Food Science and Industry (식품과학과 산업)

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

DOI QR Code

Recent trends in check-all-that-apply (CATA) method for food industry applications

식품 산업체에서 활용 가능한 카타(CATA) 평가법의 최신동향

  • Kim, In-Ah (Department of Food Science and Technology, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Lee, Youngseung (Department of Food Science and Nutrition, Dankook University)
  • 김인아 (이화여자대학교 식품공학과) ;
  • 이영승 (단국대학교 식품영양학과)
  • Received : 2019.02.11
  • Accepted : 2019.03.10
  • Published : 2019.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

For better understanding the relationship between consumers' perception and sensory characteristics of products, diverse types of rapid sensory profiling technique have been suggested as alternatives to conventional descriptive analysis. Among these, check-all-that-apply (CATA) method has gained popularity for studying consumers' perception and intuitive responses to products due to their simplicity, speed, and ease of use. CATA method has been used to gather consumers' perception derived from sensory characteristics of products as well as consumers' emotion responses to products in recent years. Moreover, many researchers reported that CATA method can be used to provide valuable information for product optimization by applying a penalty analysis and collecting responses to ideal product. Thus, this article reviews recent research using CATA in the field of sensory and consumer science and introduces practical applications to achieve various business objectives in food industry.

일반 소비자를 기반으로 하는 감각 특성 평가법이 최근 활발히 소개되고 있다. 그 중에서 카타 평가법은 쉽고 빠르게 수행할 수 있다는 장점을 바탕으로 식품 산업체에서 활용도가 높아지고 있다. 카타 평가법은 제품의 감각 특성 뿐만 아니라 소비자의 감정, 태도, 컨셉 등 비감각 특성도 평가할 수 있기 때문에 기존 묘사분석에서 얻어지는 객관적 감각 특성에 대한 정량적 정보와 함께 소비자의 주관적 정보도 일정부분 분석이 가능하다. 카타 평가법의 확장된 버전으로 페널티 분석 기반의 ideal 카타 평가법은 소비자의 직접적인 감각 또는 인지를 바탕으로 제품의 기호도 영향 인자를 규명할 수 있기 때문에 소비자 기호도 맞춤형 제품을 개발할 때 유용하게 활용될 수 있다. 또한, 라타 평가법은 카타 평가법의 제품 차이식별력 향상을 위해 개발된 평가법으로 기존 카타 평가법에 강도 척도를 병행한 형태로 사용된다. 현재 라타 평가법의 데이터 분석에 대한 지속적인 연구가 진행되고 있으며 연속형 데이터로 간주하여 모수적 검정에 의한 분석이 가능하다. 라타 평가법과 묘사분석의 유사성은 기본 맛이나 외관과 같이 잘 알려져 있는 특성에서는 높게 나타나나 소비자가 이해하기 어려운 특성에서는 라타 평가법보다 묘사분석에서 제품 간 차이식별력이 높게 나타나는 경향이 있다. 이 경우, 라타 평가법 진행 전 소비자를 대상으로 제품에 대한 짧은 오리엔테이션을 진행함으로써 제품 차이식별력을 향상 시킬 수 있으나, 이 과정에서 훈련으로 인해 소비자의 본질적인 특성을 잃게 될 수 있으므로 주의해야 한다. 따라서, 연구의 목적이 제품에 대한 소비자의 인식을 이해하고 마케팅 방향을 설정하는 것이라면 훈련은 가능한 지양해야 하나, 제품의 객관적인 감각 특성과 제품 개발과의 관련성이 주목적인 경우에는 소비자에 대한 짧은 훈련을 실시함으로써 제품 간 차이식별력을 향상시킬 수 있다.

