CATA问题是如何工作的?选择术语的可能性与感知属性强度的关系

IF 1.6 3区 农林科学 Q3 FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Sara R. Jaeger, Sok L. Chheang, David Jin, Grace S. Ryan, Gastón Ares
{"title":"CATA问题是如何工作的?选择术语的可能性与感知属性强度的关系","authors":"Sara R. Jaeger,&nbsp;Sok L. Chheang,&nbsp;David Jin,&nbsp;Grace S. Ryan,&nbsp;Gastón Ares","doi":"10.1111/joss.12833","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <p>The present research contributed to a better understanding of how check-all-that-apply (CATA) questions work by examining the relationship between likelihood of selecting a term and perceived attribute intensity. Seven consumer studies were conducted (147–157 people per study) using within-subjects experimental designs where participants twice evaluated the same set of stimuli on the same set of terms (or attributes), respectively with CATA questions and intensity scaling (7-point category scale; 1 = “not at all,” 7 = “extremely”). As a function of perceived intensity, the average CATA citation frequency tended to follow a sigmoidal-like relationship where likelihood of selecting a CATA term increased more slowly at the extreme ends of the intensity scale (1–2 and 6–7) and linearly otherwise. This illuminates why for a given term, CATA questions are less suited for discriminating between samples that are of similar “low” or “high” intensity.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Practical Applications</h3>\n \n <p>CATA questions are popular for sensory product characterization tasks with consumers. Despite their simplicity, they accurately discriminate among samples, and term citation frequency is a proxy for perceived intensity, albeit not a direct measure hereof. Versatility and applicability of CATA questions to characterize diverse stimuli using diverse types of terms/attributes was demonstrated. By showing that likelihood of CATA term selection typically increases with perceived intensity according to a sigmoidal-like shape, the present research shows that CATA terms best discriminate between samples when these vary in intensity rather than being of similar “low” or “high” perceived intensity.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":17223,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sensory Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/joss.12833","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How do CATA questions work? Relationship between likelihood of selecting a term and perceived attribute intensity\",\"authors\":\"Sara R. Jaeger,&nbsp;Sok L. Chheang,&nbsp;David Jin,&nbsp;Grace S. Ryan,&nbsp;Gastón Ares\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/joss.12833\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <p>The present research contributed to a better understanding of how check-all-that-apply (CATA) questions work by examining the relationship between likelihood of selecting a term and perceived attribute intensity. Seven consumer studies were conducted (147–157 people per study) using within-subjects experimental designs where participants twice evaluated the same set of stimuli on the same set of terms (or attributes), respectively with CATA questions and intensity scaling (7-point category scale; 1 = “not at all,” 7 = “extremely”). As a function of perceived intensity, the average CATA citation frequency tended to follow a sigmoidal-like relationship where likelihood of selecting a CATA term increased more slowly at the extreme ends of the intensity scale (1–2 and 6–7) and linearly otherwise. This illuminates why for a given term, CATA questions are less suited for discriminating between samples that are of similar “low” or “high” intensity.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Practical Applications</h3>\\n \\n <p>CATA questions are popular for sensory product characterization tasks with consumers. Despite their simplicity, they accurately discriminate among samples, and term citation frequency is a proxy for perceived intensity, albeit not a direct measure hereof. Versatility and applicability of CATA questions to characterize diverse stimuli using diverse types of terms/attributes was demonstrated. By showing that likelihood of CATA term selection typically increases with perceived intensity according to a sigmoidal-like shape, the present research shows that CATA terms best discriminate between samples when these vary in intensity rather than being of similar “low” or “high” perceived intensity.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17223,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Sensory Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/joss.12833\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Sensory Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/joss.12833\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Sensory Studies","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/joss.12833","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: 2

摘要

本研究通过考察选择术语的可能性与感知属性强度之间的关系,有助于更好地理解检查所有适用(CATA)问题的工作原理。使用受试者内实验设计进行了七项消费者研究(每项研究147-157人),参与者在同一组术语(或属性)上对同一组刺激进行两次评估,分别使用CATA问题和强度量表(7点类别量表;1 =“一点也不”,7 =“非常”)。作为感知强度的函数,平均引文频次倾向于遵循s型关系,在强度量表的极端端(1-2和6-7),选择CATA术语的可能性增加较慢,否则呈线性增长。这说明了为什么对于给定的术语,CATA问题不太适合区分具有相似“低”或“高”强度的样本。实际应用在消费者的感官产品表征任务中,CATA问题很受欢迎。尽管它们很简单,但它们可以准确地区分样本,术语引用频率是感知强度的代理,尽管不是直接衡量。证明了使用不同类型的术语/属性来描述不同刺激的CATA问题的通用性和适用性。通过表明,根据s型曲线的形状,CATA术语选择的可能性通常随着感知强度的增加而增加,本研究表明,当这些感知强度不同时,而不是类似的“低”或“高”感知强度时,CATA术语在样本之间的最佳区别。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

How do CATA questions work? Relationship between likelihood of selecting a term and perceived attribute intensity

How do CATA questions work? Relationship between likelihood of selecting a term and perceived attribute intensity

The present research contributed to a better understanding of how check-all-that-apply (CATA) questions work by examining the relationship between likelihood of selecting a term and perceived attribute intensity. Seven consumer studies were conducted (147–157 people per study) using within-subjects experimental designs where participants twice evaluated the same set of stimuli on the same set of terms (or attributes), respectively with CATA questions and intensity scaling (7-point category scale; 1 = “not at all,” 7 = “extremely”). As a function of perceived intensity, the average CATA citation frequency tended to follow a sigmoidal-like relationship where likelihood of selecting a CATA term increased more slowly at the extreme ends of the intensity scale (1–2 and 6–7) and linearly otherwise. This illuminates why for a given term, CATA questions are less suited for discriminating between samples that are of similar “low” or “high” intensity.

Practical Applications

CATA questions are popular for sensory product characterization tasks with consumers. Despite their simplicity, they accurately discriminate among samples, and term citation frequency is a proxy for perceived intensity, albeit not a direct measure hereof. Versatility and applicability of CATA questions to characterize diverse stimuli using diverse types of terms/attributes was demonstrated. By showing that likelihood of CATA term selection typically increases with perceived intensity according to a sigmoidal-like shape, the present research shows that CATA terms best discriminate between samples when these vary in intensity rather than being of similar “low” or “high” perceived intensity.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Sensory Studies
Journal of Sensory Studies 工程技术-食品科技
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
20.00%
发文量
71
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信