Semi-solid food evaluation method and application

Abstract

The present invention relates to an evaluation method and application for semi-solid foods. The present invention first proposes an evaluation method for the sensory attributes of semi-solid foods. This evaluation method first classifies sensory attribute evaluators according to different working modes of the human oral cavity, differentiates the oral processing and consumption methods of evaluators into chewing type, sucking type, and mixed type, establishes a clear classification standard for sensory evaluation personnel, clarifies the evaluation differences among people with different consumption methods, and reduces or eliminates the evaluation errors of evaluators.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention belongs to the field of the food industry, and relates to a method for evaluating semi-solid foods. More specifically, it relates to a method for improving the accuracy of sensory evaluation of semi-solid foods and its industrial application. Background Art

[0002] Today, with brands dominating the market and increasingly fierce market competition, building product brand characteristics on the basis of consumers' recognition of sensory attributes (such as taste, flavor, etc.) is a prerequisite for product success. With the upgrading of consumption, product design is developing towards diversification and differentiation to meet consumers with different consumption levels, taste preferences, and nutritional needs. Flavor is the soul of food, and whether consumers accept and like a certain food mainly depends on the sensory quality of the food.

[0003] Traditional food sensory research and evaluation methods include: difference testing, descriptive analysis testing, acceptance testing, preference testing, etc. In actual application, these methods are important ways to conduct market research, analyze product attribute intensity, product optimization and improvement directions, and consumers' preferences and degrees of liking for product attributes. By recruiting consumers, selecting or expert evaluators to complete the above suitable method tests, and comprehensively processing the result data using sensory statistical analysis methods, it can provide strong technical support for new product R & D, improvement of the sensory quality of existing products, product launch risk assessment, etc.

[0004] For example, reference document 1 conducts sensory scoring on the Maillard reaction products of beef tallow residue; taking volatile components, etc. as input to form a sample set and sensory scores as labels, a flavor score prediction model is established to optimize the beef flavor of the Maillard reaction products of beef tallow residue. Reference document 2 discloses an evaluation method for the eating quality of rice by means of an artificial neural network model.

[0005] In recent years, with the extremely active in-depth and detailed research on food senses, researchers have increasingly paid attention to consumers' personal preferences for the oral processing methods of foods, as well as the resulting food flavors and textures they may prefer more. Taste perception is affected by food ingredients, as well as physiology and human thinking.

[0006] In addition, foods can be divided into three categories: liquids, semi-solids, and solids, and each category requires different oral operations. Semi-solid foods are mainly processed through the squeezing movement between the tongue and the palate, with or without chewing activities before swallowing. Semi-solid foods are consumed throughout the age range from infants to the elderly, so there are significant differences in oral capacity and oral eating styles among consumers.

[0007] Currently, oral processing of food can be characterized by a variety of methods, such as instrumental, observational or introspective methods. Although the relationship between sensory perception and oral processing has been widely used to determine the hardness, deformability, viscosity, caramel, biscuits and model gels of solid foods, there are relatively few studies on the oral processing behavior of semi-solid foods.

[0008] Braxton et al. found that the perception of food tenderness is related to chewing efficiency and pattern (chewing time, number of chews and muscle activity), which vary from person to person and from food to food. Esthe et al. pointed out that different oral processing methods of different consumers will cause differences in sensory evaluation results. Even for expert evaluators, there are significant differences in perceived flavor intensity between evaluators.

[0009] Kim & Vickers et al. proposed that the dynamics of sensory flavor perception during different oral processing behaviors and the study of overall sensory perception are crucial to understanding the sensory attributes of products. Under different oral processing behaviors, food flavors are released in different ways. In a stagnant state, substance transfer occurs through molecular diffusion, while during chewing, vortices generated in the food and saliva matrix may accelerate the release of aroma volatiles.

[0010] Marion et al. found in their study of the oral behavior of ice cream that when ice cream melts in the mouth, its sweetness and hardness advantages are significantly prolonged; when chewing ice cream, its fruity aroma and cold feeling advantages are significantly prolonged. Oral processing behavior significantly changes the dynamic texture and flavor perception of ice cream, which highlights the importance of analyzing oral processing behavior when quantifying the sensory properties of ice cream.

[0011] Therefore, for the evaluation of semi-solid foods, there is still a need to further improve the rationality and accuracy of the evaluation methods.

[0012] References:

[0013] Reference 1: CN114868897A

[0014] Reference 2: CN114693047A Summary of the invention

[0015] Problems to be Solved by the Invention

[0016] Although the above-mentioned prior art has conducted some research on the sensory evaluation of various foods, it should also be noted that consumers have strong personal subjective consciousness in the process of sensory testing and evaluation, that is, "people" or "perception" itself has (strong) subjective bias, and this bias comes not only from innate physiological conditions, but also from experience and habits.