Keywords

References

  1. Adams J, Williams A, Lancaster B, Foley M. Advantages and uses of check-all-that-apply response compared to traditional scaling of attributes for salty snacks. In: 7th Pangborn Sensory Science Symposium. August 12-16, Hyatt Regency, Minneapolis, USA, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands (2007)
  2. Albert A, Varela P, Salvador A, Hough G, Fiszman S. Overcoming the issues in the sensory description of hot served food with a complex texture Application of $QDA^{(R)}$, flash profiling and projective mapping using panels with different degrees of training. Food Qual. Prefer. 22: 463-473 (2011) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2011.02.010
  3. Ares G, Antunez L, Bruzzone F, Vidal L, Gimenez A, Pineau B, Beresford MK, Jin D, Paisley AG, Chheang SL, Roigard C, Jaeger SR. Comparison of sensory product profiles generated by trained assessors and consumers using CATA questions: Four case studies with complex and/or similar samples. Food Qual. Prefer. 45: 75-86 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.05.007
  4. Ares G, Barreiro C, Deliza R, Gimrnez A, Gambaro A. Application of a check-all-that-apply question to the development of chocolate milk desserts. J. Sens. Stud. 25: 67-86 (2010)
  5. Ares G, Bruzzone F, Vidal L, Cadena RS, Gimenez A, Pineau B, Hunter DC, Paisley AG, Jaeger S. Evaluation of a rating-based variant of check-all-that-apply questions: Rate-all-that-apply (RATA). Food Qual. Prefer. 36: 87-95 (2014a) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.03.006
  6. Ares G, Dauber C, Fernandez E, Gimenez A, Varela P. Penalty analysis based on CATA questions to identify drivers of liking and directions for product reformulation. Food Qual. Prefer. 32: 65-76 (2014b) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2013.05.014
  7. Ares G, Jaeger SR. Check-all-that-apply (CATA) questions with consumers in practice experimental considerations and impact on outcome. pp. 227-245. In: Rapid sensory profiling techniques and related methods. Delarue J, Lawlor JB, Rogeaux M (ed). Woodhead Publishing (2015)
  8. Ares G, Jaeger SR. A comparison of five methodological variants of emoji questionnaires for measuring product elicited emotional associations: An application with seafood among Chinese consumers. Food Res. Int. 99(Pt 1): 216-228 (2017) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2017.04.028
  9. Ares G, Picallo A, Coste B, Antunez L, Vidal L, Gimenez A, Jaeger S. A comparison of RATA questions with descriptive analysis: Insights from three studies with complex/similar products. J. of Sens. Stud. 33: e12458 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1111/joss.12458
  10. Ares G, Varela P, Rado G, Gimenez A. Identifying ideal products using three different consumer profiling methodologies Comparison with external preference mapping. Food Qual. Prefer. 22: 581-591 (2011) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2011.04.004
  11. Bruzzone F, Ares G, Gimenez A. Consumers' texture perception of milk desserts II - Comparison with trained assessors' data. J. Texture Stud. 43: 214-226 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-4603.2011.00332.x
  12. Castura JC. Do panellists donkey vote in sensory choose-all-that-apply questions? In: 8th Pangborn Sensory Science Symposium. July 26-30, Stazione Leopolda, Florence, Italy, Amsterdam, Netherlands (2009)
  13. Choi Y, Lee J. The effect of extrinsic cues on consumer perception: A study using milk tea products. Food Qual. Prefer. 71: 343-353 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2018.08.004
  14. Cochran WG. The comparison of percentage in matched samples. Biometrika 37: 256-266 (1950) https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/37.3-4.256
  15. Dairou V, Sieffermann, JM. A comparison of 14 jams characterized by conventional profile and a quick original method, flash profile. J. Food Sci. 67: 826-834 (2002) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.2002.tb10685.x
  16. Dalenberg JR, Gutjar S, ter Horst GJ, de Graaf K, Renken RJ, Jager G. Evoked emotions predict food choice. PloS one 9: e115388 (2014) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0115388
  17. Dehlholm C, Brockhoff PB, Meinert L, Aaslyng MD, Bredie WL. Rapid descriptive sensory methods-comparison of free multiple sorting, partial napping, napping, flash profiling and conventional profiling. Food Qual. Prefer. 26: 267-277 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2012.02.012
  18. Delarue J, Sieffermann J. Sensory mapping using Flash profile Comparison with a conventional descriptive method for the evaluation of the flavour of fruit dairy products. Food Qual. Prefer. 15: 383-392 (2004) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-3293(03)00085-5
  19. Dooley L, Lee YS, Meullenet JF. The application of check-all-that-apply (CATA) consumer profiling to preference mapping of vanilla ice cream and its comparison to classical external preference mapping. Food Qual. Prefer. 21: 394-401 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2009.10.002
  20. Jaeger SR, Beresford MK, Paisley AG, Antunez L, Vidal L, Cadena RS, Ares G. Check-all-that-apply (CATA) questions for sensory product characterization by consumers: Investigations into the number of terms used in CATA questions. Food Qual. Prefer. 42: 154-164 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.02.003
  21. Jaeger SR, Swaney-Stueve M, Chheang SL, Hunter DC, Pineau B, Ares G. An assessment of the CATA-variant of the EsSense $Profile^{(R)}$. Food Qual. Prefer. 68: 360-370 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2018.04.005
