1

Sensory and Physical Properties of Low-Sugar Chocolate Chip Cookies Prepared by

Replacing Regular Sugar with Stevioside

Natalia Sarmiento, natalia.sarmiento75@qmail.cuny.edu

Department of Family, Nutrition and Exercise Sciences, Queens College, CUNY
65-30 Kissena Boulevard, Flushing, NY 11368-1597

Abstract

The increased prevalence of obesity, diabetes, and prediabetes has increased the demand for
healthier foods in the US. The taste and texture of cookies make them one of the highly
consumed food products in the US. Therefore, it can be a target for improved nutrition by
reducing unhealthy components such as sugars and calories. The objective of this study was to
determine if stevioside could be used to substitute conventional sugar in baked goods and what
percentage of replacement was acceptable, control 100% sugar, experimental groups 50%/50%
(sugar to stevioside ratio), and 100% stevioside. Ten untrained panelists (5 men and 5 women;
mean±SD, age =43 ± 16. 8) did sensory testing for brownness, sweetness, aftertaste,
crumbliness, and overall acceptability using a 9-point scale. The diameter of chocolate chip
cookie samples was also measured as an objectivity test, and nutritional content was analyzed.
Differences in sensory factors and diameters were analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey’s HSD
post hoc test and nutritional status using nutrition software. The study revealed a statistically
significant difference in brownness, sweetness, aftertaste between the 100% stevioside cookies
and 100% brown and white sugar cookies. However, there was no significant difference in
crumbliness and overall acceptability for stevioside cookies. The results indicated a statistically
significant difference in diameters between 50% stevioside (5.30 cm) and 100% stevioside (5.20
cm) samples compared to control (6.23 cm). Nutritional analysis indicated that cookies made
from 100% stevioside had lower calories, total carbohydrates, total sugars, and added sugars than
the control. Therefore, stevioside can be a healthier substitute for conventional sugars in making
chocolate chip cookies with no effect on acceptability.

Keywords: Stevioside, cookies, overall acceptability, sensory evaluation, regular sugar.

Introduction
Cookies are highly consumed in the food market because of their taste and texture (Li et al.,
2020). In 2018, cookie sales in the United States reached $11 billion, a 2% growth from 2013
(PRNewswire, 2019). Research has shown that 30-40% of cookies and other bakery products are
sugar (van der Sman & Renzetti, 2018). Food products with high sugar content are energy-dense
and therefore associated with unhealthy conditions such as obesity. Obesity is currently a health
concern for Americans as prevalence has continued to rise from 30.5% in 2000 to 42.4% in 2018
(Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2021). These statistics are worse for severe
obesity, with prevalence almost doubling from 4.7% in 2000 to 9.2% in 2018 (CDC, 2021).
Additionally, 34.2 million Americans have diabetes, accounting for 10.5 %, while 88 million
adults +18 years have prediabetes, accounting for 34.5 % (CDC, 2020).
 2

These increased health concerns about the intake of excess calories have led to intense research
on replacing sugars with healthier alternatives (van der Sman & Renzetti, 2018). Majzoobi et al.
(2018) replaced fat and sucrose with rebaudioside A and inulin, which are healthier options.
More recently, Li et al. (2020) replaced the normal by-product of soybean processing (okara)
with enzyme-assisted aqueous extraction (REAE) of soybean to make high-fiber low-calorie
cookies. Unfortunately, there is not much research on reducing sugar in chocolate chip cookies
by replacing them with Stevioside. The only identified study was conducted in 2009 and
replaced sucrose with sucralose/maltodextrin blend and isomalt (McKernie et al., 2009).
America’s favorite cookie is the chocolate chip cookie. As a result of the popularity of chocolate
chip cookies, producing a low-calorie cookie as part of this project will benefit diabetes and
prediabetes patients by providing low-sugar or sugar-free options.

Sugar plays an important purpose in preparing cookies (van der Sman & Renzetti, 2018).
Therefore, replacing sugar with a healthier alternative might affect sensory properties such as
color, taste, digestibility, and texture. Li et al. (2020) found that replacing normal soybean with
REAE significantly reduced digestibility and increased chewiness and hardness of cookies.
Majzoobi et al. (2018) noted that replacing sucrose and fat made them asymmetrical, have a hard
texture, and darker colors. However, these studies did not use Stevioside. Therefore, the
objective of this study was to determine if stevioside could be used to substitute conventional
sugar in baked goods, and what percentage of replacement was acceptable.

