FST 658

ADVANCED SENSORY EVALUATION AND PRODUCT

DEVELOPMENT

EXPERIMENT 4: ACCEPTANCE TEST

Prepared by : ERNIE NAJWA NAJIHAH BINTI FAIDI

Student ID : 2017283562

Group members :

1. RUS HANISA BINTI RUSLAN (2017283624)

2. AINA AQILAH BINTI KHAIRUL AMIN
(2017283608)

Group : AS2466Q

Prepared for : DR SITI ROHA BINTI AB MUTALIB

Date of submission : 6TH MAY 2020

 EXPERIMENT 4: ACCEPTANCE TEST

OBJECTIVES

1. To measure the degree of liking towards products.

2. To give better understanding of laboratory preference test to the respondents.

INTRODUCTION

Acceptance and choice of food's sensory properties are among the most relevant
factors for assessing food quality. Although market acceptance and preferential testing are
now commonly applicable, there is still a question of how best testing can be done, including
what particular methodologies should be used

\METHOD

A. Hedonic scale (more than 2 samples)

The respondents were given 3 samples and they were required to rinse their
mouth before and between sample tasting. The samples were then being tasted in
order from top to the bottom. The respondents were asked to give indication on how
much they like or dislike each sample for each characteristics given below based on
the given hedonic scale.

Sample code Appearance Colour Taste Texture Overall

029
920
643

Hedonic Scale:
1 = dislike extremely
2 = dislike very much
3 = dislike moderately
4 = dislike slightly
5 = neither like nor dislike
6 = like slightly
 7 = like moderately
8 = like very much
9 = like extremely

B. Hedonic scale (2 samples)

The respondents were given two samples and they were required to rinse their
mouth before and between each sample tasting. The samples were then being evaluate
in order from top to bottom. The respondents were required to indicate on how much
they like or dislike each sample for each characteristics given below, regarding the
hedonic scale given.

Sample code Sourness Sweetness Overall

981
843

Hedonic Scale:
1 = dislike extremely
2 = dislike very much
3 = dislike moderately
4 = dislike slightly
5 = neither like nor dislike
6 = like slightly
7 = like moderately
8 = like very much
9 = like extremely

C. Ranking test
The respondents were given four (4) difference samples. They were asked to
evaluate each of the sample for preference in the order list below, from top to bottom
with their mouth rinsed before and between sample testing. The sample with the most
preferred was then assigned a rank of 4 and the least preferred with a rank of 1.

Code Rank assigned

165
 295
306
535

D. Paired comparison (preference test)

The respondents were given two different samples this time and as usual they
were reminded to rinse their mouth before and between each sample tasting. The
sample on the left was tasted first. The respondents were then required to circle the
code number corresponding to the sample they preferred.

914 579
Comments: _______________________________________
RESULTS AND CALCULATION

A. Hedonic scale (more than 2 samples)

i. Appearance

a) Correction factor (CF) b) sum of square of sample

2942 1042 +1052 +852
= = – 1920.8
45 15
= 1920.8 = 16.93

c) sum of square of judges

162 +232 +172 +172 +20 2+182 +132 +222 +232 +202 +222 +24 2+18 2+212 +202
= ( 3 ) –

1920.8
= 43.87

d) sum of square of the total = 135.2

= (742 + 745 + 569) – 1920.8 e) sum of square error
= 135.2 – 43.87 – 16.93 = 74.4
 f) Degree of freedom (df) of sample
=3–1
=2

g) Degree of freedom (df) of judges

= 15 – 1
= 14

h) Degree of freedom (df) of total i) Degree of freedom (df) of error

= 45 – 1 = 44 – 14 – 2
= 44 = 28

j) Meansquare, sample k) Meansquare, judges

16.93 43.87
= =
2 14
= 8.47 = 3.13

l) Meansquare, error m) Variance ratio, sample (F sample)

74.4 8.47
= =
28 2.66
= 2.66 = 3.18

n) Variance ratio, judges (F judges)

3.13
=
2.66
= 1.18

o) Df, error (refer table at 5% and 1% level)

