Food Science and Biotechnology

Korean Society of Food Science and Technology (한국식품과학회)
권호 표지

Sensory Difference Testing: The Problem of Overdispersion and the Use of Beta Binomial Statistical Analysis

  • Lee, Hye-Seong (Department of Food Science and Technology, University of California) ;
  • O'Mahony, Michael (Department of Food Science and Technology, University of California)
  • Published : 2006.08.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

An increase in variance (overdispersion) can occur when a binomial statistical analysis is applied to sensory difference test data in which replicate sensory evaluations (tastings) and multiple evaluators (judges) are combined to increase the sample size. Such a practice can cause extensive Type I errors, leading to serious misinterpretations of the data, especially when traditional simple binomial analysis is applied. Alternatively, the use of beta binomial analysis will circumvent the problem of overdispersion. This brief review discusses the uses and computation methodology of beta binomial analysis and in practice evidence for the occurrence of overdispersion.

Keywords

References

  1. Lee H-S, O'Mahony M. Sensory difference testing: Thurstonian models. Food Sci. Biotechnol. 13: 841-847 (2004)
  2. Brockhoff PB. The statistical power of replications in difference tests. Food Qual. Prefer. 14: 405-417 (2003) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-3293(03)00003-X
  3. Brockhoff PB, Schlich P. Handling replications in discrimination tests. Food Qual. Prefer. 9: 303-312 (1998) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-3293(98)00014-7
  4. Harries JM, Smith GL. The two-factor triangle test. J. Food Technol. 17: 153-162 (1982) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1982.tb00172.x
  5. Bi J. Ennis DM. A Thurstonian variant of the beta-binomial model for replicated difference tests. J. Sens. Stud. 13: 461-466 (1998) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-459X.1998.tb00100.x
  6. Bi J, Ennis DM. The power of sensory discrimination methods used in replicated difference and preference tests. J. Sens. Stud. 14: 289-302 (1999a) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-459X.1999.tb00118.x
  7. Bi J, Templeton-Janik L, Ennis JM, Ennis DM. Replicated difference and preference tests: how to account for inter-trial variation. Food Qual. Prefer. 11: 269-273 (2000) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-3293(99)00032-4
  8. Ennis DM, Bi J. The beta-binomial model: accounting for inter-trial variation in replicated difference and preference tests. J. Sens. Stud. 13: 389-412 (1998) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-459X.1998.tb00097.x
  9. O'Mahony M. Sensory Evaluation of Food. Statistical Methods and Procedures. Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, NY, USA. pp.408-413 (1986)
  10. Bi J, Ennis DM. Beta-binomial tables for replicated difference and preference tests. J. Sens. Stud. 14: 347-368 (1999b) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-459X.1999.tb00121.x
  11. Rousseau B, O'Mahony M. Investigation of the effect within-trial retasting and comparison of the dual-pair, same-different, and triangle paradigms. Food Qual. Prefer. 11: 457-464 (2000) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-3293(00)00018-5
  12. Rousseau B, O'Mahony M. Investigation of the dual pair method as a possible alternative to the triangle and same-different tests. J. Sens. Stud. 16: 161-178 (2001) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-459X.2001.tb00294.x
  13. Braun V, Rogeaux M, Schneid N, O'Mahony M, Rousseau B. Corroborating the 2-AFC and 2-AC Thurstonian models using both a model system and sparkling water. Food Qual. Prefer. 15: 501-507 (2004) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2003.10.002
  14. Delwiche J, Ligget R. Accounting for between-subject variance in discrimination and preference tasks. J. Sens. Stud. 20: 48-61 (2005) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-459X.2005.00003.x
  15. Angulo O, Lee HS, O'Mahony M. Sensory difference tests: Over-dispersion and warm-up. Food Qual. Prefer. 17: in press (2006)
  16. Dacremont C, Sauvageot F, Duyen TH. Effect of assessors expertise on efficiency of warm-up for triangle tests. J. Sens. Stud. 15: 151-152 (2000) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-459X.2000.tb00262.x
  17. O'Mahony M, Thieme U, Goldstein LR. The warm-up effect as a measure of increasing the discriminability of sensory difference tests. J. Food Sci. 53: 1848-1850 (1988) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1988.tb07858.x
  18. Thieme U, O'Mahony M. Modifications to sensory difference test protocols: the warmed up paired comparison, the single standard duo-trio and the A-not A test modified for response bias. J. Sens. Stud. 5: 159-176 (1990) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-459X.1990.tb00487.x
  19. Hautus MJ, Irwin RJ. Two models for estimating the discriminability of foods and beverages. J. Sens. Stud. 10: 203-215 (1995) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-459X.1995.tb00014.x