CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 25Sensory Analysis and Statistical MethodsTactile and Sensory InteractionsSensor Technology and Measurement Systems

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 15 of the 15 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MECHANICAL HARDNESS AND ITS SENSORY ASSESSMENT

PELEG, M.·1980·Journal of Food Science
DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2621.1980.tb06510.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

ABSTRACT “Hardness” is mainly perceived through the forces that the fingers, jaws or tongue exert. Since the mechanical resistance of the tissues involved is often comparable in magnitude to that of the, tested object, the mechanical sensitivity must decline at a level determined by the resistance of both tissue and object. Sensory response to mechanical stimulus starts at zero, ends up in saturation or pain and ought to have certain mathematical properties. Superposition of the response intensity and the mechanical sensitivity reveals a theoretical relationship between mechanical hardness and its sensory assessment. This relationship implies that scatter in hardness sensory scores is theoretically inevitable and that there must be a certain hardness range for which each organ has maximum sensitivity.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2621.1980.tb06510.x

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Hayakawa S.I., 1972, Language in Thought and Action
  2. Reiner M., 1967, Rheological Terminology in Rheology—Theory and Applications
  3. Scott‐Blair W.G., 1954, The subjective assessment of firmness, Laboratory Practice, 3, 3

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 25

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
PELEG, M.
Affiliations
University of Massachusetts Amherst (US)
Corresponding author
PELEG, M.
ORCID
PELEG, M.
Venue
Journal of Food Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1980-09
Volume
45
Issue
5
Pages
1156-1160
ISSN
  • 0022-1147 (ISSN-L)
  • 1750-3841
DOI
10.1111/j.1365-2621.1980.tb06510.x
OpenAlex
W1993467705
Cited by
25
References
15
Citations by year
2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
2.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 9489 d)
Locations
Journal of Food Science (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Sensory Analysis and Statistical Methods
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Instrumentation › Sensor Technology and Measurement Systems
Keywords
mechanical hardness, sensory evaluation, mechanical sensitivity, sensory responses, response saturation, pain threshold

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