SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Amerine MA, Pangborn RM, Roessler EB. 1965. Principles of sensory evaluation of food. New York : Academic Press. 602 p.
  • [A.S.T.M.] American Society for Testing and Materials. 1968. Manual on sensory testing methods STP 434. Philadelphia, Pa. : American Society for Testing and Materials. 77 p.
  • Barkat M. 2005. Signal detection and estimation. 2nd ed. Boston : Artech House. 692 p.
  • Bi J. 2006. Sensory discrimination tests and measurements. Ames , Iowa : Blackwell Publishing. 298 p.
  • Bradley RA. 1963. Some relationships among sensory difference tests. Biometrics 19:38597.
  • Brown J. 1974. Recognition assessed by rating and ranking. Brit J Psychol 65:1322.
  • Byer AJ, Abrams D. 1953. A comparison of the triangular and two-sample taste-test methods. Food Technol 7:1857.
  • Carlson AB, Crilly PB, Rutledge JC. 2002. Communication systems: an introduction to signals and noise in electrical communication. 4th ed. Boston : McGraw-Hill. 850 p.
  • Chae JE, Lee YM, Lee H-S. 2010. Affective same–different discrimination tests for assessing consumer discriminability between milks with subtle differences. Food Qual Pref 21:427538.
  • Dai H, Versfeld NJ, Green DM. 1996. The optimum decision rules in the same–different paradigm. Percept Psychophys 58:19.
  • David HA, Trivedi MC. 1962. Pair, triangle and duo–trio tests. Technical report nr 55, Dept. of Statistics. Blacksburg , Va. : Virginia Polytechnic Insti .
  • Dessirier J-M, O’Mahony M. 1999. Comparison of d′ values for the 2-AFC (paired comparison) and 3-AFC discrimination methods: Thurstonian models, sequential sensitivity analysis and power. Food Qual Pref 10:518.
  • Dorf RC. 1997. The Electrical Engineering handbook. 2nd ed. Boca Raton , Fla. : CRC Press and IEEE Press. 2752 p.
  • Elliott PB. 1964. Tables of d′. In: SwetsJA, editor. Signal detection and recognition by human observers. New York : John Wiley & Sons. p 65184.
  • Ennis DM. 1988a. Multivariate sensory analysis. Food Technol 42:11822.
  • Ennis DM. 1988b. Confusable and discriminable stimuli: comment on Nosofsky (1986) and Shepard (1986). J Exptl Psychol General 117:40811.
  • Ennis DM. 1990. Relative power of difference testing methods in sensory evaluation. Food Technol 44:1148.
  • Ennis DM. 1992. Modeling similarity and identification when there are momentary fluctuations in psychological magnitudes. In: AshbyFG, editor. Multidimensional models of perception and cognition. Hillsdale , N.J. : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. p 27998.
  • Ennis DM. 1993. The power of sensory discrimination methods. J Sens Stud 8:35370.
  • Ennis DM. 2004. personal communication.
  • Ennis DM, Mullen K. 1985. The effect of dimensionality on results from the triangular method. Chem Senses 10:6058.
  • Ennis DM, Mullen K. 1986a. Theoretical aspects of sensory discrimination. Chem Senses 11:51322.
  • Ennis DM, Mullen K. 1986b. A multivariate model for discrimination methods. J Math Psychol 30:20619.
  • Ennis DM, Mullen K. 1992a. A general probabilistic model for triad discrimination, preferential choice and two-alternative identification. In: AshbyFG, editor. Multidimensional models of perception and cognition. Hillsdale , N.J. : Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc. p 11522.
  • Ennis DM, Mullen K. 1992b. Probabilistic psychophysics with noisy stimuli. Math Social Sci 23:22134.
  • Ennis DM, O’Mahony M. 1995. Probabilistic models for sequential taste effects in triadic choice. J Exptl Psychol 21:108897.
  • Ennis DM, Mullen K, Frijters JER. 1988a. Variants of the method of triads: unidimensional Thurstonian models. Brit J Math Stats Psychol 41:2536.
  • Ennis DM, Palen JJ, Mullen K. 1988b. A multidimensional stochastic theory of similarity. J Math Psychol 32:44965.
  • Ennis JM, Ennis DM, Yip D, O’Mahony M. 1998. Thurstonian models for vatiants of the method of tetrads. Brit J Math Stats Psychol 51:20515.
