Cited by 139Biochemical Analysis and Sensing TechniquesSensory Analysis and Statistical MethodsNutrition, Health and Food Behavior

Evaluation of the Monell forced-choice, paired-comparison tracking procedure for determining sweet taste preferences across the lifespan.

Open access
Mennella, J. A., Lukasewycz, L. D., Griffith, J. W., Beauchamp, G. K.·2011·Chemical Senses

Abstract

Lack of methodology to assess taste in children limits its measurement in research studies that include pediatric populations. We used the Monell 2-series, forced-choice tracking method to measure sucrose preferences of a racially/ethnically diverse sample (n = 949) of children, adolescents, and adults. Reliability was assessed by comparing the results of the first series with the second series. Validity was assessed by relating participants' sucrose preferences to their preferences for foods varying in sweetness. The task required, on average, 7 presentations of aqueous sucrose solution pairs. Children and adolescents preferred more concentrated sweetness than adults (P < 0.001). Black children/adolescents preferred a more concentrated sucrose solution than did White children/adolescents even when gender, parental education level, and family income were used as covariates. Data from a single series were sufficient to detect age-related differences but insufficient to detect racial/ethnic differences in sweet preferences. Level of sweetness preferred significantly correlated with the sugar content of favorite cereals (P < 0.001) and beverages (P < 0.02). This method is brief and has evidence of reliability and external validity. Although a single series will yield useful information about age-related differences in taste preferences, the 2-series version should be considered when differences in race/ethnicity are of interest.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/chemse/bjq134

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • In a 930-participant study, children most preferred 0.54 mol/L sucrose, equal to about 11 tsp (~44 g) sugar in 8 oz water, nearly twice the sugar concentration of typical cola.

    “For example, in a recent study of 930 participants, children most preferred a 0.54-mol/L sucrose concentration (32) that was equivalent to 11 tsp (~44 g) of sugar in an 8-oz (240 mL) glass of water, nearly twice the sugar concentration of a typical cola.”

    From Sweetness and Food Preference (2012) · cites this paper as [32]

    The age-related differences in task completion and reliability section reports an analysis of 930 participants, and the age-related differences in sweet preferences section reports that children preferred more concentrated sucrose solutions than adults. The retrieved passages do not give 0.54 mol/L as the children's preferred concentration or compare it with sugar in cola; the teaspoons-and-cola comparison appears after the citation in the citing sentence. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mennella, J. A., Lukasewycz, L. D., Griffith, J. W., & Beauchamp, G. K.
Affiliations
  • Monell Chemical Senses Center (US)
  • Northwestern University (US)
Venue
Chemical Senses
Published
2011-01-12
Volume
36
Issue
4
Pages
345-355
ISSN
  • 0379-864X (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-3553
OpenAlex
W2107163993
Cited by
139
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 9
FWCI
8.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Chemical Senses (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Pennsylvania Department of Health
  • National Institutes of Health (HHS-N-260–2006-00007-C)
  • National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (R01AA009523, R01AA09523)
  • National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD37119)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01‐HD37119, R01HD037119)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Biochemical Analysis and Sensing Techniques
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Sensory Analysis and Statistical Methods
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
Keywords
sweet taste preference, sucrose preference, racial and ethnic differences, Black children, test-retest reliability, generalizability
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Body Weight, Child, Child, Preschool, Female, Food Preferences, Humans, Male, Psychometrics, Sucrose, Taste Perception, Young Adult

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