4.6 Article

Recommendations for use of balanced presentation order of terms in CATA questions

Journal

FOOD QUALITY AND PREFERENCE
Volume 46, Issue -, Pages 137-141

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.07.012

Keywords

CATA; Consumer research; Research methodology; Sensory characterization; Consumer profiling

Funding

  1. Comision Sectorial de Investigacion Cientifica (Universidad de la Republica, Uruguay)
  2. CAPES-Brasil
  3. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPq, Brasil)
  4. New Zealand Ministry for Business, Innovation Employment
  5. New Zealand Institute for Plant & Food Research Ltd.

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Balancing presentation order of the terms of a CATA question between and within, participants has been recommended to minimize the influence of primacy bias on consumer responses and maintain their attention throughout the task. Compared to balancing presentation order only between participants, this experimental factor may make the task more difficult/tedious for participants and shift their attention away from the sensory characterization task with possible detrimental effects for sample discrimination. The aim of the present work was to compare sensory product characterizations obtained using CATA questions in which presentation order of the terms was balanced between participants with those obtained using CATA questions in which presentation order of the terms was balanced both between and within participants. Nine studies with 1028 consumers involving different product categories were conducted. Between-subjects experimental designs were used in all studies. No major differences were found in the sensory product characterizations obtained using presentation orders balanced between participants (BB) and both between and within participants (BW). (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available