  • Francis MA, Irwin RJ. 1995. Decision strategies and visual-field asymmetries in same–different judgments of word meaning. Mem Cognition 23:30112.
  • Frijters JER. 1979a. The paradox of discriminatory nondiscriminators resolved. Chem Senses Flav 4:3558.
  • Frijters JER. 1979b. Variations of the triangular method and the relationship of its unidimensional probabilistic models to three-alternative forced-choice Signal Detection Theory models. Brit J Math Stats Psychol 32:22941.
  • Frijters JER. 1980. Three-stimulus procedures in olfactory psychophysics: an experimental comparison of Thurstone-Ura and three-alternative forced-choice Signal Detection Theory. Percept Psychophys 28:3907.
  • Frijters JER. 1981a. The excitatory state in the triangular constant method. Psychometrika 46:21922.
  • Frijters JER. 1981b. An olfactory investigation of the compatibility of oddity instructions with the design of a 3-AFC Signal Detection task. Acta Psychol 49:116.
  • Frijters JER. 1982. Expanded tables for conversion of a proportion of correct responses (Pc) to a measure of sensory difference (d′) for the triangular method and the 3-Alternative Forced Choice procedure. J Food Sci 47:13943.
  • Frijters JER, Kooistra A, Vereijken PFG. 1980. Tables of d′ for the triangular method and the 3-AFC signal detection procedure. Percept Psychophys 27:1768.
  • Green DM, Swets JA. 1966. Signal Detection Theory and psychophysics. New York : Wiley. 479 p.
  • Gridgeman NT. 1970. A re-examination of the two-stage triangle test for the perception of sensory differences. J Food Sci 35:8791.
  • Hacker MJ, Ratcliff R. 1979. A revised table for d′ for M-alternative forced choice. Percept Psychophys 26:16870.
  • Hancock JC, Wintz PA. 1966. Signal Detection Theory. New York : McGraw-Hill. 247 p.
  • Hautus MJ, Irwin RJ. 1995. Two models for estimating the discriminability of foods and beverages. J Sens Stud 10:20315.
  • Hautus MJ, Irwin RJ, Sutherland S. 1994. Relativity of judgments about sound amplitude and the asymmetry of the same–different ROC. Quart J Exptl Psychol 47A:103545.
  • Hautus MJ, O’Mahony M, Lee H-S. 2008. Decision strategies determined from the shape of the same-different ROC curve: what are the effects of incorrect assumptions? J Sens Stud 23:74364.
  • Hautus MJ, van Hout D, Lee H-S. 2009. Variants of A Not–A and 2AFC tests: Signal Detection Theory models. Food Qual Pref 20:2229.
  • Hippenstiel RD. 2002. Detection theory: applications and digital signal processing. London , U.K. : Artech House. 325 p.
  • Irwin RJ, Francis MA. 1995. Perception of simple and complex visual stimuli: decision strategies and hemispheric differences in same–different judgments. Perception 24:787809.
  • Irwin RJ, Stillman JA, Hautus MJ, Huddleston LM. 1993. The measurement of taste discrimination with the same–different task: a detection-theory analysis. J Sens Stud 8:22939.
  • [I.S.O.] Intl. Organization for Standardization. 1987. Sensory analysis—methodology—A not A test. ISO 8588. Geneva , Switzerland : ISO Copyright Office. 6 p.
  • Kapenga JA, Dedoncker E, Mullen K, Ennis DM. 1987. The integration of the multivariate normal density function for the triangular method. In: FairweatherG, editor. Numerical integration. Dordrecht , Holland : D. Reidl Publ. Co. p 3218.
  • Kaplan HL, Macmillan NA, Creelman CD. 1978. Tables of d′ for variable-standard discrimination paradigms. Beh Res Method Instrum 10:796813.
  • Kemp S, Hollowood T, Hort J. 2009. Sensory evaluation: a practical handbook. Oxford , U.K. : Wiley-Blackwell. p 196.
  • Kim H-J, Jeon SY, Kim K-O, O’Mahony M. 2006. Thurstonian models and variance I: experimental confirmation of cognitive strategies for difference tests and effects of perceptual variance. J Sens Stud 21:46584.
  • Kim M-A, Lee Y-M, Lee H-S. 2010. Comparison of d′ estimates produced by three versions of a duo–trio test for discriminating tomato juice with varying salt concentrations: the effects of the number and position of the reference stimulus. Food Qual Pref 21:50411.
