Cited by 95Sensory Analysis and Statistical MethodsMultisensory perception and integrationTactile and Sensory Interactions

Effects of the sound of the bite on apple perceived crispness and hardness

Demattè, M. Luisa, Pojer, Nicola, Endrizzi, Isabella, Corollaro, Maria Laura, Betta, Emanuela, Aprea, Eugenio, Charles, Mathilde, Biasioli, Franco +2 more·2014·Food Quality and Preference

Abstract

The effects of the manipulation of the sound produced while biting into apple samples, a non-dry food, was investigated. In Experiment 1, participants rated the perceived crispness of flesh cylinders obtained from three apple cultivars differing in their texture profile: ‘Renetta’ (white ‘Renetta Canada’), ‘Golden’ (‘Golden Delicious’), and ‘Fuji’. Participants might hear the veridical sounds they made when biting into an apple cylinder without any frequency adjustment (0dB filter) or with high frequencies attenuated (either by −12dB or by −24dB). Perceived crispness was significantly lower when any of the reductions were applied than when no filter (0dB) was used. In Experiment 2, new participants rated both crispness and hardness of ‘Renetta’ and ‘Fuji’ cylinders. The sound of the bite could be unfiltered (0dB), reduced in its high frequencies (−24dB), or globally reduced (the microphone was switched off). Crispness, again, was perceived as significantly lower with any of the sound reductions. Interestingly, perceived hardness was significantly affected by the sound information as well: Hardness was rated as being significantly lower when a global sound reduction was applied than when the sound was unfiltered. We demonstrated, for the first time, that sound information plays an important role even for the evaluation of hardness, a property believed to be primarily oral/mechanical.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.05.009

Cites

34 of 34 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
Demattè, M. L., Pojer, N., Endrizzi, I., Corollaro, M. L., Betta, E., Aprea, E., Charles, M., Biasioli, F., Zampini, M., & Gasperi, F.
Affiliations
  • Fondazione Edmund Mach (IT)
  • University of Trento (IT)
Corresponding author
  • Demattè, M. Luisa
  • Gasperi, Flavia
Venue
Food Quality and Preference
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-12
Volume
38
Pages
58-64
ISSN
0950-3293 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2119518126
Cited by
95
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 4 · 2013: 1
FWCI
10.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Food Quality and Preference (publishedVersion)
  • Institutional Research Information System (Università degli Studi di Trento) (submittedVersion)
  • CINECA IRIS Institutional Research Information System (Fondazione Edmund Mach) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Sensory Analysis and Statistical Methods
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Multisensory perception and integration
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
Keywords
perceived hardness, acoustic attenuation, high-frequency filtering, texture perception, Fuji apple, Golden Delicious

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