Assessment of the product encounter
Laboratory analysis is the first thing that most people think of when they think about the testing procedures used in food manufacturing. Here, we learn about another crucial criteria that can make or break a product: sensory pleasure and fulfilment.
It should go without saying to everyone who reads this that eating involves multiple senses. The overwhelming combination of sight, smell, taste, sound, texture, and trigeminal stimulation is what gives our favorite foods and beverages their delicious flavors and sensations.and that also explains why we don’t like other people as much!
Sadly for the food industry, people are not machines but rather human beings, and as such, people differ greatly not just in the strength of the feelings they experience but also in the characteristics they see and find appealing. We react more strongly to textures associated with bad childhood eating memories and are more aware of flavor notes we dislike.
Individual differences also exist in how consistently we perceive things. Attention is one of the most powerful influences of all; if we are not observing what we consume, we will not be able to observe much. However, mood and surroundings are also quite important. The Provencal Rosé Paradox1 explains why, on a wet February evening in England, a cheap, sour, vinegary rosé wine that tasted so good in the warm French sunshine tastes so bad. The wine itself hasn’t changed, of course, but your perception of it has because of the shifting circumstances and your emotional state.
We form expectations about the flavor of food based on the interaction of our senses and past experiences. Depending on how the product lives up to this expectation or not, this could result in a good or bad experience. From an early age, we are taught that red drinks are thought to be sweet and strawberry-flavored, whereas in reality, they are acidic and have a lime taste. In a similar vein, we are predisposed to anticipate the flavor and texture of chicken if we see white “meat” particles in a pie without meat. If what we expect doesn’t turn out to be what we get, we will be disappointed.
When it comes to food, our expectations are heavily influenced by brand, past product experience, packaging, and value assessment. When you consume a product for the first time, you anticipate the same experience, therefore it must consistently meet your primary requirements. Therefore, the maker must exercise extreme caution when altering product formulation to meet with regulations, such as HFSS (heavy in fats, sugar, and salt), or for financial reasons, in order to retain the consistency of the consumer experience.
Traditionally, trained sensory panels have been used to track how product changes resulting from recipe and process modifications are felt. A panel of 10–12 individuals is called a sensory panel, and they are chosen based on having slightly better-than-average sensory acuity and the capacity to articulate what they
Panels frequently dissect the product experience into its component elements and quantify the strength of each using a method known as “descriptive sensory profiling.” An ice cream’s flavor, for instance, might include overtones of almond, milk, cream, caramel, and vanilla. By contrasting the intensity of these notes amongst recipes, one can identify variations brought about by altering the kind and quantity of ingredients. The outcomes are statistically analyzed and frequently shown graphically as spider profile diagrams (see to Figure 1).
Traditionally, sensory panels have concentrated on the eating experience, operated in standardized sensory laboratories (see to Figure 2), and consumed pre-portioned, pre-prepared food that was served with a blind code. This has the drawback that it leaves out the product use experience, and as was previously mentioned, we know that a product’s impact on a consumer extends beyond mere consumption. Thus, expanding the sensory panel’s use to include objective measurements of the whole product experience will provide valuable new understanding into the driving forces behind initial and subsequent purchases.
Because of this, Sensory Dimensions’ panelists use their descriptive and measuring abilities while preparing and consuming products at home in a typical manner, in addition to testing them in a lab. We are gathering this in-home data with the use of smart speaker technology.
Of course, the customer is the final arbiter; thorough consumer product testing research is a crucial first step in validating product changes.
The true magic is in figuring out what influences a product’s likeability utilizing objective sensory data. Techniques like SD’s OptiMap+ combine consumer preference data with sensory panel data focused on the eating experience of those products (people aren’t particularly good at expressing why they like or dislike something).
What was the result? determining which sensory elements should be avoided and which influence likability. The deed? Using strategic formulation, you can maximize your product’s sensory experience and increase market success.