TY - JOUR
T1 - Descriptive sensory analysis of heat-resistant milk chocolates
AU - Dicolla, Carolina B.
AU - Evans, Janet L.
AU - Hainly, Larry L.
AU - Celtruda, Sheri L.
AU - Brown, B. Douglas
AU - Anantheswaran, Ramaswamy C.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 The Authors. Food Science & Nutrition published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
PY - 2019/9/1
Y1 - 2019/9/1
N2 - Sensory attributes of six heat-resistant chocolates were compared with the standard chocolate using a trained sensory panel who were trained using the Sensory Spectrum method. The panel evaluated the chocolates using three tactile and ten oral attributes at 24, 29, and 38°C. The panel demonstrated consistent rating of the various samples. ANOVA showed that all of the 13 sensory attributes (Firmness to touch, Stickiness to fingers, Snap, Abrasiveness, Hardness with incisors, Fracturability, Cohesiveness of mass, Time to melt, Firmness with tongue, Adhesiveness to teeth, Number of particles, Oily mouthcoating, and Chocolate messiness) were significantly different across the samples. A higher degree of heat resistance was identified by the panelists for the low-fat gelatin and polyol samples at 38°C. Principal component analysis revealed two principal components; the first pricipal component described the variability due to temperature, and the second principal component described the variability brought about by the various technologies.
AB - Sensory attributes of six heat-resistant chocolates were compared with the standard chocolate using a trained sensory panel who were trained using the Sensory Spectrum method. The panel evaluated the chocolates using three tactile and ten oral attributes at 24, 29, and 38°C. The panel demonstrated consistent rating of the various samples. ANOVA showed that all of the 13 sensory attributes (Firmness to touch, Stickiness to fingers, Snap, Abrasiveness, Hardness with incisors, Fracturability, Cohesiveness of mass, Time to melt, Firmness with tongue, Adhesiveness to teeth, Number of particles, Oily mouthcoating, and Chocolate messiness) were significantly different across the samples. A higher degree of heat resistance was identified by the panelists for the low-fat gelatin and polyol samples at 38°C. Principal component analysis revealed two principal components; the first pricipal component described the variability due to temperature, and the second principal component described the variability brought about by the various technologies.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85070857748&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85070857748&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/fsn3.1047
DO - 10.1002/fsn3.1047
M3 - Article
C2 - 31572573
AN - SCOPUS:85070857748
SN - 2048-7177
VL - 7
SP - 2806
EP - 2816
JO - Food Science and Nutrition
JF - Food Science and Nutrition
IS - 9
ER -