In this project, three samples of cookies were included in the experiment. The first sample, the
control, had 100% regular sugar (white and dark brown sugar). The second sample was the first
experimental cookies, prepared using 50% regular sugar (dark brown) and 50% Stevioside
(Truvia cane sugar blend). The third sample was the second experimental cookie, prepared using
100% Truvia cane sugar blend. All other ingredients remained the same for all samples. To attain
the objective, 10 untrained panelists did sensory testing for brownness, sweetness, aftertaste,
crumbliness, and overall acceptability, as well as measuring the diameter of chocolate chip
cookie samples and analyzing the nutrients. Functionality and digestibility were not assessed on
this project.

Materials and Methods

Ingredients and Equipment

The ingredients in this study are Pillsbury unbleached all-purpose flour, (J.M. Smucker
Company, Orrville, OH), American Choice premium unsalted butter (Onpoint Inc., Montvale,
NJ), Domino pure cane sugar (Domino Foods Inc., Yonkers, NY), Domino light brown sugar
(Domino Foods Inc., Yonkers, NY), Truvia Cane Sugar Blend (The Truvia Company, LLC,
Stacey, MN), Eggland’s Best egg (Eggland’s Best Inc., Jeffersonville, PA), Diamond Crystal
Kosher salt (Diamond Crystal Brands, Savannah, GA), Arm & Hammer Pure baking soda
(Church & Dwight CO., Inc. Princeton, NJ), Spice Supreme vanilla extract (Tasty Spice
Supreme, Passaic, NJ), Hershey’s semi-sweet chocolate chip (The Hershey Company, Lancaster,
PA). The types of equipment used are a conventional oven in Remsen 301 (Maytag Corp.,
 3

Newton, IA), Electric Hand Mixer (Black & Decker Inc. Shelton, CT), and Cuisinart
WeightMate Kitchen Scale (Cuisinart, East Windsor, NJ).

Sample Formulation
Table 1. Formulations of chocolate chip cookie samples prepared by replacing sugar with
stevioside. (Unit: grams).

Ingredients Control 1st Modification 2nd Modification

(100% sugar) (50% Stevioside/50% (100% Stevioside)
Sugar)

Unsalted butter 40 g 40 g 40 g

White sugar 32 g N/A N/A

Dark brown sugar 32 g 32 g N/A

Stevioside N/A 11 g 21 g

Egg 49 g 49 g 49 g

All-purpose flour 144 g 144 g 144 g

Semisweet Chocolate 56 g 56 g 56 g
Chips

Baking soda 1.25 g 1.25 g 1.25 g

Vanilla extract 4.20 g 4.20 g 4.20 g

Salt 1.23 g 1.23 g 1.23 g

Sample Preparation
A control recipe was compared to two modified chocolate cookie recipes. The control recipe for
Chocolate Chip Cookies was obtained on the Food Network website (Food Network Kitchen,
2015). The sample formulations are presented in Table 1. First, the oven was preheated to 345°F
(174°C). Three baking pans were lined with parchment paper. Butter was melted in a
microwave-safe bowl covered on medium power. Butter was left to cool slightly. To prepare the
cookie dough, in three separate large mixing bowls eggs, butter, and vanilla were whisked
together using an electric hand mixer (Black & Decker Inc. Shelton, CT) on medium speed,
scraping the bowl occasionally. Each bowl contained different sugar to stevioside ratios. The first
bowl contained 100% regular sugar (control), the second bowl contained 50% regular sugar /
50% stevioside, and the third bowl contained 100% stevioside. Each bowl was labeled
accordingly. Flour, baking soda, and salt were mixed in a separate bowl. The dry ingredients
were stirred into the wet ingredients using a wooden spoon (15-20 strokes). After, the chocolate
chips were stirred into the dough. Using a tablespoon the dough was scooped onto the prepared
 4

aluminum pans 2 inches apart and baked in a preheated conventional oven at 345°F (174°C). The
cookies were baked until golden brown, about 8 to 10 minutes. The cookies were allowed to cool
for two minutes on the pans before being transferred to a cooling rack and allowed to cool for
another 30 minutes.

