Technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) method for the generation of external preference mapping using rapid sensometric techniques

Background External preference mapping is a powerful tool to explain consumer preference or rejection. Combining the technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) multicriteria analysis with rapid descriptive techniques can improve preference map (PREFMAP) results. This...

Celý popis

Uložené v:
Podrobná bibliografia
Vydané v:Journal of the science of food and agriculture Ročník 101; číslo 8; s. 3298 - 3307
Hlavní autori: Ramón‐Canul, Lorena G, Margarito‐Carrizal, Diana L, Limón‐Rivera, Rogelio, Morales‐Carrrera, Uriel A, Rodríguez‐Buenfil, Ingrid M, Ramírez‐Sucre, Manuel O, Cabal‐Prieto, Adán, Herrera‐Corredor, José A, Ramírez‐Rivera, Emmanuel
Médium: Journal Article
Jazyk:English
Vydavateľské údaje: Chichester, UK John Wiley & Sons, Ltd 01.06.2021
John Wiley and Sons, Limited
Predmet:
agriculture
CATA
consumer preferences
Factor analysis
flash profile
Food production
Mapping
multicriteria technique
Multiple criterion
Napping
preference
Rejection
sensometrics
Sensory properties
Similarity
multicriteria technique
CATA
flash profile
Napping
preference
ISSN:0022-5142, 1097-0010, 1097-0010
On-line prístup:Získať plný text
Tagy: Pridať tag
Žiadne tagy, Buďte prvý, kto otaguje tento záznam!
Popis
Shrnutí:Background External preference mapping is a powerful tool to explain consumer preference or rejection. Combining the technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) multicriteria analysis with rapid descriptive techniques can improve preference map (PREFMAP) results. This study was conducted to compare the PREFMAPs generated with rapid descriptive flash profile (FP), check‐all‐that‐apply (CATA), and Napping® versus PREFMAPs constructed with FP‐TOPSIS, CATA‐TOPSIS, and Napping‐TOPSIS. Results Only 38.46%, 63.66%, and 42% of sensory attributes initially generated by FP, CATA, and Napping techniques respectively were considered for the determination of their weight W and allocation as positive or negative in the TOPSIS technique. The PREFMAPs constructed with FP‐TOPSIS, CATA‐TOPSIS, and Napping‐TOPSIS presented a better explanation of the preference and rejection than the PREFMAPs directly generated with rapid sensory techniques. The results of the multiple factor analysis and coefficient Rv indicated similarities in the sensory vocabularies used after the TOPSIS technique. Conclusion The combination of the TOPSIS technique with rapid sensory techniques is a reliable alternative for the construction of PREFMAPs in order to identify the sensory attributes responsible for preference and rejection of food products. © 2020 Society of Chemical Industry
Bibliografia:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ISSN:0022-5142
1097-0010
1097-0010
DOI:10.1002/jsfa.10959