Cited by 142Sensory Analysis and Statistical MethodsBiochemical Analysis and Sensing TechniquesFood Chemistry and Fat Analysis

Modulation of perceived taste by olfaction in familiar and unfamiliar beverages

Labbe, D., Damevin, L., Vaccher, C., Morgenegg, C., Martin, N.·2006·Food Quality and Preference

Abstract

The integration of olfactory and taste perception and the role of congruency and familiarity on perception have already been demonstrated in model solutions. The aim of the present study was to investigate the role of these factors in real food products. Therefore, we have investigated the impact of olfactory perception on perceived bitterness in a familiar (bitter cocoa beverage) and an unfamiliar (bitter milk) beverage. Sensory profilings with and without noseclip were conducted according to simultaneous product presentation. In a first experiment, an instant cocoa powder mixed with water was used to prepare a common base. Two types of flavourings were added: cocoa and vanilla, at three different levels (none, medium and high). Samples were compared within a flavouring type. In a second experiment a vanilla flavour was added at three levels to a milk base containing caffeine. The panellists scored bitterness, sourness, sweetness and body with noseclip. Without noseclip, overall aroma above the cup and in mouth were assessed in addition to the previous set of attributes. With noseclip, results showed that neither the cocoa nor the vanilla flavourings provided any additional taste to the beverages. Without noseclip, olfactory/taste interaction in the cocoa beverage led to an enhancement of bitterness induced by the cocoa flavouring and an increase in sweetness from the vanilla flavouring. On the contrary, in the caffeinated milk, the addition of vanilla flavouring did not significantly increase sweetness, but unexpectedly enhanced bitterness. This study is further evidence of the influence of olfaction on taste perception in complex matrices. In addition, our results suggest that taste-olfaction integration is product dependent and related to food experience, even when working with trained subjects. Furthermore, the unpleasantness due to the neophobia related to the consumption of a new product and to bitterness may enhance bitterness when the unfamiliarity of the product is increased by addition of vanilla flavouring to a bitter milk beverage.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.foodqual.2006.04.006

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Labbe, D., Damevin, L., Vaccher, C., Morgenegg, C., & Martin, N.
Affiliations
Nestlé (Switzerland) (CH)
Corresponding author
Labbe, D.
Venue
Food Quality and Preference
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-10
Volume
17
Issue
7-8
Pages
582-589
ISSN
0950-3293 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2163217809
Cited by
142
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 8
FWCI
5.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Food Quality and Preference (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Sensory Analysis and Statistical Methods
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Biochemical Analysis and Sensing Techniques
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food Chemistry and Fat Analysis
Keywords
taste perception, familiarity, neophobia, cocoa beverage, sensory profiling, sweetness enhancement

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review