= Therefore, F value = 3.18 < 3.34 (5% level) and F value = 1.18 < 5.45 (1% level).
So, the 3 sample have no significant different in terms of appearance at 5% and 1%
level.
 ii. Colour

a) Correction factor (CF) b) sum of square of sample

2902 1002+ 1052+ 852
= = – 1868.89
45 15
= 1868.89 = 14.44

c) sum of square judges

(162 +232 +172 +172 +202 +192 +132 +212 +222 +192 +222+ 222+17 2+ 222+20 2)
= [ 3 ] –

1868.89
= 37.78

d) sum of square total e) sum of square error

= (690 + 755 + 551) –1868.89 = 127.11 – 37.78 – 14.44
= 127.11 = 74.89
f) Degree of freedom (df) of sample g) Degree of freedom (df) of judges
=3–1 = 15 – 1
=2 = 14

h) Degree of freedom (df) of total i) Degree of freedom (df) of error

= 45 – 1 = 44 – 14 – 2
= 44 = 28

j) Meansquare of sample k) Meansquare of judges

14.44 37.78
= =
2 14
=7.22 = 2.70

l) Meansquare, error m) Variance ratio, sample (F sample)

74.89 7.22
= =
28 2.67
= 2.67 =2.70

n) Variance ratio (F) judges = Therefore, F value =2.70 <

2.70 3.34 (5% level) and F value = 2.70
=
2.57
< 5.45 (1% level). So, the 3 sample
= 1.01
has no significant different in terms
of colour at 5% and 1% level.
o) Df, error (refer table at 5% and 1%
level)
 iii. Taste

a) Correction factor (CF) b) sum of square (ss) of sample

2992 902 +1012+ 1082
= = – 1986.69
45 15
= 1986.69 = 10.98

c) sum of square (ss) judges

( 182 +222+ 202+ 182+ 222+23 2+15 2+212 +24 2 +172 +242 +212 +152 +202 +192 )
= −¿
3
1986.69
= 39.64

d) sum of square (ss) total = 130.31

= (560 + 741 + 816) – 1986.69
e) sum of square (ss) error = 79.69
= 130.31 – 39.64 – 10.98
f) Degree of freedom (df) of sample g) Degree of freedom (df) of judges
=3–1 = 15 – 1
=2 = 14

h) Degree of freedom (df) of total i) Degree of freedom (df) of error

= 45 – 1 = 44 – 14 – 2
= 44 = 28

j) Meansquare, sample k) Meansquare, judges

10.98 39.64
= =
2 14
= 5.49 = 2.83

l) Meansquare, error m) Variance ratio (F) sample

79.69 5.49
= =
28 2.85
= 2.85 = 1.93

n) Variance ratio (F) judges

2.83
=
2.85
= 0.99
o) Df, error (refer table at 5% and 1% level)
=Therefore, F value = 1.93 < 3.34 (5% level) and F value = 3.85 < 5.45 (1% level).
So, the 3 sample have no significant different in terms of taste at 5% and 1% level.
 iv. Texture

a) Correction factor (CF) b) sum of square of sample

3022 922+ 1032+ 1072
= = – 2026.76
45 15
= 2026.76 = 8.04

c) sum of square judges

172 +24 2+19 2+192 +23 2+20 2+13 2+212 +26 2+20 2+23 2+212 +182 +20 2+182
= ( 3 ) –

2026.76
= 46.57

d) sum of square total e) sum of square error

= (614 + 733 + 807) – 2026.76 = 127.24– 8.04 – 46.57
= 127.24 = 72.63

f) Degree of freedom (df) of sample =3–1

 =2 = 15 – 1
g) Degree of freedom (df) of judges = 14
h) Degree of freedom (df) of total i) Degree of freedom (df) of error
= 45 – 1 = 44 – 14 – 2
= 44 = 28

j) Meansquare of sample k) Meansquare of judges

8.04 46.57
= =
2 14
= 4.02 = 3.33

l) Meansquare of error m) Variance ratio, sample (F sample)

72.63 4.02
= =
28 2.59
= 2.59 = 1.55

n) Variance ratio, judges (F judges)

3.33
=
2.59
= 1.29

o) Df, error (refer table at 5% and 1% level).