Sensory Evaluation
Ten adult volunteers (n=10) from Flushing, NY were selected to participate in this research
experiment. This panel consisted of 5 males and 5 females; ages 20-63 years old, Mean ± SD =
43 ± 16.78 years old. The sensory properties evaluated were surface brownness, sweetness,
aftertaste, crumbliness, and overall acceptability. A 9-point scale was used to evaluate for surface
brownness, sweetness, aftertaste, crumbliness (for surface brownness, 1=light brown and 9=dark
brown; for sweetness, aftertaste, and crumbliness, 1=weak and 9=strong) and a 9-point hedonic
scale for overall acceptability (1=dislike extremely and 9=like extremely). The definitions of the
sensory attributes and testing directions are presented in Table 2. After the cookies had cooled
down, panelists were served one cookie from each treatment on an 8.5" diameter white paper
plate (totaling three samples to each panelist). To eliminate any bias, the cookies were given the
numbers 347, 150, and 250 at random for control, 50/50, and 100%, respectively. The cookies
were served at room temperature, about 68°F (20°C). Between tasting samples, panelists were
given room-temperature water and napkins to clean their palates. During the test, a physical
distance of at least 6 feet was maintained between panelists. A consistent amount of lighting was
used throughout the testing area, and the surrounding was quiet.

Table 2. Evaluation of sensory attributes definitions and testing directions

Sensory Attributes Definition and Direction

Appearance Brownness Intensity of brown color, from light brown to dark. Light
brown means “pale brown”

Flavor Sweetness A taste produced by sugar. Weak means “bland” and strong
means “very sweet.”

Flavor Aftertaste Taste lingering in the mouth after swallowing. (Weak or

Strong).

Texture Crumbliness At first bite, sample stay in big piece ( Weak, Not
crumbly), or sample breaks into crumbs (Strong, Very
crumbly).

Overall Liking Indicate how much you like or dislike each sample overall.
Acceptabilit
y

Objective evaluation
 5

Each treatment's mean and standard deviation were calculated by measuring the diameter of
three cookies. At the same temperature of 68°F (20°C), each cookie was measured using the
same cm ruler in the same manner. Digital images of the finished cookies were taken.

Nutrients Analysis
To compare the nutritional properties of each sample, a nutrient analysis was performed on all
three recipes. A 2-inch chocolate chip cookie serves as one serving. Differences in
macronutrients, dietary fiber, saturated and monounsaturated fats, magnesium, potassium, and
vitamins E and K were tracked with cronometer.com to examine nutrient facts.

Statistical Analysis
All results were collected and entered into SPSS for Windows (version 25.0, 2017, IBM Inc,
Armonk, NY) to perform statistical analysis. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was
used, using Tukey HSD as a post-hoc test. Each treatment's mean values and standard deviation
were computed, and the means were compared to see if there were any significant differences
between the three treatments. The null hypothesis was rejected at a level of p<0.05.

Figure 1. Cookies produced with different modifications of Stevioside. White sugar and brown
sugar were replaced with Stevioside (after baking).

Control 1st Modification 2nd Modification

100% Sugar 50% Stevioside/50% sugar 100% Stevioside

* Sample formulations found in Table 1.

Results & Discussion

Sensory Evaluation
 6

Table 3 and Figure 2 present the results of the sensory evaluation. They indicate a significant
difference between the control group (6.10) and modification 2 (3.30) group in terms of
brownness (p=0.006), but not between the control (6.10) and modification 1 (4.20) (p=0.07).
Sweetness was significantly different (p<0.05) between the three groups with the control group
having the highest score (8.30), modification 1 (4.40), and modification 2 (1.90). Aftertaste was
significantly different between the control (6.20) and modification 1 (3.10) groups (p=0.003) and
also between the control (6.20) and modification 2 groups (p=0.001), but not significantly
different (p=0.83) between the modification 1 group (3.10) and modification 2 (2.60) group.
There are no significant differences between the control and the two treatment groups in
crumbliness (p=0.854) and overall acceptability (p=0.072). Figure 1, illustrates the final
product’s appearance for the three treatment groups.

Table 3. Sensory Attributes for Classic Chocolate Chip Cookie Formulations Modifying Sugar
with Stevioside (Mean±SD; n=10).

