View : 552 Download: 507

Full metadata record

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.author정서진*
dc.date.accessioned2024-08-26T16:31:06Z-
dc.date.available2024-08-26T16:31:06Z-
dc.date.issued2024*
dc.identifier.issn9639-9969*
dc.identifier.otherOAK-35799*
dc.identifier.urihttps://dspace.ewha.ac.kr/handle/2015.oak/269350-
dc.description.abstractDue to the constraints of the COVID-19 pandemic, conducting sensory evaluations requiring direct interactions became challenging. In response, researchers have been motivated to devise non-face-to-face testing methods as alternatives. This study aimed to compare two non-face-to-face home-use tests (HUT) with the traditional face-to-face central location test (CLT). Both HUTs involved online recruitment and sample delivery to participants' homes. One HUT provided a written protocol with no direct interaction (contactless HUT; C-HUT), whereas the other included an online meeting with a researcher for live guidance (online HUT; O-HUT). Four coffee samples were evaluated on the basis of liking and sensory and emotional attributes. The comparison between CLT and O-HUT showed RV coefficients of 0.92, 0.93, and 0.98 (P < 0.05) for liking and sensory and emotional attributes, respectively. In addition, based on the RV coefficient, the CLT results showed a significantly greater similarity to those of O-HUT compared to those of C-HUT. The O-HUT also outperformed the C-HUT in its ability to significantly discriminate between samples. Hence, real-time interactions between researchers and participants, as facilitated by O-HUT, may be more suitable in certain scenarios compared to C-HUT, which relies solely on a written protocol. Overall, these findings suggest that C-HUT and O-HUT are suitable methods for collecting sensory data and overcoming geographic and face-to-face contact limitations, providing greater flexibility, and reducing the time and cost associated with traditional sensory evaluations. © 2024*
dc.description.sponsorshipElsevier Ltd*
dc.languageEnglish*
dc.subjectCentral location test*
dc.subjectEmotional response*
dc.subjectHome-use test*
dc.subjectLiking*
dc.subjectNon-face-to-face*
dc.subjectRemote test*
dc.subjectSensory evaluation*
dc.subjectSensory profiling*
dc.titleOnline consumer testing beyond central location tests: A case study for brewed coffee*
dc.typeArticle*
dc.relation.volume187*
dc.relation.indexSCIE*
dc.relation.indexSCOPUS*
dc.relation.journaltitleFood Research International*
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.foodres.2024.114349*
dc.identifier.wosidWOS:001236595200001*
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-85191338666*
dc.author.googlePark*
dc.author.googleSeyeong*
dc.author.googleLee*
dc.author.googleCho-Long*
dc.author.googleOh*
dc.author.googleJungmin*
dc.author.googleLim*
dc.author.googleManyoel*
dc.author.googleChung*
dc.author.googleSeo-Jin*
dc.author.googleKwak*
dc.author.googleHan Sub*
dc.contributor.scopusid정서진(37042905800)*
dc.date.modifydate20260630164551*


qrcode

BROWSE