needed to rinse their mouth with distilled water, this is to avoid any other taste that might affected the panelist judgments. Afterwards, the panelists needed to taste the sample given from left to right one by one and judge all the attributes listed out. Moving on the next sample, the panelist need again to rinse their mouth each time before tasting new sample. Last but not least, the panelist is allowed to retaste as many times as needed for them to give the scores needed. RESULTS Table 1; Result of Hedonic Test from 18 panelists Panelist 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Total Mean
DISCUSSIONS
Sample 1 4 4 6 6 4 5 2 3 6 4 4 5 7 2 6 4 6 7 85 4.27
Sample 2 4 1 2 5 2 3 3 1 3 5 6 3 5 5 1 6 3 3 61 3.38
Sample 3 2 3 5 4 6 3 2 1 3 2 3 6 4 2 3 6 4 5 64 3.55
Sample 4 5 6 2 7 1 2 1 1 4 2 1 4 6 1 2 5 4 6 60 3.33
The experiment was done to creating questions that is clear and can be understood by consumers. Next to decide how much he or she like or dislike the product and to mark the scales accordingly. It is also to determine market demand or to be used for market segmentation or related demographic tabulations. This experiment, likeness have been evaluated such as color, air space, taste, saltiness, texture of level of likeness by 18 panelists. Four different kinds of yogurt drinks have been served in different coding sample. Every panelist has been asked to fill up the evaluation form in numerical scale (which scale 1 to 7 was given). Every each characteristic were evaluated by panelists in a level of likeness and mean value was calculated. For sample yogurt drink , most of the panelists chose Sample 1 yogurt drinks which has a very delicious taste with mean of 4.27 compared to the others two. Next, followed by sample 3 which 3.55. Then sample 2 with mean3.38 is higher than sample 4 with mean 3.33. The degree of likeness and having 60 % voted the most likeness was sample 1, second highest with 20% likeness from sample 3 and the least favorite percentage goes to sample 2 and 4 with 10% of voted. From the result, sample 1 has the most scoring by panelist over the four followed by sample 4 and sample 3. A sample 1 yogurt drink was more preferable to panelists as the taste of the yogurt were satisfied by all panelists. There is a must error in this experiment which they wrongly rate the sample. These problems could be prevented with proper labeling of individual sample cups and also separation of panelists during sampling and data collection.
CONCLUSION
This experiment was done to identify the preferences of the panelists on the intensity of likeness of the four sample given which are almost the same but different in taste and color. Based on the experiment conducted and the table, the hedonic test conducted and table 1, the hedonic test conducted in the laboratory yielded fairly consistent results when measuring the intensity of likeness where 60% felt that sample 1 has the most desired demand from panelists. Preferences hedonic varied much more where the number of mean value of food sample 3 is 3.55 and followed by 3.38 and 3.33 mean values for sample 2 and sample 4. The variation of preference may due to error that may had were not individually labeled made it easy for panelists who distributed samples to mix up codes and also for mix up once samples were received. Since ranking must occur after all samples have been tried, forgetting the intensity of likeness for each sample may also distort data due to inaccurate evaluation and inaccurate data that could have resulted from sample confusion. In the future, the hedonic test could be conducted with proper labeling of food sampe and multiple of each sample so less confusion will be occur. This type of testing could clearly demonstrate correlation between characteristics and preference if done it properly. Hedonic test is used to describe the degree of consumer acceptance and satisfaction regarding product attributes.
REFERENCES
● Beathard K. (2008) Lab Manual for Brown’s Understanding Food Principles and Preparation. 3rd Edition. California: Wadsworth. 304 p. ● Brown A. (2008) Understanding Food Principles and Preparation. 3rd Edition. California: Wadsworth. 654 p. ● L.V. Jones, D.R. Peryam and L.L. Thurstone. Development of a scale for measuring soldiers’ food preferences. Food Research, 20 (1955), pp. 512–520 ● D.R. Peryam and N.F. Girardot. Advanced taste-test method. Food Engineering, 24 (1952), pp. 58–61 194 ● D.R. Peryam and F.J. Pilgrim. Hedonic scale method for measuring food preferences. Food Technology, 11 (1957), pp. 9–14
