Direct and indirect hedonic scaling methods: A comparison of the labeled affective magnitude (LAM) scale and best-worst scaling

被引:47
作者
Jaeger, Sara R. [1 ]
Cardello, Armand V. [2 ]
机构
[1] Hort & Food Res Inst New Zealand Ltd, Auckland, New Zealand
[2] USA, Natick Soldier RD&E Ctr, Natick, MA 01760 USA
基金
美国国家航空航天局;
关键词
Research methodology; Choice of scaling method; Acceptance testing; Preference testing; Fruit juice; Need for cognition (NFC); LONG-TERM ACCEPTABILITY; CATEGORY; TASTE; PLEASANTNESS; NEED; INFORMATION; SENSATIONS; SWEETNESS; CHOICE;
D O I
10.1016/j.foodqual.2008.10.005
中图分类号
TS2 [食品工业];
学科分类号
0832 ;
摘要
Affective or hedonic measurement is a cornerstone of sensory science, because it provides critical information about individuals' likes and dislikes for different products. Therefore, it is not surprising that debate about hedonic scaling is ongoing and that new methodology for hedonic scaling emerges regularly. The present research adds to this body of knowledge by comparing best-worst (BW) scaling, a choice-based methodology, with a direct scaling method, the labeled affective magnitude (LAM) scale. We begin with a literature review of direct and indirect scaling methods and then present two empirical studies that compare best-worst and LAM scaling. The key finding is that neither scaling method is superior to the other. However, what tentatively emerges is that choice of scaling method needs to be made in the context of the nature and complexity of the study to be conducted, the nature of the respondents, and the nature of the test samples themselves. With numerous criteria influencing the choice of hedonic scaling methodology, we advocate that researchers be explicit about the criteria that underlie their empirical work. (c) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved
引用
收藏
页码:249 / 258
页数:10
相关论文
共 60 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2007, SENSORY EVAL TECHN
[2]   Bravais-Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficients: meaning, test of hypothesis and confidence interval [J].
Artusi, R ;
Verderio, P ;
Marubini, E .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL MARKERS, 2002, 17 (02) :148-151
[3]   Using best-worst scaling methodology to investigate consumer ethical beliefs across countries [J].
Auger, Pat ;
Devinney, Timothy M. ;
Louviere, Jordan J. .
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS ETHICS, 2007, 70 (03) :299-326
[4]  
Borg G., 1982, PSYCHOPHYSICAL JUDGM, P25
[5]   THE NEED FOR COGNITION [J].
CACIOPPO, JT ;
PETTY, RE .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1982, 42 (01) :116-131
[6]   THE EFFICIENT ASSESSMENT OF NEED FOR COGNITION [J].
CACIOPPO, JT ;
PETTY, RE ;
KAO, CF .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT, 1984, 48 (03) :306-307
[7]   CENTRAL AND PERIPHERAL ROUTES TO PERSUASION - AN INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCE PERSPECTIVE [J].
CACIOPPO, JT ;
KAO, CF ;
PETTY, RE ;
RODRIGUEZ, R .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1986, 51 (05) :1032-1043
[8]   Effects of extreme anchors and interior label spacing on labeled affective magnitude scales [J].
Cardello, Armand ;
Lawless, Harry T. ;
Schutz, Howard G. .
FOOD QUALITY AND PREFERENCE, 2008, 19 (05) :473-480
[9]   Research note - Numerical scale-point locations for constructing the LAM (labeled affective magnitude) scale [J].
Cardello, AV ;
Schutz, HG .
JOURNAL OF SENSORY STUDIES, 2004, 19 (04) :341-346
[10]   Commentary: Direct versus indirect scaling: The gnashing of psychophysical worldviews [J].
Cardello, AV .
JOURNAL OF SENSORY STUDIES, 2005, 20 (04) :373-379