  • Lau S, O’Mahony M, Rousseau B. 2004. Are three-sample tasks less sensitive than two-sample tasks? Memory effects in the testing of taste discrimination. Percept Psychophys 66:46474.
  • Lawless HT, Heymann H. 1998. Sensory evaluation of food: principles and practices. New York : Chapman & Hall. 827 p.
  • Lee H-S, O’Mahony M. 2004. Sensory difference testing: Thurstonian models. Food Sci Biotechnol 13:84147.
  • Lee H-S, O’Mahony M. 2007a. The evolution of a model: a review of Thurstonian and conditional stimulus effects on difference testing. Food Qual Pref 18:36983.
  • Lee H-S, O’Mahony M. 2007b. Difference test sensitivity: cognitive contrast effects. J Sens Stud 22:1733.
  • Lee H-S, Kim K-O. 2008. Difference test sensitivity: comparison of three versions of the duo–trio method requiring different memory schemes and taste sequences. Food Qual Pref 19:97102.
  • Lee H-S, van Hout D. 2009. Quantification of sensory food quality: the R-Index Analysis. J Food Sci 74:R5764.
  • Lee H-S, van Hout D, Hautus M, O’Mahony M. 2007a. Can the same–different test use a β-criterion as well as a τ-criterion? Food Qual Pref 18:60513.
  • Lee H-S, van Hout D, O’Mahony M. 2007b. Sensory difference tests for margarine: a comparison of R-Indices derived from ranking and A Not–A methods considering response bias and cognitive strategies. Food Qual Pref 18:67580.
  • Lee H-S, van Hout D, Hautus MJ. 2007c. Comparison of performance in the A Not–A, 2-AFC and same–different tests for the flavor discrimination of margarines: the effect of cognitive decision strategies. Food Qual Pref 18:9208.
  • Lee Y-M, Chae J-E, Lee H-S. 2009. Effects of order of tasting in sensory difference tests using apple juice stimuli: development of a new model. J Food Sci 74:S28675.
  • Levy BC. 2008. Signal detection and parameter estimation. New York : Springer. 639 p.
  • Macmillan NA, Creelman CD. 2005. Detection theory: a user's guide. 2nd ed. Mahwah , N.J. : Lawrence Erlbraum Assoc. 492 p.
  • McNicol D. 1972. A primer of Signal Detection Theory. Sydney , Australia : George Allen and Unwin Ltd. 242 p.
  • Meilgaard M, Civille GV, Carr BT. 1991. Sensory evaluation techniques. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, Fla. : CRC Press. 354 p.
  • Meta-Garcia M, Angulo O, O’Mahony M. 2007. On warm-up. J Sens Stud 22:18793.
  • Mullen K, Ennis DM. 1987. Mathematical formulation of multivariate Euclidean models for discrimination methods. Psychometrika 52:23549.
  • Mullen K, Ennis DM. 1991. A simple multivariate probabilistic model for preferential and triadic choices. Psychometrika 56:6975.
  • Mullen K, Ennis DM, Dedoncker E, Kapenga JA. 1988. Models for the duo–trio and triangular methods. Biometrics 44:116975.
  • Noreen DL. 1981. Optimal decision rules for some common psychophysical paradigms. In: GrossbergS, editor. Mathematical psychology and psychophysiology. Vol 13. Proceedings of the Symposium in Applied Mathematics of the American Mathematical Society and the Society for Industrial Applied Mathematics. Providence, R.I. : American Mathematical Society. p 23779.
  • O’Mahony M. 1972a. Purity effects and distilled water taste. Nature 240:489.
  • O’Mahony M. 1972b. Salt taste sensitivity: a single detection approach. Perception 1:43964.
  • O’Mahony M. 1983. Adapting short cut signal detection measures to the problem of multiple difference testing; The R-Index. In: WilliamsAA, AtkinRK, editors. Sensory quality i foods and beverages: definition, measurement and Control. Chichester , U.K. : Ellis Horwood Inc. p 6981.
  • O’Mahony M. 1992. Understanding discrimination tests: a user-friendly treatment of response bias, rating and ranking R-index tests and their relationship to signal detection. J Sens Stud 7:147.
  • O’Mahony M. 1995a. Sensory measurement in food science: fitting methods to goals. Food Technol 49:7282.
