THE POWER OF SENSORY DISCRIMINATION METHODS USED IN REPLICATED DIFFERENCE AND PREFERENCE TESTS

Research on the power of discrimination methods in difference and preference tests has both theoretical and practical significance. Power is important to evaluate the sensitivities of tests and determine sample size. Ennis and Bi (1998, 1999) proposed the beta-binomial distribution to model replicated difference and preference tests with inter-trial variation and analyzed in general the power of the tests. In this paper, the power of discrimination methods for replicated difference and preference tests is discussed further. The equations for calculating power for methods based on the BB model are given. Examples with tables and charts for calculating and comparing the power of the methods are also given.     

THE POWER OF SENSORY DISCRIMINATION METHODS

Difference testing methods are extensively used in a variety of applications from small sensory evaluation tests to large scale consumer tests. A central issue in the use of these tests is their statistical power, or the probability that if a specified difference exists it will be demonstrated as a significant difference in a difference test. A general equation for the power of any discrimination method is given. A general equation for the sample size required to meet Type I and Type II error specifications is also given. Sample size tables for the 2-alternative forced choice (2-AFC), 3-AFC, the duo-trio and the triangular methods are given. Tables of the psychometric functions for the 2-AFC, 3-AFC, triangular and duo-trio methods are also given.     

氟乙酰胺毒杀高山姬鼠的效果试验

高山姬鼠(Apodemus chevrieri Milne-Edwards)是云南农田的主要害鼠之一。作者于1981年7-9月用氟乙酰胺进行了有关试验。     

INFLUENCE OF PANEL INCONSISTENCY ON THE OUTCOME OF SENSORY EVALUATIONS FROM DESCRIPTIVE PANELS

Different types of panelist by treatment interaction are explored to determine how they influence the outcomes of discrimination tests. The study compares the situations where panelists are considered as fixed or random effects over the range of most testing conditions for small panels (5–15 panelists) that replicate their judgements. Magnitude interaction and nonperceivers or nondiscriminators have minor effects on test outcomes. Cross-over interaction increases the chances for a type II error, especially when panelists are considered as random effects. False discrimination increases the chances for a type I error when panelists are considered as fixed effects. Applications of methods to reduce the chances for these errors in the testing for differences among treatments are discussed.     

THE β-STRATEGY: AN ALTERNATIVE AND POWERFUL COGNITIVE STRATEGY WHEN PERFORMING SENSORY DISCRIMINATION TESTS

For discrimination tests not requiring the nature of the difference to be specified in the instructions, such as the triangle, duo-trio and same-different protocols, it is usually assumed that the decision rule used by the subject in order to generate an answer involves the comparison of the relative sensory distances between the samples. However, there is evidence that an alternative cognitive strategy, the β-strategy, involving the absolute categorization of the sensations could be used by the subject when performing these protocols. This paper introduces the characteristics of this alternative strategy by discussing its statistical power (higher than the traditional strategies) and by describing means of investigating which strategy is used by the subject during an experiment as well as illustrating the experimental conditions that might facilitate the use of this particular decision rule.     

COMPARISON OF THE EFFICIENCY OF PAIR, DUO-TRIO AND TRIANGLE TESTS

The pair, duo-trio and triangle tests were compared, using three levels of instructions with orange drink as medium and sucrose as stimulus. If the subjects know only the nature of the test, the pair test cannot be performed and the frequencies of correct responses above chance of the two other tests do not differ significantly, in this case the triangle test is the more efficient. If the subjects know the nature of the test and the nature of the stimulus, the frequency of correct responses above chance obtained for the pair test is significantly higher than those of the two other tests, in this case the pair test is more efficient. Finally, if the subjects know the nature of the test, the nature of the stimulus and whether or not the sample to be selected contains the stimulus, the conclusions are more difficult to achieve but the triangle test seems to be the more efficient.     

THE FORMATION OF INSECTICIDAL FILMS ON BUILDING MATERIALS: II. TESTS OF THE EFFICIENCY OF VARIOUS TYPES OF PRETREATMENT

Thirty different pretreatments have been tested, in addition to those mentioned in a previous contribution, for their efficiency in prolonging the effective toxic life of a film of pyrethrins in Shell Oil P 31 deposited on brick. Reasons for the success or failure of the various types of pretreatment are considered. Seven substances selected for further trial were tested on four more building materials—limewashed brick, wood, cement, and cement-sand mixture. The five pretreatments which gave good results on all or most of these substrates were then tested to determine how long they would continue to support a toxic film on cement. Solutions of size and gelatin caused the greatest persistence of toxicity of the pyrethrum films. The flour beetle, Tribolium castaneum Herbst, was used throughout as the test insect.     

EFFECT OF ASSESSORS EXPERTISE LEVEL ON EFFICIENCY OF WARM-UP FOR TRIANGLE TESTS

The effect of warm-up on performance for repeated triangle tests is studied according to assessors' expertise level for both triangle test strategy and the pair of products to compare. Three experiments performed with orange flavored soft drinks show that the effect of warm-up depends on the assessors' expertise: (1) naive assessors do not increase their performance with warm-up; (2) assessors with a moderate practice of both triangle tests and the pair of products improve their performance with warm-up; (3) assessors with a moderate practice of triangle tests, but not familiar with the pair of products, improve their performance with warm-up too; and (4) assessors highly experienced for both triangle tests and products do not improve their performance with warm-up. These results support the idea that the positive effect of warm-up is due to an attentional process: Warm-up seems to help assessors focusing their attention on the dimension on which the two products are actually different and ignoring the other dimensions. Thus, results show that assessors are able to learn the difference between the two products and to learn to focus their attention on this difference at any time. They also suggest that prior knowledge of the triangle test scheme is required to benefit from warm-up.