= Therefore, F value = 1.55 < 3.34 (5% level) and F value = 1.55 < 5.45 (1% level).
So, the 3 sample has no significant different in terms of texture at 5% and 1% level.
 v. Overall

a) Correction factor (CF) b) sum of square (ss) of sample

3032 922 +1032 +1082
=
45
= ( 15 )
– 2040.2

= 2040.2 = 8.93

c) sum of square (ss) judges

182 +242 +202 +16 2+24 2 +242 +132 +222 +232 +182 +232 +212 +162 +212 +202
=( 3 ) –

2040.2
= 53.47

d) sum of square total e) sum of square error

= (594 + 743 + 806) – 2040.2 = 102.8 – 53.47 – 8.93
= 102.8 = 40.4
f) Degree of freedom (df) of sample g) Degree of freedom (df) of judges
=3–1 = 15 – 1
=2 = 14

h) Degree of freedom (df) of total i) Degree of freedom (df) of error

= 45 – 1 = 44 – 14 – 2
= 44 = 28

j) Meansquare of sample
8.93
=
2
= 4.47

k) Meansquare, judges
53.47
=
14

= 3.82

l) Meansquare, error m) Variance ratio (F) sample

40.4 4.47
= =
28 1.44
= 1.44 = 3.10

n) Variance ratio (F) judges

3.82
=
1.44
= 2.65
o) Df, error (refer table at 5% and 1% level)
=Therefore, F value = 3.10 < 3.34 (5% level) and F value = 3.10 < 5.45 (1% level).
So, the 3 sample has no significant different in terms of overall characteristics
evaluation at 5% and 1% level.
 B. Hedonic scale (2 sample)
i. Sourness

Respondents Sample Coded Difference (d) d2

920 843
Nur Amirah 7 5 2 4
Najwa 6 8 -2 4
Shaqeera 8 3 5 25
Adreana 8 9 -1 1
Noreen 7 5 2 4
Aina 7 8 -1 1
Athiera 5 6 -1 1
Anis Nabihah 8 5 3 9
Syarafana 7 5 2 4
Shuhadah 8 9 -1 1
Hasnita 5 9 -4 16
Nurfadzliyana 8 6 2 4
Naimi 6 8 -2 4
Dahlia 8 8 0 0
Nadiyana 8 8 0 0
Total 106 102 4 78
Mean 7.07 6.80 0.27
Mean of difference = 0.27

Σd2 = 78

(Σd)2 = 42

= 16

√
(Σd )
2
a) Variance, s = Σd − n
n−1

( 1615 )
=
√
= 2.34
78−

15−1

b) df = 15 – 1
= 14

Based on the statistical chart distribution of T:

= T – value at 5% level (0.050) = 2.145

0.27
Therefore, T – calculated = 2.34
√15

= 0.44

Thus, T – calculated = 0.44 < T – value = 2.145, sample 920 and 843 is not significantly
difference at 5% level in terms of sourness
 ii. Sweetness

Respondents Sample Coded Difference (d) d2

920 843
Nur Amirah 6 5 1 1
Najwa 8 9 -1 1
Shaqeera 7 7 0 0
Adreana 9 9 0 0
Noreen 6 4 2 4
Aina 7 7 0 0
Athiera 7 8 -1 1
Anis Nabihah 6 7 -1 1
Syarafana 8 7 1 1
Shuhadah 8 8 0 0
Hasnita 7 9 -2 4
Nurfadzliyana 7 7 0 0
Naimi 6 7 -1 1
Dahlia 8 7 1 1
Nadiyana 8 9 -1 1
Total 108 110 -2 16
Mean 7.20 7.33 -0.13

Mean of difference = -0.13 (Σd)2 = (-2)2

Σd2 = 16 =4

√
2 (Σd )
a) Variance, s = Σd −
n
n−1

( 154 )
=
√
= 1.06
16−

15−1

b) df = 15 – 1
= 14

Based on statistical chart 8,

Distribution of T = T – value at 5% level (0.050)

=2.145
 −0.31
Therefore, T – calculated = 1.06
√ 15

= -0.4

Thus, T – calculated = - 0.47 < T – value = 2.145, sample 920 and 843 is not significantly
difference at 5% level in terms of sweetness
 iii. Overall

