Han-Seok Seo, Associate Professor of Sensory Science, prepares and serves taste-testing samples to the participant on the way up.
The director of the Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station’s Sensory Science Center presented the new sensory testing method at the Institute of Food Technologists’ FIRST (Food Advanced by Research, Science and Technology) annual meeting in Chicago on July 12.
When the COVID-19 pandemic halted necessary sensory testing, Han-Seok Seo, director of the Sensory Science Center, developed an alternative to indoor sensory testing using the walk-in booth method.
Seo is an Associate Professor of Sensory and Consumer Science at the Experiment Station, University of Arkansas Department of Agricultural Systems, as well as a faculty member in the Dale Bumpers Department of Agriculture, Food and Food Science at the College. Life Sciences. At the IFT meeting, he spoke in a panel discussion titled “What are the recent advances in the sensory sciences that lead to new products or methodologies?” His discussion is accessible upon request.
“Sensory evaluation is a very critical component in the food and non-food industries,” said Seo. It is involved in many parts of the industry such as quality assurance, marketing and product development.
Test results show that the walk-in booth method is an effective, reliable and valid alternative to indoor booths, Seo said.
Although the method was created with pandemic and epidemic problems in mind, it is applicable beyond those problems as well, Seo said. For example, a university or company that does not have access to a sensory laboratory can perform sensory testing using this method.
“The method should also be sustainable,” Seo said. The ability of the method to exist under pandemic, epidemic and normal conditions makes it part of “sustainable sensory science”.
Drive-in Sensory Testing
“The most important thing during COVID is that we need to bring both scientists and experts to the testing site,” Seo said. To see also : Emergency Food Box meets needs | News, sports, jobs. “No one wants to take a risk during COVID because of this testing.
“I did my best to create a safer state, both physically and emotionally,” Seo said.
While driving in Fayetteville, Seo passed a drive-in theater. It occurred to him that the drive-in device might have other uses for entertainment. He could create an alternative to indoor lab settings for sensory testing.
Seo has tested the drive-in method under three different conditions: large-difference test samples, small-difference test samples, and a validation test. He has published a peer-reviewed paper on one and plans to publish his research on two others soon.
To control external factors in the drive-in cabin, the panelists had to remove all odors from the cars, set the air conditioning to a certain temperature, drive their own car and come alone.
In the first condition, panelists tasted four significant sensory-difference beverages—lemonade, black tea, vegetable juice, and coconut water. They were divided into two groups. One group tested the drinks using the drive-in booth method and the other group tested the drinks using the indoor booth method. The groups switched after the initial trials.
Panelists also rated their reactions to the drinks using terms associated with positive or negative emotions.
“We saw no differences between the two groups in sensory perception, liking and emotional response to the food,” Seo said.
For the second test, the panelists evaluated products with smaller differences—four types of yogurt. It followed the same steps as the first experiment.
The third condition had a different structure from the previous experiments. Seo brought in new people and the two groups stayed in one test area rather than switching as in the first two conditions. They also retested a week after the initial test.
Seo found no significant differences between drive-in and indoor booths after these tests. He examined panelist engagement, safety, and realism after each test.
“Our research shows that people feel more realistic when they participate in a walk-in booth rather than an indoor one,” Seo said.
“Companies want to hear more realistic insight or opinions about natural conditions,” Seo said.
Many food companies test products in different environmental conditions, changing macro and micro environmental factors, Seo said.
In studies conducted on consumer perception of coffee, microenvironmental conditions such as cup shape, color, and texture produced mixed results. Experiences of coffee consumption also varied at the macro level, as seen in previous studies testing coffee consumption in a laboratory, a coffee shop, and an ambient simulated coffee shop.
Competing Methods
Some sensory specialists used at-home methods to continue sensory assessment during the pandemic, Seo said. This may interest you : Caspers Company will sell its McDonald’s business. They are based on non-face-to-face contact at home or outside in cubicles.
Home methods consist of two types, home use testing and home testing.
The home-use testing condition allows panelists to prepare, evaluate, and respond to test samples in a real, natural environment, such as the home, and this method was used before the pandemic. Home testing, an alternative to laboratory testing, requires panelists to evaluate test specimens under controlled conditions at home.
“At home, it is difficult to control test samples or test conditions,” said Seo.
According to Seo, there may be unexpected distractions, such as a baby laughing or crying, an outside visitor’s doorbell ringing in the background, or outside noises.
At-home testing works for items like cookies, but when it comes to shipping temperature-sensitive foods, their texture, flavor and other factors can change because of variations in post-bake time and sample temperature during delivery, Seo said. .
COVID-19 was an obstacle for Seo, but helped inspire creativity in creating a new method, he said.
“I hope that this method can be useful not only to me, but also to other peers, the food industry and the non-food industry, so that they can continue sensory evaluations,” said Seo.
At the IFT meeting, Seo said he has plenty of opportunities to discuss the walk-in booth method with other sensory professionals interested in using it. She was able to share her team’s stories and how they navigated the COVID-19 pandemic to continue the sensory assessment. His next experiment will focus on using walk-in sensory booths to compare with home testing conditions.
“I especially thank my team members and test participants,” said Seo. “Without their help, it would have been impossible to conduct this study on our own during the pandemic.”
For more information about the Department of Agricultural Research, visit the Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station website: https://aaes.uada.edu/. Follow us on Twitter at @ArkAgResearch. For information about the Cooperative Extension Service, visit https://www.uaex.uada.edu and follow us on Twitter at @AR_Extension. For more information about the Department of Agriculture, visit https://uada.edu/. Follow us on Twitter at @AgInArk.
About the Department of Agriculture: The mission of the Department of Agriculture at the University of Arkansas is to strengthen agriculture, communities and families by combining sound scientific research with the adoption of best practices. Through the Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service, the Department of Agriculture conducts research and extension work within the framework of the nation’s historic land grant education system. The Department of Agriculture is one of 20 units in the University of Arkansas system. It has offices in all 75 Arkansas counties and faculty on five system campuses. The University of Arkansas Department of Agriculture offers all of its extension and research programs and services without regard to race, color, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, national origin, religion, age, disability, marital or veteran status, genetic information, or any other status protected by law. and is an affirmative action/equal opportunity employer.