[0017] Therefore, after long-term practice, the present invention has found that if the population cannot be divided according to refined criteria (physiological, habits, etc.), there will be a large range of sensory score values, discrete results, and obvious differences, which will have a great impact on the reliability and effectiveness of the detection and evaluation results; moreover, different conditions of the sensory taste, smell, texture, etc. of the test product itself will cause changes in consumers' sensory judgments, resulting in a decrease in data reliability. Although the above disadvantages have been attempted to be alleviated in the art by increasing the number of samples, the problem often cannot be effectively solved substantially.

[0018] Furthermore, currently, for the research on food oral processing behavior and sensory, most of the research fields are for solid foods. Most scholars distinguish the chewing behaviors of different populations simply by observing the oral behaviors of the subjects and conducting corresponding instrument tests, and using the observation results of the researchers. However, the main directions and focuses of the research are to deeply explore the relationship and influence between different oral processing methods and food sensory flavors.

[0019] Therefore, in terms of the current sensory evaluation and research methods for semi-solid food oral processing behavior, there is no method that can truly combine the sensory evaluation and semi-solid food oral processing behavior method for the precise division of the sensory evaluation population, and there is no clear standard for the sensory evaluation population division system.

[0020] Based on the problems existing in the above-mentioned prior art, the present invention first proposes a sensory evaluation method for semi-solid foods. Specifically, by analyzing the oral processing behavior of consumers / evaluators when eating semi-solid foods and the consumers / evaluators' scoring of the sensory attribute intensity of semi-solid foods, the consumers with different oral processing methods are divided, and a clear sensory evaluation - consumers / evaluators division standard is established. Therefore, on the premise of ensuring that the subjective preferences of consumers / evaluators are not affected, the evaluation differences between different populations can be clarified, the errors of consumers' evaluations can be reduced or eliminated, the accuracy of the scoring results can be improved, and the consumer sensory evaluation of semi-solid products can be carried out more precisely.

[0021] Solutions for Solving the Problems

[0022] Through the long-term research of the inventors of the present invention, it is found that the above technical problems can be solved by implementing the following technical solutions:

[0023] [1]. The present invention first provides an evaluation method for semi-solid foods, wherein the method evaluates the sensory attributes of the semi-solid foods through the evaluation of sensory evaluators, wherein

[0024] the sensory evaluators are classified as: chewing preference type, sucking preference type, and mixed preference type,

[0025] Moreover, the classification is carried out as follows. For the same kind of semi-solid food:

[0026] i. If the chewing time of the sensory assessor when consuming the semi-solid food accounts for more than 70% of the total consumption time, then the sensory assessor is classified as a chewing preference type;

[0027] ii. If the sucking time of the sensory assessor when consuming the semi-solid food accounts for more than 70% of the total consumption time, then the sensory assessor is classified as a sucking preference type;

[0028] iii. If the chewing time or sucking time of the sensory assessor when consuming the semi-solid food accounts for more than 20% and less than 70% of the total consumption time, then the sensory assessor is classified as a mixed preference type;

[0029] One of the chewing preference type, sucking preference type, and mixed preference type sensory assessors after classification evaluates the target semi-solid food, or multiple types of sensory assessors separately evaluate the target semi-solid food.

[0030] [2]. According to the evaluation method described in [1], wherein the semi-solid food is a food that has the ability to maintain its self-supporting shape only under the action of gravity after thermal equilibrium at room temperature.

[0031] [3]. According to the evaluation method described in [1] or [2], wherein the semi-solid food includes one or a mixture of dairy products, rice / flour products, fruit products, vegetable products, plant products, or meat products.

[0032] [4]. According to the evaluation method described in any one of [1] to [3], wherein the same kind of semi-solid food includes the same type and quality of food substantially.

[0033] [5]. According to the evaluation method described in any one of [1] to [4], wherein the classification criteria are carried out as follows:

[0034] i’. If the chewing time of the sensory assessor when consuming the semi-solid food accounts for more than 80% of the total consumption time, then the sensory assessor is classified as a chewing preference type;

[0035] ii’. If the sucking time of the sensory assessor when consuming the semi-solid food accounts for more than 80% of the total consumption time, then the sensory assessor is classified as a sucking preference type;

[0036] iii’. If the chewing time or sucking time of the sensory assessor when consuming the semi-solid food accounts for more than 20% and less than 80% of the total consumption time, then the sensory assessor is classified as a mixed preference type.

[0037] [6]. According to the evaluation method described in any one of [1] to [5], wherein the sensory assessor has one or more of the following conditions:

[0038] ① Between 20 and 40 years old;

[0039] ② Good oral health;

[0040] ③ No obstacle in jaw movement;

[0041] ④ No smoking or no smoking history within one week.

[0042] [7]. According to the evaluation method described in any one of [1] to [6], wherein the evaluation of the target semi-solid food includes evaluating by means of scoring.

[0043] [8]. According to the evaluation method described in any one of [1] to [7], wherein the chewing time, sucking time, and total consumption time are determined by direct observation or by video observation.

[0044] [9]. Further, the present invention also provides a production method of a semi-solid food, wherein the method includes evaluating the sensory attributes of the semi-solid food according to the evaluation method described in any one of [1] to [8].