Control Modification 1 Modification 2

50% Brown, 50% 50% Brown sugar – 100% Stevioside
white sugar 50% Stevioside (Code: 250)
(Code: 347) (Code: 156)

Brownness 𝑏
6. 10 ± 1. 85 4. 20
𝑎𝑏
± 1. 55
𝑎
3. 30 ± 2. 06

Sweetness 𝑐
8. 30 ± 0. 68
𝑏
4. 40 ± 1. 00
𝑎
1. 90 ± 0. 88

Aftertaste 𝑏
6. 20 ± 2. 10
𝑎
3. 10 ± 1. 00
𝑎
2. 60 ± 2. 35

Crumbliness 𝑎
5. 20 ± 1. 99
𝑎
4. 80 ± 1. 14
𝑎
4. 80 ± 2. 20

Overall 𝑎
5. 90 ± 1. 66
𝑎
6. 80 ± 1. 48
𝑎
5. 10 ± 1. 60
Acceptability
*Mean ± SD of 10 panelists using a 9-point scale (1: Weak, 9: Strong; Overall Acceptability- 1: dislike
extremely, 9: like extremely) for Brownness the 9-point scale (1: Light Brown, 9: Dark Brown).
*All means with the same superscripts in rows indicate no significant difference (Tukey test, p<0.05)
*Sample formulations are found in Table 1.

Figure 2. Bar Graph for Sensory Attributes and Overall Acceptability of Classic Chocolate Chip
Cookie Formulations Modifying Sugar with Stevioside.
 7

*Mean values of 10 panelists using a 9-point scale (1: Weak, 9: Strong; overall acceptability- 1: dislike extremely, 9:
like extremely); for Brownness the 9-point scale (1: Light Brown, 9: Dark Brown).
*Sample formulations are found in Table 1.

Brownness
Customers' decisions to acquire a product are heavily influenced by color. Browning and
Maillard reaction and caramelization of the chocolate chip occur due to the reaction between the
flour and the sugars (Yazdi et al., 2017). The Maillard process and caramelization cause the
surface color to develop in cookies during baking. Brown chemicals are produced as a result of
these reactions, contributing to the color of the surface. Reducing sugars and amino acids are
important components of the Maillard process, as they interact with one another during heating
to produce brown melanoidins. Natural reducing sugars like fructose and glucose, which come
from flour, participate in the Maillard reaction in the cookie. Although sucrose (sugar) is made
up of reducing sugars such as glucose and fructose, it is not a reducing sugar in and of itself
because the reducing sugars are bound together. As a result, the Maillard reaction does not
influence the color of the cookie when the sucrose concentration is changed. Sucrose (sugar), on
the other hand, can caramelize and change the cookie's dark color. Based on the data from table
3, the brownness of the chocolate chips made using 50% brown and 50% white sugar had the
highest score (6.10) then chocolate chips made using 50% brown sugar and 50% stevioside
(4.20), and the lowest brownness scores were recorded for 100% stevioside chocolate chips. This
reaction is higher in the 50% brown and 50% white sugar because as one changes from sugars to
stevioside the reaction reduces. Accordingly, as seen by Majzoobi et al. (2018) as the sugar
 8

concentration decreases, the degree of the caramelization process is significantly reduced, and
the color of the sample is lighter than the control. Majzoobi et al. (2018) also pointed out that
stevia will not undergo any browning reaction during the baking process.

Sweetness
Data in table 3 shows that the sweetness of the chocolate chip cookie significantly reduced when
replacing sugar with stevioside. Chocolate chip cookies made using 50% brown and 50% white
sugar had the highest sweetness score (8.30) with the lowest score being chocolate chips made
using 100% stevioside (1.90). This contradicts what is known about stevia that is up to 300 times
sweeter than sucrose (Struck et al., 2014).

Aftertaste
Data in table 3 shows that the aftertaste scores are higher for chocolate chips made using 50%
brown and 50% white sugar (6.20). The aftertaste for chocolate chips made using 50% brown
and 50% stevia (3.10) and 100% stevia (2.60) did not differ a lot. The findings are contradictory
in that stevia has a bitter aftertaste (Pielak et al., 2020). One would expect the chocolate chips
made 50% brown sugar and 50% stevia or 100% stevia to have an aftertaste over chocolate chips
made using 50% brown and 50% white sugar.

Crumbliness
Data shows that the three experimental groups did not significantly differ in crumbliness.
Chocolate chips made using 50% brown and 50% white sugar had a slightly higher score (5.20)
and the other two had scores of 4.80. This might be explained by the slight moisture differences
in the samples with the control group having the lowest moisture content over the modification 1
and modification 2 groups.

