Determination of the effect of brand and product identification on consumer palatability ratings of ground beef patties1,2,3

Wilfong, A. K.; McKillip, K. V.; Gonzalez, J. M.; Houser, T. A.; Unruh, John A.; Boyle, Elizabeth A. E.; O’Quinn, T. G.

doi:10.2527/jas.2016-0894

Cited by 11 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There were no differences (P > 0.05) among GB treatments for appearance liking, juiciness, overall flavor liking, beef flavor liking, and overall liking. These results are similar to previous reports that have shown little to no variation in consumer palatability ratings for GB of various fat levels (Wilfong et al, 2016;Beavers, 2017;Pohlman, 2017); however, in the Wilfong et al (2016) study, the authors showed an increase in juiciness with increased fat percentage, which was not observed in the current work. Furthermore, all 3 GB treatments were rated higher (P < 0.05) than all 3 GBA for appearance liking, overall flavor liking, beef flavor liking, and overall liking.…”

Section: Consumer Palatability Evaluationsupporting

confidence: 92%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Quality of Plant-Based Ground Beef Alternatives in Comparison with Ground Beef of Various Fat Levels

Davis

Harr

Farmer

et al. 2021

Meat and Muscle Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study was to compare the quality characteristics of current plant-based protein ground beef alternatives (GBA) to ground beef (GB) patties of varying fat percentages. Fifteen different production lots (n = 15 / fat level) of 1.36 kg GB chubs of three different fat levels (10%, 20%, and 27%) were collected from retail markets in the Manhattan, KS area. Additionally, GBA products including a foodservice GBA (FGBA), a retail GBA (RGBA), and a traditional soy-protein based GBA (TGBA) currently available through commercial channels were collected. Consumers (n = 120) evaluated sample appearance, juiciness, tenderness, overall flavor liking, beef flavor liking, texture liking, and overall liking. Additionally, samples were evaluated for color, texture profile, shear force, pressed juiciness percentage (PJP), pH, and fat and moisture percentage. All three GB samples rated higher (P < 0.05) than the three GBA samples for appearance liking, overall flavor liking, beef flavor liking, and overall liking by consumers. Similar results were found with trained sensory panelists, which rated the GBA as less (P < 0.05) juicy, softer (P < 0.05), and lower (P < 0.05) for beef flavor and odor intensity and higher (P < 0.05) for off-flavor intensity than the GB. Moreover, the GBA had less (P < 0.05) change in shape through cooking and a lower (P < 0.05) percentage of cooking loss and cooking time than the GB. Also, the GBA all had lower (P < 0.05) shear force and PJP values than the GB. The color of the GBA differed (P < 0.05) from the GB, with the GB samples being more (P < 0.05) red in the raw state. These results indicate that the GBA provide different eating and quality experiences than GB and should thus be considered as different products by consumers and retailers.

show abstract

Section: Consumer Palatability Evaluationsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…The reported fat percentages are lower than the labeled fat percentages at retail. But this is similar to previous works that have reported the fat percentage of various retail GB (Wilfong et al, 2016;Najar-Villarreal et al, 2019). This could also be the result of differences in measurement techniques.…”

Section: Cooking Characteristicssupporting

confidence: 91%

Quality of Plant-Based Ground Beef Alternatives in Comparison with Ground Beef of Various Fat Levels

Davis

Harr

Farmer

et al. 2021

Meat and Muscle Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Table 1 shows the demographic profile of consumers varied, yet were comparable to those reported in other beef consumer work conducted in Manhattan, KS (Wilfong et al, 2016a(Wilfong et al, , 2016bMcKillip et al, 2017;Vierck et al, 2018;Drey et al, 2019). Male and female consumers were similarly represented, while the majority of consumers were Caucasian/white and single.…”

Section: Participant Demographics and Factors Emphasized When Purchasing Beefsupporting

confidence: 58%

Visual Degree of Doneness Impacts Beef Palatability for Consumers with Different Degree of Doneness Preferences

Prill

Drey

Olson

et al. 2019

Meat and Muscle Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study was to determine the impact on beef palatability perceptions when consumers with varying degree of doneness (DOD) preferences are served steaks cooked to multiple DOD. Paired Low Choice strip loin steaks were randomly assigned to a DOD of either rare (60°C), medium-rare (63°C), medium (71°C), medium-well (74°C), or well-done (77°C). Consumer panelists were prescreened for DOD preference (rare, medium, or well-done) prior to sensory panels and were assigned to panels based on their DOD preference. In the first round of testing, consumers were served 1 sample from each of the 5 DOD under low-intensity red incandescent light to mask any DOD differences among samples. In round 2 of testing, consumers were fed the paired samples cooked to the same DOD under white incandescent lights. There were no (P > 0.05) consumer DOD preference × steak DOD interactions or consumer DOD preference effects for tenderness, juiciness, and flavor ratings when steaks were evaluated under both lighting types. Within the white-lighting testing, there was a consumer DOD preference × steak DOD interaction (P < 0.05) for overall acceptability. Consumers who preferred steaks cooked to well-done reported no differences (P > 0.05) in overall palatability among DOD under white-lighting, whereas consumers who preferred steaks cooked to rare and medium rated steaks lower (P < 0.05) for overall palatability as DOD increased. Regardless of DOD preference, consumer sensory ratings decreased (P < 0.05) when steaks were cooked above the consumer’s preferred DOD; whereas sensory ratings improved (P < 0.05) when steaks were served below the consumers’ preferences. These results indicate that overcooking steaks has the greatest negative impact on beef palatability perception and thus, foodservice should err on the side of undercooking steaks to preserve, and potentially improve, eating satisfaction.

show abstract

“…For beef, a recent study found CAB ground beef products to increase in overall liking ratings by 11% to 25% when consumers were informed of the brand prior to sampling (Wilfong et al, 2016).…”

Section: Impact Of Branding On Consumer Palatability Traitsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of branding on consumer palatability ratings of beef strip loin steaks1,2

Wilfong

McKillip

Gonzalez

et al. 2016

Journal of Animal Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Determination of the effect of brand and product identification on consumer palatability ratings of ground beef patties1,2,3

Cited by 11 publications

References 39 publications

Quality of Plant-Based Ground Beef Alternatives in Comparison with Ground Beef of Various Fat Levels

Quality of Plant-Based Ground Beef Alternatives in Comparison with Ground Beef of Various Fat Levels

Visual Degree of Doneness Impacts Beef Palatability for Consumers with Different Degree of Doneness Preferences

The effect of branding on consumer palatability ratings of beef strip loin steaks1,2

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About