[0045]

[10] . In addition, the present invention also provides a production method of a semi-solid food, wherein the method includes the evaluation method described in any one of [1] to [8], and adjusts the production method according to the evaluation result.

[0046] Effects of the Invention

[0047] By implementing the above technical solutions, the present invention can achieve the following technical effects:

[0048] In the sensory evaluation test of semi-solid foods, the rationality and accuracy of the evaluation are particularly crucial, and the evaluation results will have a direct impact on product positioning and the direction of product improvement and optimization. Therefore, the present invention first proposes an improved evaluation method for the sensory attributes of semi-solid foods. This evaluation method first classifies sensory attribute evaluators according to different working methods of the human oral cavity, differentiates the oral processing and consumption methods of the evaluators into chewing type, sucking type, and mixed type, first establishes a clear division standard for sensory evaluation personnel, verifies and clarifies the evaluation differences among different eating method groups, in order to reduce or eliminate the evaluation errors of the evaluators.

[0049] At the same time, sensory evaluations are specifically carried out for different eating method groups to improve the accuracy of the scoring results, better assist enterprises in product positioning and product optimization, and more accurately conduct consumer sensory evaluations of semi-solid products. Specific Embodiments

[0050] The following describes the embodiments of the present invention, but the present invention is not limited thereto. The present invention is not limited to the various components described below. Within the scope claimed in the invention, various changes can be made, and the embodiments and examples obtained by appropriately combining the technical means respectively disclosed in different embodiments and examples are also included in the technical scope of the present invention.

[0051] Unless otherwise defined, the technical and scientific terms used in the present invention have the same meanings as those commonly understood by those of ordinary skill in the technical field to which the present invention belongs.

[0052] Furthermore, unless otherwise specified, the meanings of the following terms comply with the following definitions:

[0053] In this specification, the numerical range expressed as "numerical value A to numerical value B" means a range including the endpoint numerical values A and B.

[0054] In the present invention, the terms "about" or "substantially", "essentially" may mean: a value includes the standard deviation of the error of the device or method used to measure the value. The numerical ranges and parameters used to define the present invention are all approximate values, and the relevant numerical values in the specific embodiments have been presented as precisely as possible here. However, any numerical value inevitably contains the standard deviation caused by the aforementioned test device or method. Therefore, unless otherwise clearly stated, it should be understood that all ranges, quantities, numerical values, and percentages used in the present invention are modified by "about". Here, "about" generally means that the standard deviation between the actual value and the theoretical model or theoretical data is within the range of 3%, preferably 2%, and more preferably 1%.

[0055] In this specification, the meaning expressed by "may" includes both the meaning of performing a certain process and the meaning of not performing a certain process.

[0056] In this specification, the use of "sensory assessor" or "evaluator" shall be understood to include the concept of "consumer".

[0057] In this specification, the terms "milk" and "dairy milk" shall be interpreted broadly and can cover both raw milk (i.e., the liquid directly obtained from the mammary gland) and standardized dairy products (such as skim milk or whole milk), where the concentration of milk fat has been reduced relative to the original raw milk.

[0058] In this specification, the use of "room temperature" refers to an indoor temperature of 23 ± 2°C.

[0059] In this specification, "optional" or "optionally" means that the event or situation described next may or may not occur, and this description includes the situation where the event occurs and the situation where the event does not occur.

[0060] In this specification, the "some specific / preferred embodiments", "other specific / preferred embodiments", "embodiments", etc. mentioned refer to the specific elements (such as features, structures, properties, and / or characteristics) related to the embodiment, which are included in at least one of the embodiments described herein, and may or may not exist in other embodiments. Additionally, it should be understood that the elements can be combined in various embodiments in any suitable manner.

[0061] In this specification, according to the provisions of GB 5420-2021, "cheese" (including "dry cheese") is a soft, semi-hard, hard, or extra-hard dairy product, which may or may not have a coating, whether mature or immature, where the ratio of whey protein / casein does not exceed the corresponding ratio in bovine (or other milk-producing animals') milk (except for whey cheese). The cheese is obtained by any of the following methods:

[0062] a) After the protein in milk and / or dairy products is coagulated or partially coagulated under the action of rennet or other appropriate coagulants (or directly using the coagulated curd after coagulation as the raw material), with or without the addition of fermentation strains, edible salt, food additives, and food nutrient fortifiers, and with or without the removal of whey (when using the protein coagulated mass after coagulation as the raw material), a solid or semi-solid product is obtained through processes such as fermentation or non-fermentation;

[0063] b) The processing technology includes the coagulation process of the protein in milk and (or) dairy products, and imparts the finished product with physical, chemical, and sensory characteristics similar to those of the product described in a).

[0064] <First aspect>

[0065] The present invention primarily proposes an evaluation method for the sensory attributes of semi-solid foods with improved accuracy. The sensory attributes described in the present invention mainly or substantially refer to the sensations from the oral cavity when a consumer consumes semi-solid foods.

