Tetrad vs. triangle test: A case study with Brazilian guarana soft drink
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v9i4.3049Keywords:
Discrimination testing; Tetrad test; Triangle test; Thurstonian distance.Abstract
Discrimination sensory tests aim to identify if a difference between two similar stimuli is detected. In this study we compared the efficacy of Tetrads and Triangle tests in the difference detection between two samples of guarana soft drink, by means of the calculation of proportion of discriminators and thurstonian distance. Evaluated samples were produced by different syrup clarification methods (activated carbon and ionic exchange column). For each test 99 testers were used; Triangle test evaluated three samples, while Tetrad four samples, in complete randomized blocks. Only Tetrad test was able to detect significant difference between the samples (p<0.05), with a low proportion of discriminators and thurstonian distance inferior to perception limit, demonstrating that Tetrad test is more powerful and sensible than Triangle test.
References
ASTM International. (2014). Standard Practice for Estimating Thurstonian Discriminal Distances (ASTM E2262-03). Retrieved on January 22, 2016 from www.astm.org.
Barnabé, D., & Venturini Filho, W. G. (2010). Refrigerantes. Bebidas não alcoólicas: Ciência e Tecnologia. vol. 2. São Paulo: Editora Blucher.
Bi, J., & O’mahony, M. (2013). Variance of d´ for the tetrad test and comparisons with other forced-choice methods. Journal of Sensory Studies, 28, 91–101.
Delwiche, J., & O’mahony, M. (1996). Flavour discrimination: An extension of Thurstonian paradoxes to the tetrad method. Food Quality and Preference, 7, 1–5.
Dutcosky, S. D. (2013). Análise sensorial de alimentos (4th ed.). Curitiba: Champagnat.
Ennis, D. M. (1993). The power of sensory discrimination methods. Journal of Sensory Studies, 8, 353–370.
Ennis, J. M. (2012). Guiding the switch from Triangle testing to Tetrad testing. Journal of Sensory Studies, 27, 223–231.
Ennis, J. M., & Christensen, R. (2014a). A Thurstonian comparison of the Tetrad and Degree of Difference tests. Food Quality and Preference, 40, 263-269.
Ennis, J. M., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2014b). Precision of measurement in Tetrad testing. Food Quality and Preference, 32, 98–106.
Ennis, J. M., & Jesionka, V. (2011). The power of sensory discrimination methods revisited. Journal of Sensory Studies, 26, 371–382.
Garcia, K., Ennis, J. M., & Prinyawiwatkul, W. (2012). A large-scale experimental comparison of the tetrad and triangle tests in children. Journal of Sensory Studies, 27, 217–222.
Gridgeman, N. T. (1956). Group size in taste sorting trials. Food Research, 21, 534–539.
Ishii, R., O´Mahony, M., & Rousseau, B. (2014). Triangle and tetrad protocols: Small sensory differences, resampling and consumer relevance. Food Quality and Preference, 31, 49–55.
Jesionka, V., Rousseau, B., & Ennis, J. M. (2014). Transitioning from proportion of discriminators to a more meaningful measure of sensory difference. Food Quality and Preference, 32, 77–82.
Konen, J. C., & Wilson, J. R. (1992). Replacing carbonaceous adsorbents with acrylic and styrenic strong base anion resins in cane sugar decolorization applications. International Society of Sugar Cane Technologists, 5(14), 1–7.
Lawless, H. T., & Heymann, H. (2010). Sensory Evaluation of Food (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.
Masuoka, S., Hatjopoulos, D., & Mahony, M. O. (1995). Beer bitterness detection: Testing Thurstonian and sequential sensitivity analysis models for triad and tetrad methods. Journal of Sensory Studies, 10, 295–306.
Meilgaard, M., Civille, G. V., & Carr, B. T. (1999). Sensory evaluation techniques (3rd ed.). Boca Raton: CRC Press.
Muñoz, A. M. (2002). Sensory evaluation in quality control: An overview, new developments and future opportunities. Food Quality and Preference, 13(6), 329–339.
O´Mahony, M., & Rousseau, B. (2002). Discrimination testing : A few ideas, old and new. Food Quality and Preference, 14, 157–164.
O’Mahony, M. (1986). Sensory Evaluation of Food: Statistical methods and procedures. New York: CRC Press.
Qureshi, K., Bhatti, I., Kazi, R., & Ansari, A. K. (2008). Physical and Chemical Analysis of Activated Carbon Prepared from Sugarcane Bagasse and Use for Sugar Decolorisation. International Journal of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, 1(3), 145-149.
Rodrigues, M. V. N., Rodrigues, R. F., Serra, G. E., Andrietta, S. R., & Franco, T. T. (2000). Improvement of invert syrup production using heterogeneous hidrolysis. Food Science and Technology, 20(1), 103-109.
Schlich, P. (1993). Uses of change-over designs and repeated measurements in sensory and consumer studies. Food Quality and Preference, 4(4), 223–235.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
3) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