  • O’Mahony M. 1995b. Who told you the triangle test was simple? Food Qual Pref 6:22738
  • O’Mahony M, Odbert N. 1985. A comparison of sensory difference testing procedures: Sequential sensitivity analysis and aspects of taste adaptation. J Food Sci 50:10558.
  • O’Mahony M, Goldstein L. 1987. Tasting successive salt and water stimuli: the roles of adaptation, variability in physical signal strength, learning, supra- and subadapting signal detectability. Chem Senses 12:42536.
  • O’Mahony M, Rousseau B. 2002. Discrimination testing: a few ideas, old and new. Food Qual Pref 14:15764.
  • O’Mahony M, Hautus MJ. 2008. The Signal Detection Theory ROC curve: some applications in food science. J Sens Stud 23:186204.
  • O’Mahony M, Masuoka S, Ishii R. 1994. A theoretical note on difference tests: models, paradoxes and cognitive strategies. J Sens Stud 9:24772.
  • Owen DH, Machamer PK. 1979. Bias-free improvement in wine discrimination. Perception 8:199209.
  • Paredes-Olay C, Moreno-Fernandez MM, Rosas JM, Ramos-Alvarez MM. 2010. ROC analysis in olive oil tasting: a Signal Detection Theory approach to tasting tasks. Food Qual Pref 21:5628.
  • Peryam DR. 1958. Sensory difference tests. Food Technol 12:2316.
  • Peryam DR, Swartz VW. 1950. Measurement of sensory differences. Food Technol 4:3905.
  • Pfaffmann C. 1954. Variables affecting difference tests. In: PeryamDR, PilgrimFJ, PetersonMS, editors. Food acceptance testing methodology, a symposium. Washington , D.C. : Natl. Academy of Sciences, Natl. Research Council. p 420.
  • Porat B. 1997. A course in digital signal processing. New York : John Wiley. 602 p.
  • Rousseau B. 2001. The β-strategy: an alternative and powerful cognitive strategy when performing sensory discrimination tests. J Sens Stud 16:30118.
  • Rousseau B, O’Mahony M. 1997. Sensory difference tests: Thurstonian and SSA predictions for vanilla flavored yogurts. J Sens Stud 12:12746.
  • Rousseau B, O’Mahony M. 2000. Investigation of the effect of within-trial retasting and comparison of the dual-pair, same different and triangle designs. Food Qual Pref 11:45764.
  • Rousseau B, O’Mahony M. 2001. Investigation of the dual-pair method as a possible alternative to the triangle and same–different tests. J Sens Stud 16:16178.
  • Rousseau B, Meyer A, O’Mahony M. 1998. Power and sensitivity of the same–different test: comparison with triangle and duo–trio methods. J Sens Stud 13:14973.
  • Rousseau B, Rogeaux M, O’Mahony M. 1999. Mustard discrimination by same–different and triangle tests: aspects of irritation, memory and τ-criteria. Food Qual Pref 10:17384.
  • Santosa M, Hautus M, O’Mahony M. 2010. ROC curve analysis to determine effects of repetition on the criteria for the same–different and A Not–A tests. Food Qual Pref. Forthcoming.
  • Stillman JA. 1993. Response selection sensitivity, and taste test performance. Percept Psychophys 54:1904.
  • Stillman JA, Irwin RJ. 1995. Advantages of the same–different method over the triangular method for the measurement of taste discrimination. J Sens Stud 10:26172.
  • Stone H, Sidel JL. 1993. Sensory evaluation practices. 2nd ed. New York : Academic Press. 338 p.
  • Stull JW, Angus RC, Taylor RR, Swartz AN, Daniel TC. 1974. Rich flavor discrimination in ice cream by theory of signal detection. J Dairy Sci 57:14237.
  • Tedja S, Nonaka R, Ennis DM, O’Mahony M. 1994. Triadic discrimination testing: refinement of Thurstonian and sequential sensitivity analysis approaches. Chem Senses 19:279301.
  • Tuzlukov VP. 2001. Signal Detection Theory. Boston : Birkhauser. 725 p.
  • Ura S. 1960. Pair, triangle and duo–trio test. Reports of Statistical Application Research. Japanese Union Scientists Engineers 7:10719.
  • Vessereau A. 1965. Les méthodes statistiques appliquées au test des caractères organoleptiques. Ann Nutr l’Aliment 19:10340.