Respondents Sample Coded Difference (d) d2

920 843
Nur Amirah 7 5 2 4
Najwa 8 9 -1 1
Shaqeera 7 7 0 0
Adreana 9 9 0 0
Noreen 6 5 1 1
Aina 7 8 -1 1
Athiera 7 8 -1 1
Anis Nabihah 8 7 1 1
Syarafana 8 6 2 4
Shuhadah 7 8 -1 1
Hasnita 6 9 -3 9
Nurfadzliyana 8 7 1 1
Naimi 6 7 -1 1
Dahlia 8 7 1 1
Nadiyana 8 8 0 0
Total 110 110 0 26
Mean 7.33 7.33 0.00

Mean of difference =0
Σd2 = 26
(Σd)2 = (0)2
=0

√
(Σd )
2
a) Variance, s = Σd − n
n−1

( 150 )
=
√ 26−

= 1.36
15−1

b) df = 15 – 1
= 14

Based on statistical chart 8,

Distribution of T = T – value at 5% level (0.050)

 =2.145

0
Therefore, T – calculated = 1.36
√15

=0.0

Thus, T – calculated = 0.00 < T – value = 2.145, sample 920 and 843 is not significantly
difference at 5% level in terms of overall characteristics evaluation
 C. Ranking test

Panelist Health status Sample

165 (A) 295 (B) 306 (C) 643 (D)
Adreana Healthy 3 1 4 2
Naimi Healthy 2 4 1 3
Aina Healthy 2 4 3 1
Anis Healthy 3 1 4 2
Dahlia Healthy 2 1 4 3
Hasnita Healthy 4 1 2 3
Amirah Healthy 1 4 3 2
Najwa Healthy 2 4 3 1
Athiera Healthy 4 3 2 1
Fadzliyana Flu 3 1 4 2
Shaqeera Healthy 4 2 1 3
Nadiyana Cough 3 1 4 2
Noreen Healthy 2 1 4 3
Shuhadah Healthy 1 2 3 4
Syarafana Healthy 3 1 4 2
TOTAL 39 31 46 34

Difference between the rank total

C A D B

C – A = 46 – 39 = 7
C – D = 46 – 34 = 12
C – B = 46 – 31 = 15
A – D = 39 – 34 = 5
A – B = 39 – 31 = 8
D – B = 34 – 31 = 3

Number of panellist = 15
Number of samples = 4
Critical absolute rank sum differences value at 5% level = 19
Critical absolute rank sum differences value at 1% level = 22

Conclusions: All samples pair are not significantly different at 5% and 1% level.
 D. Paired comparison (preference test)

Based on statistical chart 3: two – sample test (two – tail tests), the sample is
significant different at 0.1% with the confidence level of 99.9%
DISCUSSION

According to Ellis et.al. (1967), preference is an expression of higher degree of liking

where it implies a choice of one product over another and it may be referred to in degrees of
liking or disliking. Acceptability and preference are two different things that are related but
not the same. Meanwhile, the term preference testing as commonly used in today's sensory
assessment refers to all affective measures based on preference calculation, or a measure
from which relative preference can be defined.

This study sought to understand better on how well individual methods discriminate
between samples, similarities and differences in sample discrimination patterns, consumer
understanding of their implementation, and practicalities. In former method, hedonic
response of a product is determined by skilled evaluators whereas in second method,
consumers are involved in the evaluation process (Sharif & Sharif, 2017). During this
experiment, two hedonic method were implied, one with two sample and the other one is
using more than two samples.

The first characteristics that being tested in this experiment is appearance

acceptability of the samples. Appearance is the first features perceived by the human senses
and plays a significant role in the recognition and final food selection process. This is the
visual experience of food consisting of colour, form, scale, shine, sluggishness, transparency.
The presence of a meal has had an effect on stimulation of appetite or depression leading to
pleasure or total depression.

A mixture of senses such as touch, mouth feel, sight and sound, perceives texture.
Texture is a prerequisite for the acceptation of several foodstuffs. Texture plays a vital role in
product development process as there is a wide variety and level of texture acceptability
among the consumers.

CONCLUSION

This experiment was conducted to measure the degree of liking towards the products
as well as to give better understanding of preference test to the respondents. The objective of
this experiment was successfully achieved.
REFERENCES

Ellis, B. H., Drive, F. H., & Carolina, N. (1967). Acceptance and Consumer Preference
Testing. Journal of Dairy Science, 52(6), 823–831. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-
0302(69)86658-0

Sharif, M. K., & Sharif, H. R. (2017). Sensory Evaluation and Consumer Acceptability,
(October).