Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Sensory Evaluation of Food pp 407–432Cite as

Quality Control and Shelf-Life (Stability) Testing

  • Chapter

  • 134k Accesses

Part of the book series: Food Science Text Series ((FSTS))

Abstract

Two routine functions of a sensory department may be quality control testing and the measurement of product stability or shelf life. These activities may involve any of the three main kinds of sensory testing or modifications of them. However, there are unique constraints for these tests, different types of analyses, and specific models for these data. This chapter discusses different procedures for sensory quality control, presents a recommended procedure, and outlines the programmatic requirements for establishing and maintaining a sensory QC function. The second section of the chapter presents an introduction to shelf-life testing, its special considerations, and some of the models used for stability testing data.

Consumer researchers are well aware of the quality of products. The food industry constantly faces the demand to maintain both quality and profitability simultaneously. Quality, however, is an elusive concept and as such must be operationalized and measured in order for it to be maintained.

—H. R. Moskowitz (1995)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Amerine, M. R. and Roessler, E. B. 1981. Wines, Their Sensory Evaluation, Second Edition. W.H. Freeman, San Francisco, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amerine, M. R., Pangborn, R. M. and Roessler, E. B. 1965. Principles of Sensory Evaluation of Foods. Academic, New York, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aust, L. B., Gacula, M. C., Beard, S. A. and Washam, R. W. 1985. Degree of difference test method in sensory evaluation of heterogeneous product types. Journal of Food Science, 50, 511–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauman, H. E. and Taubert, C. 1984. Why quality assurance is necessary and important to plant management. Food Technology, 38(4), 101–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beckley, J. P. and Kroll, D. R. 1996. Searching for sensory research excellence. Food Technology, 50(2), 61–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodyfelt, F. W., Tobias, J. and Trout, G. M. 1988. Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products. Van Nostrand/AVI, New York, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bressan, L. P. and Behling, R. W. 1977. The selection and training of judges for discrimination testing. Food Technology, 31, 62–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cardello, A. V. 1995. Food quality: Relativity, context and consumer expectations. Food Quality and Preference, 6, 163–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlton, D. K. 1985. Plant sensory evaluation within a multiplant international organization. Food Technology, 39(11), 130–133, 142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dethmers, A. E. 1979. Utilizing sensory evaluation to determine product shelf life. Food Technology, 33(9), 40–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ennis, D. M., Mullen, K. and Frijters, J. E. R. 1988. Variations of the method of triads: Unidimensional Thurstonian models. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 41, 25–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gacula, M. C. 1975. The design of experiments for shelf life study. Journal of Food Science, 40, 399–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gacula, M. C. and Kubala, J. J. 1975. Statistical models for shelf life failures. Journal of Food Science, 40, 404–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garvin, D. A. 1987. Competing on the eight dimensions of quality. Harvard Business Review, 65(6), 101–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillette, M. H. and Beckley, J. H. 1992. In-Plant Sensory Quality Assurance. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting, Institute of Food Technologists, New Orleans, LA, June, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giminez, A., Ares, G. and Gambaro, A. 2008. Survival analysis to estimate sensory shelf life using acceptability scores. Journal of Sensory Studies, 23, 571–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giminez, A., Varela, P., Salvador, A., Ares, G., Fiszman, S. and Garitta, L. 2007. Shelf life estimation of brown pan bread: A consumer approach. Food Quality and Preference, 18, 196–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldwyn, C. and Lawless, H. 1991. How to taste wine. ASTM Standardization News, 19(3), 32–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, E., Dunkley, W., Bodyfelt, F., Larmond, E, and Lindsay, R. 1986. Report of the committee on sensory data to the journal management committee. Journal of Dairy Science, 69, 298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson, R. T. 2008. An examination of judge reliability at a major U.S. wine competition. Journal of Wine Economics, 3, 105–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hough, G. 2010. Sensory Shelf Life Estimation of Food Products. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hough, G., Langohr, K., Gomez, G. and Curia, A. 2003. Survival analysis applied to sensory shelf life of foods. Journal of Food Science, 68, 359–362.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • International Olive Oil Council. 2007. Sensory analysis of olive oil. Method for the organoleptic assessment of virgin olive oil. http://www.internationaloliveoil.org/.