[0066] The present invention is mainly based on the following insights:

[0067] In order to minimize the undesirable errors in the evaluation of the sensory attributes of foods caused by the subjective differences among evaluators, and to make the evaluation more statistically rational and accurate, the present invention classifies evaluators according to the differences in oral behaviors when consuming semi-solid foods, divides the evaluators into chewing type, sucking type, and mixed type, establishes a clear standard for classifying sensory evaluation consumers, so as to clarify the evaluation differences among different groups of people with different eating methods, and reduce or eliminate the errors in the evaluation by evaluators.

[0068] Semi-Solid Foods

[0069] The semi-solid foods of the present invention refer to a type of food whose form is between liquid foods and solid foods.

[0070] For the "semi-solid" referred to in the present invention, at room temperature and after reaching complete thermal equilibrium, it has the ability to maintain its self-supporting shape only under the action of gravity. In some specific embodiments, the semi-solid can support its own weight, maintain its own shape, and can change its shape under external pressure and flow under low pressure. Additionally, for the above semi-solid, it can also exhibit long-term (e.g., one day or more than one week) cold flowability or creepability.

[0071] In some specific embodiments, the semi-solid foods described in the present invention can be a viscous substance or a gel at room temperature.

[0072] Regarding the types or sources of the semi-solid foods of the present invention, the present invention has no particular limitations. The semi-solid foods include one or a mixture of semi-solid dairy products, rice / flour products, fruit products, vegetable products, plant products, sugar products, or meat products. Preferably, the semi-solid foods include one or a mixture of semi-solid dairy products, flour products, fruit (including its extracts) products, plant (including plant extracts, such as plant proteins, etc.) products, and sugar products.

[0073] In some typical embodiments, the semi-solid foods are selected from semi-solid cheeses, rice flour paste / puree, milkshakes, fruit puree / paste, plant protein puree / paste, sugar gums, etc., and additional animal milk can be added or not added to each of the above types of foods.

[0074] In addition, in some other embodiments of the present invention, for the semi-solid foods described at room temperature, they can also have the characteristics of solid foods at low temperatures. For example, in some cases, under the condition of thermal equilibrium below 5°C, some products (especially dairy products) can have the characteristics of solid foods, but when they are heated to room temperature and reach thermal equilibrium, they become viscous or soft jelly-like substances. Therefore, the semi-solid foods of the present invention also include foods that are usually sold in frozen or refrigerated forms and meet the above conditions.

[0075] Sensory Assessors

[0076] For the sensory assessors described in the present invention, there are generally no special restrictions in principle. They can be professional sensory assessment practitioners or ordinary consumers.

[0077] In some preferred embodiments of the present invention, from the perspective of improving the accuracy of evaluation, the sensory assessors can be further selected based on the following factors:

[0078] ① Aged between 20 and 40 years old;

[0079] ② Good oral health, such as having complete teeth, no false teeth, no tooth decay, no oral perforation, and no dental surgery in the recent (half a year) period;

[0080] ③ No obstacle to jaw movement;

[0081] ④ No smoking or no smoking history within one week;

[0082] ⑤ Other factors, such as not taking any drugs that may affect chewing, swallowing or saliva secretion within one month or half a year.

[0083] For the selection principle, sensory assessors who meet at least one of the above conditions, at least two conditions, at least three conditions or even all of the above conditions can be selected.

[0084] Regarding age, the selection of condition ① can better take into account factors such as good physical health and normal appetite, and for the sense of cognition, relatively sharp and mature judgments can be given.

[0085] Regarding conditions ② and ③ above, a healthy oral environment can better experience or distinguish the original or true sensory properties of semi-solid foods. Moreover, normal jaw movement can avoid deviations in judgments such as chewing time and sucking time described below due to problems such as difficulty in swallowing.

[0086] Regarding condition ④, it can avoid problems such as cognitive deviation or malfunction of taste due to tobacco taste or long-term dependence on this taste.

[0087] In addition, in some specific embodiments of the present invention, for the sensory evaluation personnel selected according to the above principles, the final sensory evaluation group can be formed with the proportion of about 50% of the number of men and women respectively.

[0088] In addition, there is no special limitation on the number of people in the selected group of qualified sensory evaluators. Usually, dozens or hundreds of people are appropriate. The more the number of people, the more beneficial it is to improve the accuracy of the final result. In some preferred embodiments, the total number of people in the group of qualified sensory evaluators can be 50 - 500.

[0089] Oral Behaviors and Classification

[0090] One of the cores of the present invention is that for the evaluation of semi - solid foods, the above - mentioned group of qualified sensory evaluators is classified according to the different oral behavior patterns when consuming semi - solid foods. It has been found that different oral behavior habits will have different effects on the evaluation results.

[0091] Specifically, the classification of the sensory evaluators of the present invention can be carried out according to the following principles (each evaluator is not in multiple groups at the same time):

[0092] i. If the chewing time of the sensory evaluator when consuming the semi - solid food accounts for more than 70% of the total consumption time, then the sensory evaluator is classified as a chewing - preference type;

[0093] ii. If the sucking time of the sensory evaluator when consuming the semi - solid food accounts for more than 70% of the total consumption time, then the sensory evaluator is classified as a sucking - preference type;

[0094] iii. If the chewing time or sucking time of the sensory evaluator when consuming the semi - solid food accounts for more than 20% and less than 70% of the total consumption time, then the sensory evaluator is classified as a mixed - preference type.

