A Comparison of Free-Linking and Projective-Mapping Tasks on Biltong, a Seasoned Meat Product

IF 1.6 3区农林科学 Q3 FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

Journal of Sensory Studies Pub Date : 2026-04-01 DOI:10.1111/joss.70134

K. V. To, D. Orden, C. Miller, S. O'Keefe, J. Lahne

{"title":"A Comparison of Free-Linking and Projective-Mapping Tasks on Biltong, a Seasoned Meat Product","authors":"K. V. To, D. Orden, C. Miller, S. O'Keefe, J. Lahne","doi":"10.1111/joss.70134","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Meat palatability strongly influences consumers' purchasing decisions, yet its sensory complexity limits traditional evaluations to about four samples per session. Rapid profiling methods such as projective mapping (PM) and free linking (FL) allows semi- or un-trained panelists to profile more samples by grouping similar products and optionally describing them. Previously successful with complex products like wine and chocolate, the current study investigates and compares the PM and FL methods on seasoned meat product. Seventy-one untrained panelists performed PM (nPM = 36) or FL (nFL = 35) with eight (five unique, three duplicated) samples of biltong. Results were analyzed using multiple factor analysis and DISTATIS, and free comments were projected into the resulting spaces to explain the consensus configurations. The methods were compared for discrimination/description, reliability, and task difficulty. Results suggest both methods may be effective tools to increase efficiency in meat sensory evaluation, with some advantages for FL over PM.","PeriodicalId":17223,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sensory Studies","volume":"41 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/joss.70134","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Sensory Studies","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/joss.70134","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Meat palatability strongly influences consumers' purchasing decisions, yet its sensory complexity limits traditional evaluations to about four samples per session. Rapid profiling methods such as projective mapping (PM) and free linking (FL) allows semi- or un-trained panelists to profile more samples by grouping similar products and optionally describing them. Previously successful with complex products like wine and chocolate, the current study investigates and compares the PM and FL methods on seasoned meat product. Seventy-one untrained panelists performed PM (n_PM = 36) or FL (n_FL = 35) with eight (five unique, three duplicated) samples of biltong. Results were analyzed using multiple factor analysis and DISTATIS, and free comments were projected into the resulting spaces to explain the consensus configurations. The methods were compared for discrimination/description, reliability, and task difficulty. Results suggest both methods may be effective tools to increase efficiency in meat sensory evaluation, with some advantages for FL over PM.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

调味肉制品Biltong的自由链接与投影映射任务比较

肉类的适口性强烈地影响着消费者的购买决定，但它的感官复杂性限制了传统的评估，每次大约四个样品。快速分析方法，如投影映射（PM）和自由链接（FL），允许半或未经训练的小组成员通过分组相似的产品和选择性地描述它们来分析更多的样本。之前在葡萄酒和巧克力等复杂产品上取得成功，目前的研究调查并比较了调味肉制品的PM和FL方法。71名未经训练的小组成员使用8个（5个独特的，3个重复的）biltong样本进行PM （nPM = 36）或FL （nFL = 35）。使用多因素分析和DISTATIS对结果进行分析，并将自由评论投射到结果空间中以解释共识配置。比较了这些方法的区别/描述、信度和任务难度。结果表明，这两种方法都是提高肉品感官评价效率的有效工具，FL比PM有一定的优势。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Sensory Studies 工程技术-食品科技

CiteScore

3.80

自引率

20.00%

发文量

审稿时长

18-36 weeks

期刊介绍： The Journal of Sensory Studies publishes original research and review articles, as well as expository and tutorial papers focusing on observational and experimental studies that lead to development and application of sensory and consumer (including behavior) methods to products such as food and beverage, medical, agricultural, biological, pharmaceutical, cosmetics, or other materials; information such as marketing and consumer information; or improvement of services based on sensory methods. All papers should show some advancement of sensory science in terms of methods. The journal does NOT publish papers that focus primarily on the application of standard sensory techniques to experimental variations in products unless the authors can show a unique application of sensory in an unusual way or in a new product category where sensory methods usually have not been applied.