  22. Kenney E, Adhikari K. Recent developments in identifying and quantifying emotions during food consumption. J. Sci. Food Agric. 96: 3627-3630 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.7717
  23. Kim IA, Kim MA, van de Velden M, Lee HS. Psychological positioning of bottled tea products: A comparison between two Kansei profiling techniques. Food Sci. Biotechnol. 22: 257-268 (2013)
  24. King SC, Meiselman HL. Development of a method to measure consumer emotions associated with foods. Food Qual. Prefer. 21: 168-177 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2009.02.005
  25. Lawless HT, Sheng N, Knoops SSCP. Multidimensional scaling of sorting data applied to cheese perception. Food Qual. Prefer. 6: 91-98 (1995) https://doi.org/10.1016/0950-3293(95)98553-U
  26. Lee YS, Findlay C, Meullenet JF. Experimental consideration for the use of check-all-that-apply questions to describe the sensory properties of orange juices. Int. J. Food Sci. Tech. 48: 215-219 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.2012.03165.x
  27. Lesniauskas RO, Carr BT. Workshop summary: Data analysis: getting the most out of just-about-right data. Food Qual. Prefer. 15: 891-899 (2004) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2004.04.015
  28. Meyners M, Castura JC. Check-all-that-apply questions. Pp. 284-319. In: Novel techniques in sensory characterization and consumer profiling. Varela P, Ares G (ed). CRC Press (2014)
  29. Meyners M, Castura JC. Randomization of CATA attributes: Should attribute lists be allocated to assessors or to samples?. Food Qual. Prefer. 48: 210-215 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.09.014
  30. Meyners M, Castura JC, Carr BT. Existing and new approaches for the analysis of CATA data. Food Qual. Prefer. 30: 309-319 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2013.06.010
  31. Meyners M, Jaeger S, Ares G. On the analysis of Rate-All-That-Apply (RATA) data. Food Qual. Prefer. 49: 1-10 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.11.003
  32. Ng M, Chaya C, Hort J. Beyond liking: Comparing the measurement of emotional response using EsSense Profile and consumer defined check-all-that-apply methodologies. Food Qual. Prefer. 28: 193-205 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2012.08.012
  33. Oppermann AKL, Graaf DE, Scholten E, Stieger M, Piqueras-Fiszman B. Vidal (RATA) and Descriptive sensory Analysis (DA) of model double emulsions with subtle perceptual differences. Food Qual. Prefer. 56: 55-68 (2017) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2016.09.010
  34. Pages J. Collection and analysis of perceived product inter-distances using multiple factor analysis: Application to the study of 10 white wines from the Loire Valley. Food Qual. Prefer. 16: 642-649 (2005) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2005.01.006
  35. Plaehn, D. CATA penalty/reward. Food Qual. Prefer. 24: 141-152 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2011.10.008
  36. Risvik E, McEvan JA, Colwill JS, Rogers R, Lyon DH. Projective mapping: A tool for sensory analysis and consumer research. Food Qual. Prefer. 5: 263-269 (1994) https://doi.org/10.1016/0950-3293(94)90051-5
  37. Saenz-Navajas MP, Avizcuri JM, Ferrero-del-Teso S, Valentin D, Ferreira V, Fernandez-Zurbano P. Chemo-sensory characterization of fractions driving different mouthfeel properties in red wines. Food Res. Int. 94: 54-64 (2017) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2017.02.002
  38. Schouteten JJ, De Steur H, De Pelsmaeker S, Lagast S, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Gellynck X. An integrated method for the emotional conceptualization and sensory characterization of food products: The $EmoSensory^{(R)}$ Wheel. Food Res. Int. 78: 96-107 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2015.11.001
  39. Schouteten JJ, Gellynck X, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Sas B, Bredie WL, Perez-Cueto FJ, De Steur H. Comparison of response formats and concurrent hedonic measures for optimal use of the $EmoSensory^{(R)}$ Wheel. Food Res. Int. 93: 33-42 (2017) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2016.12.015
  40. Valentin D, Chollet S, Lelievre M, Abdi H. Quick and dirty but still pretty good: A review of new descriptive methods in food science. Int. J. Food Sci. Tech. 47: 1563-1578 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.2012.03022.x
  41. Vidal L, Ares G, Hedderley DI, Meyners M, Jaeger S. Comparison of rate-all-that-apply (RATA) and check-all-that-apply (CATA) questions across seven consumer studies. Food Qual. Prefer. 67: 49-58 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2016.12.013
  42. Vidal L, Jaeger S, Antunez L, Gimenez A, Ares G. Product spaces derived from projective mapping and CATA questions: Influence of replicated assessments and increased number of study participants. J. Sens. Stud. 31: 373-381 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1111/joss.12220
  43. Waehrens SS, Zhang S, Hedelund PI, Petersen MA, Byrne DV. Application of the fast sensory method 'Rate-All-That-Apply' in chocolate Quality Control compared with DHS-GC-MS. Int. J. Food Sci. Tech. 51: 1877-1887 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1111/ijfs.13161
  44. Williams A, Carr BT, Popper R. Exploring analysis options for check-all-that-apply (CATA) questions. In: 9th Pangborn Sensory Science Symposium. September 4-8, Sheraton Centre Toronto Hotel, Toronto, Canada, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands (2011)