[0095] For iii, it can also be understood as those sensory evaluators whose chewing time or sucking time when consuming the semi - solid food accounts for more than 20% of the total consumption time except for the above i or ii.

[0096] Specifically, when the above classification is carried out, the food tasted by all sensory evaluators is preferably the same. Here, the same can be specifically understood as the same variety, the same quality, and even the storage conditions are the same when necessary. In addition, there is no special requirement for the temperature condition during tasting, and it can be carried out under the temperature condition that is beneficial to consuming the food.

[0097] Furthermore, for the determination of chewing time, sucking time, and total consumption time, from the perspective of convenience, it can be determined by an additional assistant observing the oral movement status of the sensory assessor.

[0098] In some specific embodiments, three or more assistants can simultaneously observe the consumption situation of a sensory assessor and record the chewing time, sucking time, and total consumption time. Finally, it can be determined by optional mathematical or statistical methods.

[0099] In addition, without limitation, for the assistants to determine the above times when each sensory assessor consumes, it can be carried out by directly observing on-site, or by observing video materials.

[0100] The chewing rate (the ratio of chewing time to total consumption time) and sucking rate (the ratio of sucking time to total consumption time) for each sensory assessor are calculated by the following two formulas:

[0101]

[0102]

[0103] Furthermore, in another preferred embodiment of the present invention, the classification of the sensory assessors of the present invention can be carried out according to the following principles (each assessor is not in multiple groups at the same time):

[0104] i'. If the chewing time of the sensory assessor when consuming the semi-solid food accounts for more than 80% of the total consumption time, then the sensory assessor is classified as a chewing preference type;

[0105] ii'. If the sucking time of the sensory assessor when consuming the semi-solid food accounts for more than 80% of the total consumption time, then the sensory assessor is classified as a sucking preference type;

[0106] iii'. If the chewing time or sucking time of the sensory assessor when consuming the semi-solid food accounts for more than 20% and less than 80% of the total consumption time, then the sensory assessor is classified as a mixed preference type.

[0107] For the above iii', it can also be understood as those sensory assessors whose chewing time or sucking time when consuming the semi-solid food accounts for more than 20% of the total consumption time except for the above i' or ii'.

[0108] Through the above classification method, the sensory assessors can be classified into chewing preference type, sucking preference type, and mixed preference type. And it has been proven (see the example part later) that there are obvious differences in the evaluation of food sensory attributes among people with different oral behavior types.

[0109] In the evaluation method of the semi-solid food described in the present invention, after the above classification of sensory assessors, suitable categories of assessors can be selected to evaluate the solid food.

[0110] In some preferred embodiments, the evaluation can be carried out by using the Quantitative Descriptive Analysis (QDA method). For example, the main evaluation items can be evaluated by means of quantitative scoring. Optionally, the QDA method can also be improved and fine-tuned according to any needs. There is no particular limitation on the way of improvement and fine-tuning, as long as it can meet the smooth progress of the evaluation or has an expected enhanced effect on the rationality.

[0111] <Second aspect>

[0112] In the second aspect of the present invention, a production method of semi-solid food is provided.

[0113] The method includes:

[0114] 1) According to the evaluation method provided in the above <First aspect>, to evaluate the sensory attributes of the produced semi-solid food; or

[0115] 2) According to the evaluation method provided in the above <First aspect>, to evaluate the sensory attributes of the produced semi-solid food, and adjust the production method based on the evaluation of the evaluation results.

[0116] More specifically, in the case of 1), one or more types of assessors of chewing preference type, sucking preference type or mixed preference type that have been classified can be used to evaluate the produced semi-solid food respectively.

[0117] In the case of 2), the evaluation results of the above one or more types of assessors can be further analyzed to guide the adjustment of the production method. Typically:

[0118] ■ If it is found that the evaluation results of a certain type of assessor are the most ideal, then adjust the product to better adapt to or strengthen the oral behavior pattern corresponding to the food when it is eaten; for example, if it is found that the evaluation results of the chewing preference type assessment group are the most ideal, then the food can be made into a form that is more conducive to chewing and eating.

[0119] ■ If it is found that the evaluation results do not match the preset oral behavior mode of the food when it is eaten, then the formula or production process can be adjusted; for example, if the preset product to be produced is a food to be sucked, but it is found that the evaluation results of the sucking preference type assessment group are not ideal or the evaluation results are lower than the evaluation results given by the assessors of their preference type, then it may be necessary to adjust the formula or processing process to make the evaluation of the sucking preference type assessment group more ideal.

[0120] In addition, there are no special restrictions on the utilization of the results of the evaluation method using the sensory attributes of the present invention in food production, or the auxiliary production or adjustment methods carried out thereby. All the results are beneficial to improving the preference of consumers for the final product, and are beneficial to increasing the popularity and economic value of the product.