  • Kilcast, D. 2000. Sensory evaluation methods for shelf-life assessment. In: D. Kilcast and P. Subramaniam (eds.), The Stability and Shelf-Life of Food. CRC/Woodhead, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 79–105.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lawless, H. T. 1995. Dimensions of quality: A critique. Food Quality and Preference, 6, 191–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawless, H. T. and Claassen, M. R. 1993. Validity of descriptive and defect-oriented terminology systems for sensory analysis of fluid milk. Journal of Food Science, 58, 108–112, 119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mastrian, L. K. 1985. The sensory evaluation program within a small processing operation. Food Technology, 39(11), 127–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • McBride, R. L. and Hall, C. 1979. Cheese grading versus consumer acceptability: An inevitable discrepancy. Australian Journal of Dairy Technology, June, 66–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNutt, K. 1988. Consumer attitudes and the quality control function. Food Technology, 42(12), 97, 98, 108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mizrahi, S. 2000. Accelerated shelf-life tests. In: D. Kilcast and P. Subramaniam (eds.), The Stability and Shelf-life of Foods. CRC /Woodhead, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 107–142.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Moskowitz, H. R. 1995.Food Quality: conceptual and sensory aspects. Food Quality and Preference, 6, 157–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muñoz, A. M., Civille, G. V. and Carr, B. T. 1992. Sensory Evaluation in Quality Control. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, NY.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nakayama, M. and Wessman, C. 1979. Application of sensory evaluation to the routine maintenance of product quality. Food Technology, 33(9), 38, 39 ,44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, L. 1984. The Shewart control chart-tests for special causes. Journal of Quality Technology, 16, 237–239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, J. and Trout, G. M. 1964. Judging Dairy Products. AVI, Westport, CT.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Mahony, M. 1981. Our-industry today—psychophysical aspects of sensory analysis of dairy products: A critique. Journal of Dairy Science, 62, 1954–1962.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ough, C. S. and Baker, G. A. 1961. Small panel sensory evaluations of wines by scoring. Hilgardia, 30, 587–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pangborn, R. M. and Dunkley, W. L. 1964. Laboratory procedures for evaluating the sensory properties of milk. Dairy Science Abstracts, 26, 55–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pecore, S., Stoer, N., Hooge, S., Holschuh, N., Hulting, F. and Case, F. 2006. Degree of difference testing: A new approach incorporating control lot variability. Food Quality and Preference, 17, 552–555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peryam, D. R. 1964. Consumer preference evaluation of the storage stability of foods. Food Technology, 18, 214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reece, R. N. 1979. A quality assurance perspective on sensory evaluation. Food Technology, 33(9), 37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, G. L. 2006. Food Packaging, Principles and Practice, Second Edition. CRC/Taylor and Francis, Boca Raton, FL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutenbeck, S. K. 1985. Initiating an in-plant quality control/sensory evaluation program. Food Technology, 39(11), 124–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Regenstein, J. M. 1983. What is fish quality? Infofish, June, 23–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sidel, J. L., Stone, H. and Bloomquist, J. 1981. Use and misuse of sensory evaluation in research and quality control. Journal of Dairy Science, 64, 2292–2302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, G. E. A. 1990. The psychology of novice and expert wine talk. American Journal of Psychology, 103, 495–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson, S. G.,Vaisey-Genser, M. and Eskin, N. A. M. 1984. Quality control in the use of deep frying oils. Journal of the American Oil Chemist’s Society, 61, 1102–1108.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stouffer, J. C. 1985. Coordinating sensory evaluation in a multiplant operation. Food Technology, 39(11), 134–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, R. H. and Pearson, A. M. 1977. Quantitative determination of 5 Androst-16-en-3-one by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry and its relationship to sex odor intensity of pork. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 25, 1241–1245.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Trant, A. S., Pangborn, R. M. and Little, A. C. 1981. Potential fallacy of correlating hedonic responses with physical and chemical measurements. Journal of Food Science, 46, 583–588.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe, K. A. 1979. Use of reference standards for sensory evaluation of product quality. Food Technology, 33(9), 43–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • York, R. K. 1995. Quality assessment in a regulatory environment. Food Quality and Preference, 6, 137–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, T. A., Pecore, S., Stoer, N., Hulting, F., Holschuh, N. and Case, F. 2008. Incorporating test and control product variability in degree of difference tests. Food Quality and Preference, 19, 734–736.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Food Science, Cornell University, Stocking Hall, Room 106, Ithaca, 14853, USA

    Harry T. Lawless

  2. Department of Viticulture and Enology, University of California – Davis, 2003 RMI Sensory Building, 95616, Davis, CA, USA

    Hildegarde Heymann

Authors
  1. Harry T. Lawless
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hildegarde Heymann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lawless, H., Heymann, H. (2010). Quality Control and Shelf-Life (Stability) Testing. In: Sensory Evaluation of Food. Food Science Text Series. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6488-5_17

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation