All posts by Caroline Withers

Generating consumer descriptions of products – It’s not all talk

Consumer language

As a sensory and consumer scientist, understanding how consumers perceive and describe products is an essential aspect of market research.  However, consumers can struggle to find the language to express and articulate product characteristics, often selecting liking and hedonic terms they feel more comfortable using.  This leads to difficulties understanding why consumers like or dislike products and could provide limited optimisation guidance for product development teams.

An ideal approach is preference mapping, allowing consumers to just rate their liking of the products, while a trained sensory panel score the samples for their characteristics.  The consumer liking data is then combined with the sensory map of product characteristics to really understand what attributes drive consumer liking and is a robust insightful tool.  However, this approach can be expensive and time consuming, and in this ever demanding world of faster insights, may not be suitable in every case.  This means asking consumers to describe products in detail, a tricky task.

So what is the best way to gain the most product information and insight directly from consumers?  Is there a practical way to get participants to really give product characteristic descriptions?  A recent study in Food Quality and Preference has compared a range of different consumer methods, to find that the highest number of descriptive terms were provided by consumers when assessed samples at an individual level or by presenting triads of samples in a repertory grid.  This is in contrast to assessing and comparing a wider number of product in the full sample set, which can lose some of the detail.

These study findings align with my own experience of product testing with consumers, where found pairwise comparisons offer the best option to get detail from consumers.  For example, if consumers are trying to describe the characteristics of plain biscuits, it is easy to compare and contrast two products for differences in key attributes such as colour, baked character, crumbliness, cereal flavour, crunchiness, sweetness and so on.  By providing both products, consumers can say things like “This biscuit is drier than that one”, and help them to express the differences in the products.  This can allow consumers to generate descriptions as well as elements of liking and crucially provide R&D teams with as much sample focussed detail to drive development and product optimisation

Sweets in jars

Flavour… more than meets the mouth

Recently brought to my attention, here is a fascinating summary of the perception of artificial flavourings, published by the BBC last year.

My colleague Sam sent me this interesting article, as she was intrigued by how the origin of flavouring can impact consumer perceptions, with some ‘artificial’ flavours possibly originating from less frequently consumed varieties of foods we know and love.  The author Chris Baraniuk uses banana flavourings to great effect, highlighting how sensory and flavour chemistry can be used to trick consumer perceptions.  On his journey through flavour he steps into the world of the full sensory experience and cross-modal interaction with Charles Spence, and even flavour encapsulation, which provides such hope for the food industry to deliver key flavours and product attributes, albeit with varying levels of success at this early stage.

Thank you Sam for sending me this article.  It summarises nicely the challenges faced by the food and drinks industry to deliver flavoursome, natural tasting foods.  This is particularly important for current FMCG trends, as shown by the 2015 Insights Show, highlighting how consumers are demanding more and more different and exciting flavour options.

The not so sweet taste of fat

Fat

Another exciting study has hit the world of taste research.  Researchers from Purdue University, have found new evidence to suggest we can perceive the taste of fat, termed ‘Oleogustus’.  In a study published this month, Mattes and his team have found new evidence that fats can have a distinct taste, different sensation to the basic tastes of sweet, sour, salty, bitter or umami.

In this study, volunteers were screened for their taste ability through a series of discrimination (spot the similar samples) tests.  Screening selected 69% of volunteers, with 36% showing higher taste acuity.  Successful participants wore nose clips, to reduce the impact of aroma and flavour, and sorted a variety of taste samples into groups using an adapted Taxonomic Free Sorting approach.  The samples were matched for texture, so volunteers focussed on taste differences when describing what united samples that they placed in the same groups.

Sorting results found participants grouped samples into salty, sweet, sour and bitter tastes, with the fat samples generally placed separately to all these basic tastes.  Whilst some overlap was observed with certain fats considered to be have elements sour, umami and bitter tastes, follow-up assessments found participants could isolate the fat samples specifically. Some short chain fatty acids were found to be slightly sour, whilst medium length chain fatty acids had some cross-over with umami compounds such as Monosodium Glutamate.  Interestingly, long chain fatty acids were found to have some bitter associations for consumers, and these findings led the study authors to conclude that the taste of fat may not be entirely pleasant, and even considered unpalatable.

Despite fat delivering a specific sensation we can detect on the tongue, it is the combination of these tastes, aromas, textures and flavours that contribute to the full sensory experience.  Fats can aid flavour delivery and provide texture cues to a wide range of products such as the melting mouthfeel of chocolate and ice cream, so even though it may be unpalatable when isolated, fat is easily accepted in the full context of foods and beverages.  Nevertheless, this greater understanding of what we perceive when we eat, can help industry develop low fat alternatives and fat replacers, knowing the role this essential ingredient plays in the mouth, and how we can perceive it.

This is a fascinating finding for both sensory research and the food industry as a whole, particularly for those developing low fat products with fat free alternatives.  This study highlights that fat has a taste which could be important to mimic in low fat products, as well as indicating the levels that isolated fatty acids can detected by consumers.  The concentrations of fats used in this study are around the levels in fermented and rancid products and could help explain the unpalatable nature of fat samples by consumers.  This new study suggests the taste of fat could play more of a role in food perception than we all realise, beyond the texture and mouthfeel characteristics we recognise in some of our favourite foods like chocolate!

Halving sugar intakes – What impact does this have on food & drink?

Sugar on spoonThe Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN), has recommended the average daily intake of sugar in the UK to be halved.  This aims to reduce the risk of obesity, type 2 diabetes and improve overall dental health.  This interesting BBC News Article on Sugar Intakes highlights the role of consumers, retailers and the food and drinks industry in taking steps towards this dietary change.

But will this be easy to achieve?  Well I think there are definitely some challenges ahead, both in terms of changing consumer behaviour, but also for food and drink developers.  Moving towards alternative sweetening options such as natural and artificial sweeteners is not a simple task of replacing like for like.  Removing or replacing sugars and can severely affect the sensory characteristics of products not just by impacting the sweetness, but also the overall flavour and how it is delivered, the texture and mouthfeel of the product and the after-effects after swallowing.  This makes any changes, even small ones, easy for consumers to notice and can lead to disliking and rejecting the low sugar formulation.

This reminds me of The Sugar Debate we had at work.  Recently MMR carried out a quick online poll asking people whether sugars or artificial sweeteners concerned them most in their foods and drinks.  Interestingly 33% of consumers were concerned by sugar, whilst 29% were concerned by aspartame and 4% by sucralose.  Perhaps the recommendations from the SACN will increase concern over sugar and make the first steps towards adapting consumer diets.

The Sugar Debate: What are consumers most concerned about?