Investigation of human flavor perception and discrimination of the fat content in food using DR A-Not A and 3-AFC methods

Abstract

This study examined human flavor perception and discrimination of powdered milk samples with various fat contents using two different sensory discrimination methods, DR A-Not A and 3-AFC. DR A-Not A was expected to be more effective. Using skim milk and whole milk powder, five different samples with various fat contents were prepared. An independent samples design was used to compare DR A-Not A and 3-AFC. Each subject performed 24 repeated tests consisting of comparisons of four different test samples from the reference sample. Signal detection d′ results showed that sample discrimination was possible using DR A-Not A, but not 3-AFC. Moreover, the just noticeable difference (JND) was calculated using the results of DR A-Not A. The calculated JND was 0.47% (w/v), and the Weber fraction was 0.82. These results confirm that the DR A-Not A method is more effective for studying the human sensitivity to the fat content in food.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  1. ASTM, Standard practice E 679–04. Standard practice for determination of odor and taste thresholds by a forced-choice ascending concentration series method of limits. Philadelphia, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials (2004)

  2. Bi J. Similarity tests using forced‐choice methods in terms of Thurstonian discriminal distance, d′. Journal of Sensory Studies, 26: 151-157 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bi J. Sensory discrimination tests and measurements: Sensometrics in sensory evaluation, 2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons. UK. 95-97 (2015)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  4. Boesveldt S, Lundström JN. Detecting fat content of food from a distance: olfactory-based fat discrimination in humans. PLoS One, 9: e85977 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bolton B, Halpern BP. Orthonasal and retronasal but not oral-cavity-only discrimination of vapor-phase fatty acids. Chemical Senses, 35: 229-238 (2010)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Camacho S, Dop M, de Graaf C, Stieger M. Just noticeable differences and Weber fraction of oral thickness perception of model beverages. Journal of Food Science, 80: S1583-S1588 (2015)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chale-Rush A, Burgess JR, Mattes RD. Evidence for human orosensory (taste?) sensitivity to free fatty acids. Chemical Senses, 32: 423-431 (2007)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Christensen RHB, Brockhoff PB. sensR: An R-package for Thurstonian modelling of discrete sensory data. R-package version 3(3) http://www.cran.rproject.org/package=sensR/. (2011)

