No abstract

The sensory properties of nine milk chocolate formulations varying in sucrose (400, 475 or 550 g kg−1) and cocoa butter (280, 320 or 360 g kg−1) were evaluated by descriptive analysis with a panel of 18 trained judges and by instrumental measures of colour lightness, hardness, viscosity and yield value. Low‐sugar samples were more bitter, gritty and roasted (p < 0.001). High‐sugar samples had higher milky/dairy, vanilla/caramel, hardness and sweetness intensities (p < 0.001). Samples higher in fat were faster melting. Low‐sugar and low‐fat samples were associated with viscous, mouthcoating, fatty/oily, cocoa and darker notes. Samples with high levels of both sugar and fat were more cooling and faster vanishing (p < 0.001). Surprisingly, fatty/oily intensity was inversely related to fat concentration. This research documents previously unreported effects of sugar and fat on the texture, mouthfeel and flavour of milk chocolate. © 1999 Society of Chemical Industry

American beer consumers (n=170), evenly distributed into six categories based on age (20s, 30s, 40s) and gender, tasted 24 commercial, domestic/ice, imported and speciality lagers first blind (week 1) and then with knowledge of brand and price (week 2). They rated overall degree of liking (DOL)and DOL of the appearance, carbonation, aroma, taste, body/mouthfeel and aftertaste of the beer on a 9-point hedonic scale, and purchase intent (PI) on a 5-point scale, and indicated in which situation they would consume the beers. Relationships between consumer ratings and descriptive analysis and quality ratings by brewing experts were then analysed with multivariate statistics.Gender differences were observed, with men preferring stronger-flavoured beers (speciality > imported > domestic) regardless of quality, whereas women's hedonic ratings paralleled expert quality ratings. DOL and PI ratings of some domestic and imported beers decreased and increased, respectively, from the blind to the informed condition, suggesting American consumers view imported beers as superior products, even though blind tasting suggested otherwise. In all age and gender groups, liking for taste was the best predictor of overall liking.

Monadic (one sample served at a time, and all attributes rated for that sample) and simultaneous multiple (4 samples served together, and attributes rated one at a time across samples) presentation and evaluation procedures were compared in terms of descriptive profile generated, panel performance (ability to discriminate, reproducibility, concept alignment) and session duration, in a descriptive analysis of 9 milk chocolate samples by a panel of 18 trained judges. The sensory profiles obtained with the two presentation modes were very similar (as assessed by spider web and principal component plots). Time‐wise, the simultaneous presentation procedure took significantly longer to complete (p<0.001). Judges discriminated slightly better and were more reproducible with the simultaneous presentation mode, but quality of concept alignment did not differ between the two procedures. We conclude each method has its advantages and limitations, and choice of presentation procedure should be based on the type of descriptive analysis carried out and the time frame available.

No abstract