Abstract
The increasing requirement for sensory laboratories to show that the results they provide are repeatable by other laboratories has meant that ways of measuring this are required. One way to achieve this is to undertake ring trials on the same product, using different panels. If the sensory method is used correctly, and the panels are trained, the same conclusions should be drawn from the ring trials. This paper investigates the comparability of sensory panels using a number of different methods—ranking, `multiple comparison' and profiling—during a 15 month breakfast cereal storage trial. The ranking trial involved 11 panels' assessments at one time point (5 months); six provided similar information in terms of rank order, and were able to discriminate between the samples. Two panels could not discriminate, whilst the other two only separated out one sample. `Multiple comparison' data (two panels) showed better consistency at the start of the trial, compared to the latter months. The sample and attribute biplots of descriptive profiling, at one selected time period, revealed that while there was an overall similarity between the two panels performing this test at 5 months, there was a notable discrepancy in the position of one sample. This paper illustrates that proficiency testing by ring trials is a method of comparing panel performance. It highlights the fact that even highly trained panels, familiar with the product, can be subject to the occasional inconsistency, relative to other panels. However, this should be viewed in the context of the overall sensory test. ©
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call