Overall acceptability
Similar to crumbliness, overall acceptability did not significantly differ between the three groups.
However, it’s important to note that the chocolate chip cookies made using 50% brown sugar and
50% stevia had the highest acceptability score (6.80), and the least acceptable were chocolate
chip cookies made using 100% stevia (5.10). The reason for this could be related to the sensory
quality of the chips where those made using 50% brown and 50% stevia were moderately sweet,
brown, and with little aftertaste.

Objective evaluation
Table 4 and Figure 3 presents the data for diameter measurements for the three samples of
chocolate chip cookies There was a statistically significant difference (p=0.02) between the
diameters of the control samples (6.23) and 1st modification group samples (5.30). Similarly,
there was a statistically significant difference (p=0.012) between the diameters of the control
 9

samples (6.23) and the 2nd modification group samples (5.20). Diameters for the 1st modification
(5.30) and 2nd modification (5.10) samples did not significantly differ (p=0.911) (p>0.05).

Table 4. Diameter Measurement for Classic Chocolate Chip Cookie Formulations Modifying
Sugar with Steviosideia (Mean ± SD; Unit: cm; Measurement at 20°C).

Control 1st Modification 2nd Modification

(Code: 347) Code: 156 Code: 250
Average of 3
Measurements 𝑏 𝑎 𝑎
6. 23 ± 0. 38 5. 30 ± 0. 17 5. 20 ± 0. 30
* Mean ± SD of 3 replications per sample. Diameters of 9 cookies–3 cookies of 3 treatments.
* All means with the same superscripts in a row indicate no significant difference (Tukey test, p<0.05).

Figure 3. Average Diameter Measurement for Classic Chocolate Chip Cookie Formulations
Modifying Sugar with Stevioside (Unit: inch; Measurement at 20°C).

*Means of 3 replications per sample. Diameters of 9 cookies–3 cookies of 3 treatments.

*Sample formulations are found in Table 1.

The diameter of chocolate chip cookies made with 50% stevia or 100% stevioside differed
significantly from those made using sugars. 100% Sugar chocolate chip cookies were more
spread than stevia chocolate chip cookies, which means stevia restricted dough flow, giving
cake-like chocolate chip cookies with reduced spread. The differences in spread might be
attributed to moisture content or overmixing of the ingredients when preparing the dough.
Stevioside's impact on the cookie diameter reduction has yet to be completely researched. In the
 10

presence of stevioside, however, wheat flour has a lower peak viscosity, implying that the batter
becomes less viscous and stable during baking, resulting in less expansion (Manisha et al., 2012).

Nutrition Analysis
Figure 4 presents the nutritional analysis for the three classic chocolate chip cookie formulations
modifying sugar with Stevioside. Four major nutritional components changed as sugar was
replaced by stevioside; calories, total carbohydrate, total sugars, and added sugars. Calories
reduced by 8.9 calories after replacing white sugar with 50% stevioside and by 17.8 calories with
100% Stevioside based on Cronometer (n.d.). Total carbohydrates were reduced from 21.3g to
19.2g, a 9.85% reduction with the 50% Stevioside and from 21.3g to 17g by 20.2% with the
100% stevioside. Total sugars were reduced by 24.2% with the 50% Stevioside and by 48.5%
with 100% stevioside. Added sugars reduced 75% with 50% stevioside and by 50% with 100%
stevioside. All the other nutritional facts remained the same in all three groups.

Compared with commercial Chip Ahoy! Original Chocolate Chip Cookies from Nabisco, three
cookies (33g) per serving contains 160 calories, meaning one cookie contains 53.3 calories. Chip
Ahoy! Also contains 1 gram of protein, 2.5 grams of saturated fat, has no trans-fat or cholesterol,
2.5 grams of polyunsaturated fat, 2 grams of monounsaturated fat, and 110 grams of sodium.
Surprisingly the commercial Chips Ahoy! cookie has fewer calories than the 100% stevioside
cookies with 117 calories per serving. This is dependent on the type of fat used. The protein is
higher on 100% stevioside cookies (2.5g). Although, the saturated fat is in 100% stevioside 3.1
grams, compared to Chips Ahoy! 2.5 grams. However, the total carbohydrates (17g), total sugar
(5.1g), and added sugars (1.6g) are lower in the 100% stevioside cookies compared with the
commercial Chip Ahoy! Cookies carbs 22g, total sugar 11g and add sugar 11g.

Figure 4. Nutrition Analysis for Three Classic Chocolate Chip Cookie Formulations
Modifying Sugar with Stevioside.

