Comparison of Rate-All-That-Apply and Descriptive Analysis for the Sensory Profiling of Wine

被引:61
作者
Danner, Lukas [1 ]
Crump, Anna M. [1 ]
Croker, Alexander [1 ]
Gambetta, Joanna M. [1 ]
Johnson, Trent E. [1 ]
Bastian, Susan E. P. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Adelaide, Sch Agr Food & Wine, Waite Res Inst, PMB 1, Glen Osmond, SA 5064, Australia
来源
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ENOLOGY AND VITICULTURE | 2018年 / 69卷 / 01期
关键词
consumer; descriptive analysis; multiple factor analysis (MFA); rapid sensory profiling; Rate-All-That- Apply (RATA); sensory characterization; TRAINED ASSESSORS; CATA; QUESTIONS; REPRODUCIBILITY;
D O I
10.5344/ajev.2017.17052
中图分类号
Q81 [生物工程学(生物技术)]; Q93 [微生物学];
学科分类号
071005 ; 0836 ; 090102 ; 100705 ;
摘要
The aim of this work was to investigate how useful the Rate-All-That-Apply (RATA) method with naive consumers is to profile a wide range of wines and how the sensory profiles obtained compare with those of classic descriptive analysis (DA). For this purpose, we conducted two studies. Study 1 presents preliminary work comparing the discrimination ability of RATA, undertaken by 84 naive consumers, with a traditional DA with 11 trained panelists. The vocabulary lists remained the same across the two methods, and the assessment was based on a set of six red table wines (from six different varieties). Study 2 aimed to further elucidate the discrimination ability of RATA with 71 naive consumers compared with traditional DA. It expanded on Study 1 by increasing the number of samples assessed (12 white table wines from six varieties) and by varying the vocabulary between methods (RATA used a generic white wine attribute list and the DA used a panel-generated attribute list). In addition, similarity of sample configuration in the sensory space between RATA and DA was assessed by means of multiple factor analysis (MFA) and regression vector (RV) coefficients. The results of both studies revealed that RATA and DA are highly similar in sample discrimination ability (in terms of number of attributes significantly discriminating among samples). Furthermore, the MFA indicated high agreement in sample configuration between RATA and DA, reinforced by highly significant RV coefficients of 0.97 for Study 1 and 0.92 for Study 2. Overall, this observation supports a trend toward more consumer-centric approaches for sensory profiling and suggests that RATA could be a valid, accurate, and rapid addition to existing profiling methods used for wine.
引用
收藏
页码:12 / 21
页数:10
相关论文
共 32 条
[21]  
NOBLE AC, 1987, AM J ENOL VITICULT, V38, P143
[22]   Comparison of Rate-All-That-Apply (RATA) and Descriptive sensory Analysis (DA) of model double emulsions with subtle perceptual differences [J].
Oppermann, A. K. L. ;
de Graaf, C. ;
Scholten, E. ;
Stieger, M. ;
Piqueras-Fiszman, B. .
FOOD QUALITY AND PREFERENCE, 2017, 56 :55-68
[23]  
Parr W. V., 2003, Journal of Wine Research, V14, P79, DOI 10.1080/09571260410001677969
[24]   Demystifying wine expertise: Olfactory threshold, perceptual skill and semantic memory in expert and novice wine judges [J].
Parr, WV ;
Heatherbell, D ;
White, KG .
CHEMICAL SENSES, 2002, 27 (08) :747-755
[25]   Comparison of three sensory profiling methods based on consumer perception: CATA, CATA with intensity and Napping® [J].
Reinbach, Helene C. ;
Giacalone, Davide ;
Ribeiro, Leticia Machado ;
Bredie, Wender L. P. ;
Frost, Michael Bom .
FOOD QUALITY AND PREFERENCE, 2014, 32 :160-166
[26]   Chemo-sensory characterization of fractions driving different mouthfeel properties in red wines [J].
Saenz-Navajas, Maria-Pilar ;
Avizcuri, Jose-Miguel ;
Ferrero-del-Teso, Sara ;
Valentin, Dominique ;
Ferreira, Vicente ;
Fernandez-Zurbano, Purificacion .
FOOD RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL, 2017, 94 :54-64
[27]   Comparison of response formats and concurrent hedonic measures for optimal use of the EmoSensory® Wheel [J].
Schouteten, Joachim J. ;
Gellynck, Xavier ;
De Bourdeaudhuij, Ilse ;
Sas, Benedikt ;
Bredie, Wender L. P. ;
Perez-Cueto, Federico J. A. ;
De Steur, Hans .
FOOD RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL, 2017, 93 :33-42
[28]  
STONE H, 1974, FOOD TECHNOL-CHICAGO, V28, P24
[29]  
Stone H., 2012, SENSORY EVALUATION P
[30]  
Thorngate JH, 1997, AM J ENOL VITICULT, V48, P271