[0121] Examples

[0122] The present invention will be further described below through specific examples:

[0123] The experimental process is as follows:

[0124] 1. Basic information of the assessors

[0125] Two hundred consumers were recruited as assessors for this experiment (100 females and 100 males, aged between 20 and 30 years old). All participants were in good health, had intact teeth, no dentures, no recent dental surgery, no pain or discomfort during mandibular movement, no swallowing problems, did not smoke, had no oral perforations, and did not take any medications that might affect chewing, swallowing or saliva secretion.

[0126] 2. Classification of the oral processing methods of the assessors

[0127] 2.1 Sample preparation

[0128] Plain cheese: Commercially available, and all cheeses were produced in the same batch.

[0129] Each assessor was provided with 1 sample of plain cheese with a mass of 5 g ± 0.3 g, placed in a disposable tasting box with a lid, and the sample temperature was 20°C.

[0130] 2.2 Method for classifying the oral processing methods of consumers

[0131] Time :

[0132] At 10:00 am, after breakfast.

[0133] Observation Method :

[0134] Video recording method, which was recorded in a sensory room isolated from external noise, odors and any other interferences. The camera was placed about 50 cm away from the assessor's face to ensure that it was close enough to capture a complete and clear video of the face without distracting the assessor or making the assessor feel uncomfortable while eating the cheese.

[0135] During the experiment, the assessors were required to use their natural oral processing and eating methods, keep their heads facing the camera directly, not cover their mouths or faces with their hands, and raise their hands when swallowing the cheese.

[0136] Three parameters of each assessor needed to be recorded: total chewing action time, total sucking action time, and total eating time.

[0137] The eating parameters were recorded in the video, and data was collected through visual analysis of the video. Video processing based on observation was conducted by two researchers. If there were significant differences in the judgments of the two researchers, the video would be reviewed by a third researcher and a final decision would be made.

[0138] The criteria for classifying oral processing methods followed the natural oral processing behaviors of each assessor and were calculated by the following two formulas:

[0139]

[0140]

[0141] The chewing rate and sucking rate of each assessor were recorded to select the following three groups of assessors according to the provisions of the comparative examples and examples below:

[0142] Chewing preference type; sucking preference type; mixed (chewing and sucking) preference type

[0143] 3. Quantitative descriptive analysis method (QDA method) 3.1 Sample preparation

[0144] Fruity cheese: 0.5% by mass of fruit juice was added to the above-mentioned plain cheese, and all the cheeses were produced in the same batch.

[0145] Two samples of fruity cheese with a mass of 5 g ± 0.3 g were provided to each assessor and placed in a disposable tasting box with a lid. The sample temperature condition was 20°C.

[0146] The traditional quantitative descriptive analysis method (QDA method) can be improved. Since all assessors need to maintain natural oral processing behaviors and preferences as much as possible, the assessors' perception of taste intensity is significantly affected by personal preferences. Therefore, no unified pre-experiment meeting and training course are conducted, and only the experimental steps and methods are explained.

[0147] To reduce the possibility of inaccurate evaluation of flavor intensity perception and enable the assessors to focus on objective scoring, a 10-cm scale line was selected and re-defined. A midpoint was marked on the scale line to represent the intensity perception of the plain cheese. The plain cheese was provided to all assessors, and then they were required to mark the midpoint on the scale. After that, the flavored cheese samples were delivered to each assessor in a random order, and the assessors were asked to mark the perceived intensity on the scale. A 2-minute break was taken between the two samples, and a glass (250 ml) of water was provided for rinsing the mouth before consuming the next sample. The test was conducted in a separate compartment under white light. Each sample was tested twice to ensure the accuracy and parallelism of the experimental results.

[0148] Comparative Example 1:

[0149] The oral processing methods of the assessors were classified according to the chewing rate and sucking rate ≥ 50%. Those with a chewing rate ≥ 50% were defined as having a chewing-preferred oral processing method, and those with a sucking rate ≥ 50% were defined as having a sucking-preferred oral processing method (there was no mixed (chewing and sucking)-preferred oral processing method under this classification method). Furthermore, a sensory intensity scoring experiment was carried out to evaluate the milk flavor, fruit flavor, and flavor persistence of the flavored cheese, and the classification criteria were verified with the sensory evaluation results. The results are shown in Tables 1 and 2.

[0150] Comparative Example 2:

[0151] The oral processing methods of the assessors were classified according to the chewing rate and sucking rate ≥ 60%. Those with a chewing rate ≥ 60% were defined as having a chewing-preferred oral processing method, those with a sucking rate ≥ 60% were defined as having a sucking-preferred oral processing method, and those with a chewing rate and sucking rate between 40% and 60% were defined as having a mixed (chewing and sucking)-preferred oral processing method. Furthermore, a sensory intensity scoring experiment was carried out to evaluate the milk flavor, fruit flavor, and flavor persistence of the flavored cheese, and the classification criteria were verified with the sensory evaluation results. The results are shown in Tables 1 - 3.