  9. Dessirier JM, O’Mahony M. Comparison of d′ values for the 2-AFC (paired comparison) and 3-AFC discrimination methods: Thurstonian models, sequential sensitivity analysis and power. Food Quality and Preference, 10: 51-58 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Drewnowski A. Why do we Like Fat? Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 97: S58-S62 (1997)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ennis JM, Jesionka V. The power of sensory discrimination methods revisited. Journal of Sensory Studies, 26: 371-382 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Frijters JER, Kooistra A, Vereijken PFG. Tables of d′ for the triangular method and the 3-AFC signal detection procedure. Perception & Psychophysics 27: 176-178 (1980)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Fushiki T, Kawai T. Chemical reception of fats in the oral cavity and the mechanism of addiction to dietary fat. Chemical Senses, 30: i184-185 (2005)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Geshcheider GA. Psychophysics: Method, Theory and Application. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawerence Erlbaum Associates. pp. 38-46 (1985)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hautus MJ, van Hout D, Lee HS. Variants of A Not-A and 2AFC tests: Signal Detection Theory models. Food Quality and Preference. 20: 222-229 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Hautus MJ, Shepherd D, Peng M. Decision strategies for the A Not-A, 2AFC and 2AFC-reminder tasks: Empirical tests. Food Quality and Preference, 22: 433-442 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Heinze JM, Preissl H, Fritsche A, Frank S. Controversies in fat perception. Physiology & Behavior, 152: 479-493 (2015)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Hoppert K, Zahn S, Puschmann A, Ullmann I, Rohm H. Quantification of sensory difference thresholds for fat and sweetness in dairy-based emulsions. Food Quality and Preference, 26: 52-57 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Jeong YN, Kang BA, Jeong MJ, Song MJ, Hautus MJ, Lee HS. Sensory discrimination by consumers of multiple stimuli from a reference: Stimulus configuration in A-Not AR and constant-ref. duo-trio superior to triangle and unspecified tetrad?. Food Quality and Preference, 47: 10-22 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kallas O, Halpern BP. Retronasal Discrimination Between Vapor-Phase Long-Chain, Aliphatic Fatty Acids. Chemosensory Perception, 4: 16-24 (2011)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kim MA, Chae JE, van Hout D, Lee HS. Discriminations of the A–Not A difference test improved when “A” was familiarized using a brand image. Food Quality and Preference, 23: 3-12 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kim MA, Lee HS. Investigation of operationally more powerful duo-trio test protocols: Effects of different reference schemes. Food Quality and Preference, 25: 183-191 (2012)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kim MA, Sim HM, Lee HS. Affective discrimination methodology: Determination and use of a consumer-relevant sensory difference for food quality maintenance. Food Research International, 70: 47-54 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kim MA, Sim HM, Lee HS. Food quality management using sensory discrimination method based on signal detection theory and its application to drinking water. Food Science and Industry, 52: 22-28 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kindleysides S, Beck KL, Walsh DC, Henderson L, Jayasinghe SN, Golding M, Breier BH. Fat sensation: fatty acid taste and olfaction sensitivity and the link with disinhibited eating behaviour. Nutrients, 9: 879 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Lawless HT, Heymann H. Sensory evaluation of food: principles and practices. 2nd ed. Springer Science & Business Media. CA. USA. 20-21 (2010)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  27. Le Calvé B, Saint‐Léger C, Babas R, Geli, JL, Parker A, Erni P, Cayeux I. Fat perception: how sensitive are we?. Journal of Texture Studies, 46: 200-211 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Lee HS, O’Mahony M. Sensory difference testing: Thurstonian models. Food Science and Biotechnology, 13: 841-847 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Lee HS, Van Hout D, Hautus MJ. Comparison of performance in the A–Not A, 2-AFC, and same–different tests for the flavor discrimination of margarines: The effect of cognitive decision strategies. Food Quality and Preference, 18: 920-928 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Lee YM, Chae JE, Lee HS. Effects of order of tasting in sensory difference tests using apple juice stimuli: Development of a new model. Journal of food science, 74: S268-S275 (2009)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Liang LC, Sakimura J, May D, Breen C, Driggin E, Tepper BJ, Chung WK, Keller KL. Fat discrimination: a phenotype with potential implications for studying fat intake behaviors and obesity. Physiology & Behavior, 105: 470-475 (2012)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Liu D, Archer N, Duesing K, Hannan G, Keast R. Mechanism of fat taste perception: Association with diet and obesity. Progress in lipid research, 63: 41-49 (2016)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Macmillan NA, Creelman CD. Detection theory: A user’s guide. 2nd ed. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Mahwah, New Jersey, USA. 3-50 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Mattes RD. Fat taste and lipid metabolism in humans. Physiology & Behavior, 86: 691-697 (2005)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Mattes RD. Oral detection of short-, medium-, and long-chain free fatty acids in humans. Chemical Senses, 34: 145-150 (2009)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Ministry of Food and Drug Safety. Korean Food Standards Codex. Available from:https://www.foodsafetykorea.go.kr/foodcode/01_03.jsp?idx=39 Accessed Oct. 25, 2019 (2019)

  37. Mun JW, Kim MA, Sim HM, Lee HS. Investigation of test performance of the dual reminder A-Not A (DR A-Not A) in comparison to 3-AFC for discriminating samples of drinking water. Food Quality and Preference, 77: 43-50 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Pangborn RM, Trabue IM, Pikielna NB. Taste, odor, and tactile discrimination before and after smoking. Perception & Psychophysics, 2: 529-532 (1967)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Rousseau B. Sensory discrimination testing and consumer relevance. Food Quality and Preference, 43: 122-125 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Running CA, Craig BA, Mattes RD. Oleogustus: the unique taste of fat. Chemical senses, 40: 507-516 (2015)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Stern MK, Johnson JH. Just Noticeable Difference. In The Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology (pp. 1–2). Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (2010)

  42. Stocks MA, van Hout D, Hautus MJ. Cognitive decision strategies adopted by trained judges in reminder difference tests when tasting yoghurt, mayonnaise, and ice tea. Food Quality and Preference, 34: 14-23 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF), funded by the Ministry of Education (No. 2018R1D1A1A02086215).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hye-Seong Lee.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kim, SM., Kim, JE. & Lee, HS. Investigation of human flavor perception and discrimination of the fat content in food using DR A-Not A and 3-AFC methods. Food Sci Biotechnol 30, 815–822 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10068-021-00922-y

Download citation

Keywords

  • Dual reminder A-not A (DR A-not a)
  • Fat discrimination
  • Fat perception
  • Unspecified sensory discrimination test
  • Just noticeable difference (JND)