Control 1st Modification 2nd Modification

100% Sugar 50% Stevioside/50% sugar 100% Stevioside
 11

Acknowledgments

The Department of Family, Nutrition, and Exercise Sciences at Queens College in New York
provided the facility and the ingredients.
 12

References
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2020, August 28). Estimates of diabetes and its
burden in the United States.
https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/data/statistics-report/index.html

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021, June 7). Obesity is a common, serious, and
costly disease. cdc.gov/obesity/data/adult.html

Cronometer. (n.d.). Track Nutrition & Count calories. https://cronometer.com/

Food Network Kitchen. (2015, January 22). Chocolate Chip Cookies. Retrieved from
https://www.foodnetwork.com/recipes/food-network-kitchen/chocolate-chip-cookiesrecip
e4-2011856

Li, Y., Sun, Y., Zhong, M., Xie, F., Wang, H., Li, L., Qi, B., & Zhang, S. (2020). Digestibility,
textural and sensory characteristics of cookies made from residues of enzyme-assisted
aqueous extraction of soybeans. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 1–8.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-61179-9

Majzoobi, M., Mohammadi, M., Mesbahi, G., & Farahnaky, A. (2018). Feasibility study of
sucrose and fat replacement using inulin and rebaudioside A in cake formulations.
Journal of Texture Studies, 49(5), 468–475. https://doi.org/10.1111/jtxs.12330

McKemie, R., Swanson, R. B., Savage, E., & Zhuang, H. (2009). Reduced-in-Sugar Chocolate
Chip Cookies: Functionality of Sucralos/Maltodextrin: Isomalt Blends. Journal of the
American Dietetic Association, 109(9), A70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jada.2009.06.231

Manisha, G., Soumya, C., & Indrani, D. (2012). Studies on interaction between stevioside, liquid
sorbitol, hydrocolloids and emulsifiers for replacement of sugar in Cakes. Food
Hydrocolloids, 29(2), 363–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2012.04.011

Pielak, M., Czarniecka-Skubina, E., & Głuchowski, A. (2020). Effect of sugar substitution with
steviol glycosides on sensory quality and physicochemical composition of low-sugar
apple preserves. Foods, 9(3), 293. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9030293

PRNewswire. (2019, February 26). U.S. packaged cookie market sales reach $11 billion.
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/us-packaged-cookie-market-sales-reach-11-b
illion-300802111.html

Struck, S., Jaros, D., Brennan, C. S., &amp; Rohm, H. (2014). Sugar replacement in sweetened
bakery goods. International Journal of Food Science and Technology, 49(9), 1963–1976.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ijfs.12617
 13

van der Sman, R. G. M., & Renzetti, S. (2018). Understanding functionality of sucrose in
biscuits
for reformulation purposes. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 59(14),
2225–2239. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2018.144231

Yazdi, A. G., Hojjatoleslamy, M., Keramat, J., Jahadi, M., & Amani, E. (2017). The evaluation
of
saccharose replacing by adding stevioside-maltodextrin mixture on the physicochemical
and sensory properties of Naanberenji (an Iranian confectionary). Food Science &
Nutrition, 5(4), 845–851. https://doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.463
 14

Appendix

Female Male Age_______ Date:_____________________

Please taste samples and circle the number that you feel best describes your perception of each distributes
listed below.
Brownness – Intensity of brown color, from Light to Dark. Light Brown means “pale brown.”
Code: ______ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Light Brown Dark Brown

Code: ______ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Light Brown Dark Brown

Code: ______ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Light Brown Dark Brown

Sweetness – A taste produced by sugar. Weak means “bland” and strong means “very sweet.”
Code: ______ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Weak Strong

Code: ______ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Weak Strong

Code: ______ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Weak Strong

Aftertaste – Taste lingering in the mouth after swallowing.

Code: ______ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Weak Strong

Code: ______ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Weak Strong

Code: ______ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Weak Strong

Crumbliness – At first bite, sample stay in big piece (Weak, Not crumbly), or sample breaks into crumbs (Strong,
Very crumbly)
Code: ______ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Weak Strong

Code: ______ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Weak Strong

Code: ______ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Weak Strong

Overall Acceptability – Overall likability of cookies

Code: ______ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Dislike extremely Like extremely
 15

Code: ______ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Dislike extremely Like extremely

Code: ______ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Dislike extremely Like extremely
Thank you for participating in our study!