[0152] Conclusions Drawn from Comparative Examples:

[0153] As can be seen from the results in Tables 1 - 3, the tables show the mean values, SD values, and difference results of the intensity evaluations of the milk flavor, fruit flavor, and flavor persistence attributes of the flavored cheese.

[0154] In the evaluation test where the eating methods of the assessors were not divided, the SD values of the scores for the three attribute intensities were all relatively large, indicating that there were significant differences in the scoring results of the assessors, the data was discrete, and the evaluation results of the attribute intensities were inaccurate. In the evaluation tests divided according to a chewing rate and a sucking rate of ≥50% and a chewing rate and a sucking rate of ≥60%, the SD values of the scores for the three attribute intensities were all smaller than those in the test without dividing the eating methods of the assessors. However, the SD values were still relatively large, and there were no differences in the mean scores of the attribute intensities between the two division methods and the mean score results without dividing the eating methods of the assessors (P > 0.05). The purpose of dividing the eating methods of the assessors was not achieved, the scoring results had large differences, the data was discrete, and the evaluation results of the attribute intensities were unstable.

[0155] Example 1:

[0156] The oral processing methods of the assessors were divided according to a chewing rate and a sucking rate of ≥70%. It was stipulated that a chewing rate of ≥70% was a chewing-preferred oral processing method, a sucking rate of ≥70% was a sucking-preferred oral processing method, and a chewing rate and a sucking rate between 30% and 70% were a mixed (chewing and sucking)-preferred oral processing method. Then, a sensory intensity scoring experiment was carried out to evaluate the milk flavor, fruit flavor, and flavor persistence of the fruit-flavored cheese, and the division criteria were verified with the sensory evaluation results. The results are shown in Tables 1 - 3.

[0157] Example 2:

[0158] The oral processing methods of the assessors were divided according to a chewing rate and a sucking rate of ≥80%. It was stipulated that a chewing rate of ≥80% was a chewing-preferred oral processing method, a sucking rate of ≥80% was a sucking-preferred oral processing method, and a chewing rate and a sucking rate between 20% and 80% were a mixed (chewing and sucking)-preferred oral processing method. Then, a sensory intensity scoring experiment was carried out to evaluate the milk flavor, fruit flavor, and flavor persistence of the fruit-flavored cheese, and the division criteria were verified with the sensory evaluation results. The results are shown in Tables 1 - 3.

[0159] Example 3:

[0160] The oral processing methods of the assessors were divided according to a chewing rate and a sucking rate of ≥90%. It was stipulated that a chewing rate of ≥90% was a chewing-preferred oral processing method, a sucking rate of ≥90% was a sucking-preferred oral processing method, and a chewing rate and a sucking rate between 10% and 90% were a mixed (chewing and sucking)-preferred oral processing method. Then, a sensory intensity scoring experiment was carried out to evaluate the milk flavor, fruit flavor, and flavor persistence of the fruit-flavored cheese, and the division criteria were verified with the sensory evaluation results. The results are shown in Tables 1 - 3.

[0161] Table 1 Sensory Attribute Intensity Evaluation Results of the Population with a Chewing-Preferred Oral Processing Method

[0162]

[0163] Note: The a / b / c marked in the upper right corner of the numbers indicates that the same letter represents no significant difference (P>0.05), and different letters represent significant differences (P<0.05).

[0164] Table 2 Evaluation results of the sensory attribute intensity of the population with sucking preference oral processing mode

[0165]

[0166] Note: The a / b / c marked in the upper right corner of the numbers indicates that the same letter represents no significant difference (P>0.05), and different letters represent significant differences (P<0.05).

[0167] Table 3 Evaluation results of the sensory attribute intensity of the population with mixed preference oral processing mode

[0168]

[0169] Note: The a / b / c marked in the upper right corner of the numbers indicates that the same letter represents no significant difference (P>0.05), and different letters represent significant differences (P<0.05).

[0170] Conclusions Drawn from Examples :

[0171] The oral processing modes of the assessors were divided according to the chewing rate and sucking rate, and the intensity scores of the three sensory attributes (milk flavor, fruit flavor, and flavor persistence) of the fruit-flavored cheese were used as the judgment indicators. The mean and SD values of the scoring results are shown in Tables 1-3.

[0172] It can be seen from the results of Tables 1-3 that:

[0173] There were significant differences (P<0.05) between the mean results of the milk flavor and fruit flavor attributes with a chewing rate or sucking rate ≥80% and a chewing rate or sucking rate ≥90% and the mean results of the other classification methods and the non-classified population. The scoring results of different eating methods were divided, and the SD values of the mean results were all small, indicating that the population classification method was effective and the degree of dispersion of the scores was significantly reduced.

[0174] At the same time, there was no significant difference (P>0.05) in the mean results of the milk flavor and fruit flavor attributes with a chewing rate or sucking rate ≥80% and a chewing rate or sucking rate ≥90%, indicating that the population classification methods at the stages of a chewing rate or sucking rate ≥80% and a chewing rate or sucking rate ≥90% achieved similar effects.

