Browse > Article

Investigating the Efficiency of Various Consumer-acceptance Testing Methods while Developing a Ready-to-eat Meal  

Shin, Weon-Sun (Department of Food and Nutrition, Hanyang University)
Kim, Ji-Na (Department of Food and Nutrition, Hanyang University)
Kim, Kyeong-Mi (Department of Food and Nutrition, Hanyang University)
Park, Jin-Hee (Department of Food and Nutrition, Hanyang University)
Chung, Jin-A (Department of Food and Nutrition, Seoul Women's University)
Chung, Seo-Jin (Department of Food and Nutrition, Seoul Women's University)
Publication Information
Korean journal of food and cookery science / v.24, no.6, 2008 , pp. 763-770 More about this Journal
Abstract
A taste-testing method that accurately measures consumer-acceptance is critical during the course of the product development stage. Although various types of consumer-acceptance tests are available, the testing protocol appropriate for measuring the acceptance of ready-to-eat-meals (REM) has not yet been verified. In this study, various hedonic taste-testing methods (9-point hedonic scaling, best-worst scaling, open ended response) were compared for their efficiency and power in identifying the preferred REM menu of consumers. Forty-four consumers evaluated the acceptance of five types of REM menu samples consisting of a wide variety of flavors. Consumers initially used the 9-point hedonic rating method to choose the best and the worst sample among the 5 meals tested. Finally, consumers were asked to fill out open-ended comments where they could freely describe their liking and disliking of each sample. The results showed that the REM menu acceptance measured by the 9-point hedonic method that rated best-worst scaling exhibited a similar preference pattern. The open-ended response method could not provide a quantifiable acceptance data but was able to provide supplementary information regarding the limitations of the samples and therefore, provide a general idea of the direction of improvement during the product development.
Keywords
consumer taste test; ready-to-eat meal; 9-point hedonic rating; best-worst scaling method; food acceptance;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Cohen S, Orme B. 2004. What's your preference? Market Res 16(2):32-37
2 Hein KA, Jaeger SR, Carr TB, Delahunty CM, 2007. Comparison of common acceptance and preference methods.7th Pangborn Sensory Science Symposium, Minneapolis, MN, USA
3 van Herk H, van de Velden M. 2007. Insight into the relative merits of rating and ranking in a cross-national context using threeway correspondence analysis. Food Qual Prefer 18(8):1096-1105   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Kwak TK, Sohn SN, Yoon S, Park HW, Ryu K, Hong WS, Jang HJ, Moon HK, Choi JH. 2000. Quality assessment of cook/ chill soy sauce glazed soybean curd packaged with different methods for the development of health - oriented convenience foods. Korean J Soc Food Sci 16(2):99-111
5 Schutz HG, Cardello AV. 2001. A labeled affective magnitude (LAM) scale for assessing food liking/disliking. J Sens Stud 16(2):117-159   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Kim GH. 2000. Development of minimal processing technology for Korean fruit and vegetables. Korean J Soc Food Sci 16(6):577-583
7 O'Mahony M, Park H, Park JY, Kim K-O. 2004. Comparison of the statistical analysis of hedonic data using analysis of variance and multiple comparisons versus an R-index analysis of the ranked data. J Sens Stud 19(6):519-529   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Villanueva NDM, Petenate AJ, Da Silva MAAP. 2000. Performance of three affective methods and diagnosis of the ANOVA model. Food Qual Prefer 11(5):363-370   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Finn A, Louviere JJ. 1992. Determining the appropriate response to evidence of public concern: The case of food safety. J Public Policy Mark 11(1):19-25
10 Peryam DR, Girardot NF. 1952. Advanced taste-test method. Food Eng 24(7):58-61
11 Cordelle S, Lange C, Schlich P. 2004. On the consistency of liking scores: Insights from a study including 917 consumers from 10 to 80 years old. Food Qual Prefer 15(7/8):831-841   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Yoon S, Sohn KH, Kwak TK, Kim JS, Kwon DJ. 1998. Consumer trends on dietary and food purchasing behaviors and perception for the convenience foods. Korean J Dietary Culture 13(3):197-206
13 Mead R, Gay C. 1992. Statistical appraisal of the problem of sensory measurement. J Sens Stud 7(3):205-228   DOI
14 Villanueva NDM, Petenate AJ, Da Silva MAAP. 2005. Performance of the hybrid hedonic scale as compared to the traditional hedonic, self-adjusting and ranking scales. Food Qual Prefer 16(8):691-703   DOI   ScienceOn
15 Lee JA, Soutar GN, Louviere J. 2007. Measuring values using best-worst scaling: The LOV example. Psychol Market 24(12): 1043-1058   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Cho HY, Chung SJ, Kim HS, Kim KO. 2005. Effect of sensory characteristics and non-sensory factors on consumer liking of various canned tea products. J Food Sci 70(8):s532-s538   DOI   ScienceOn
17 김광옥, 김상숙, 성내경, 이영춘. 1993. 관능검사 방법 및 응용. 신광출판사. 서울. pp 195-242
18 이숙영. 2000. 한국전통 한 그릇 음식의 편의식 개발을 위한 조 리과학적 접근. 한국식품조리과학회: 추계학술대회 논문 집. pp 3-29
19 Jaeger SR, Jorgensen AS, Aaslyng MD, Bredie WLP. 2008. Bestworst scaling: An introduction and initial comparison with monadic rating for preference elicitation with food products. Food Qual Prefer 19(6):579-588   DOI   ScienceOn