Trained vs. consumer panels for analytical testing: Fueling a long lasting debate in the field
Trained vs. consumer panels for analytical testing: Fueling a long lasting debate in the field
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.foodqual.2016.10.006
复制
发表时间：
2017-10-01
影响因子：
5.3
通讯作者：
Varela, Paula
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ares, Gaston;Varela, Paula
感官评价传统上分为两个明确定义的领域：分析测试，旨在客观地评估产品的感官特性，以及享乐测试，消费者评估他们的接受度/偏好。该领域的中心法则之一是将这两种类型的测试分别与不同类型的评估员相匹配：经过挑选和培训的评估员和目标产品的普通消费者。多年来，消费者一直被认为没有能力执行分析任务。然而，在过去的几十年里，各种替代方法的发展，刺激了关于使用未经训练的评估员在感官科学的分析任务的辩论。最近，经过培训的分析测试小组和消费者分析测试小组之间的界限已经模糊，预计将继续模糊。本意见书讨论了围绕消费者或受过培训的评估员小组是否适合在特定应用中进行分析测试的辩论的一些最相关的问题，并就此向从业人员提供了建议。(C)2016爱思唯尔有限公司版权所有
Sensory evaluation has traditionally been divided into two clearly defined areas: analytical tests, aimed at objectively evaluating the sensory characteristics of products, and hedonic tests, in which consumers evaluate their acceptance/preference. One of the central dogmas of the field has been matching these two types of tests to different types of assessors respectively: selected and trained assessors and regular consumers of the target products. For years, consumers have been regarded as not capable of performing analytical tasks. However, the development of various alternative methods for sensory characterization in the last couple of decades has agitated the debate about the use of untrained assessors for analytical tasks in sensory science. Lately, the line between trained and consumer panels for analytical tests has blurred and is expected to continue to do so. The present opinion paper discusses some of the most relevant issues around the debate of whether consumer or trained assessor panels are appropriate for analytical testing in specific application and provides recommendations for practitioners on this respect. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.