[0175] The test results of the population with the mixed oral processing mode showed that:

[0176] In terms of milk flavor, there was no significant difference in the mean results between a chewing or sucking rate < 70% and a chewing or sucking rate < 80% or a chewing or sucking rate < 90% (P > 0.05).

[0177] In terms of fruit flavor, there was no significant difference in the mean results between a chewing or sucking rate < 80% and a chewing or sucking rate < 90% (P > 0.05).

[0178] In terms of flavor persistence, there were significant differences in the mean results between a chewing or sucking rate < 80%, a chewing or sucking rate < 90% and a chewing or sucking rate < 60% (P < 0.05).

[0179] In summary, for the test of the mixed oral processing mode population, the clearer the division between the chewing type and the sucking type populations, the more obvious the difference in the mean scores of the mixed population, the smaller the SD value result, the more accurate the scores, and the lower the degree of dispersion.

[0180] Therefore, the preferred scheme for the standard of dividing the oral processing mode of the assessors can be: a chewing preference oral processing mode for those with a chewing rate ≥ 80%, a sucking preference oral processing mode for those with a sucking rate ≥ 80%, and a mixed (chewing and sucking) preference oral processing mode for those with a chewing rate and a sucking rate between 20% and 80%.

[0181] Industrial Applicability

[0182] The evaluation method for the sensory attributes of the semi-solid food provided by the present invention can be applied industrially.

Claims

1. An evaluation method for semi-solid foods, characterized in that, The method evaluates the sensory attributes of the semi-solid food through the evaluation of sensory assessors, where the sensory assessors are classified into: chewing preference type, sucking preference type, and mixed preference type, and the classification is carried out according to the following: for the same semi-solid food: i. If the chewing time of the sensory assessor when consuming the semi-solid food accounts for more than 70% of the total consumption time, the sensory assessor is classified as the chewing preference type; ii. If the sucking time of the sensory assessor when consuming the semi-solid food accounts for more than 70% of the total consumption time, the sensory assessor is classified as the sucking preference type; iii. If the chewing time or sucking time of the sensory assessor when consuming the semi-solid food accounts for more than 20% and less than 70% of the total consumption time, the sensory assessor is classified as the mixed preference type; To clarify the evaluation differences of different types of sensory assessors for the semi-solid food, and then select one type of the classified chewing preference type, sucking preference type, and mixed preference type sensory assessors to evaluate the target semi-solid food, or multiple types of sensory assessors evaluate the target semi-solid food separately, the semi-solid food is a food that has the ability to maintain its self-supporting shape only under the action of gravity after thermal equilibrium at room temperature.

2. The evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized in that The semi-solid food includes one or a mixture of dairy products, rice / flour products, fruit products, vegetable products, sugar products, and meat products.

3. The evaluation method according to claim 1 or 2, characterized in that The same semi-solid food includes foods of the same type and substantially the same quality.

4. The evaluation method according to claim 1 or 2, characterized in that The sensory assessors have one or more of the following conditions: ① Aged between 20 and 40 years old; ② Good oral health; ③ No obstacle to jaw movement; ④ No smoking or no smoking history within one week.

5. The evaluation method according to claim 1 or 2, characterized in that, The evaluation of the target semi-solid food includes evaluating it by means of scoring.

6. The evaluation method according to claim 1 or 2, characterized in that, The chewing time, sucking time, and total consumption time are determined by direct observation or video observation.

7. An evaluation method for semi-solid foods, characterized in that, The method evaluates the sensory attributes of the semi-solid food through the evaluation of sensory assessors, where the sensory assessors are classified into: chewing preference type, sucking preference type, and mixed preference type, and the classification is carried out according to the following: for the same semi-solid food: i. If the chewing time of the sensory assessor when consuming the semi-solid food accounts for more than 80% of the total consumption time, the sensory assessor is classified as the chewing preference type; ii. If the sucking time of the sensory assessor when consuming the semi-solid food accounts for more than 80% of the total consumption time, the sensory assessor is classified as the sucking preference type; iii. If the chewing time or sucking time of the sensory assessor when consuming the semi-solid food accounts for more than 20% and less than 80% of the total consumption time, the sensory assessor is classified as the mixed preference type; To clarify the evaluation differences of the semi-solid foods by different types of sensory assessors, and then select one type from the classified chewing-preference type, sucking-preference type, and mixed-preference type sensory assessors to evaluate the target semi-solid food, or multiple types of sensory assessors separately evaluate the target semi-solid food. The semi-solid food is a food that, under room temperature conditions and after thermal equilibrium, has the ability to maintain its self-supporting shape only under the action of gravity.

8. A production method of semi-solid food, characterized in that, The method includes using the evaluation method according to any one of claims 1 to 7 to evaluate the sensory attributes of the semi-solid food.

9. A production method of semi-solid food, characterized in that, The method includes using the evaluation method according to any one of claims 1 to 7 and adjusting the production method based on the evaluation results.

Images