67.240 - Sensory analysis
ICS 67.240 Details
Sensory analysis
Sensorische Analyse
Analyse sensorielle
Senzorična analiza
General Information
e-Library Subscription
Create subscription and get permanent access to documents within 67.240 - Sensory analysis
Currently subscription includes documents marked with .We are working on making all documents available within the subscription.
This document specifies a method for the application of balanced incomplete block designs to sensory descriptive and hedonic tests. This document is applicable when the number of test samples exceeds the number of evaluations that an assessor can perform reliably in a single session. This document also specifies the fundamental characteristics of balanced incomplete block designs and establishes guidelines for their application in sensory evaluation.
- Standard19 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard19 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
This document specifies criteria for the selection of and procedures for the training of trained sensory assessors and expert sensory assessors for food and beverages, as well as home and personal care products.
It is applicable to all industries concerned with the evaluation of products by the sense organs.
This document supplements the information given in ISO 6658.
- Standard48 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
This document specifies the characteristics of a glass intended for use in the sensory analysis of the organoleptic attributes of odour, taste and flavour of virgin olive oils, for the classification of such oils. The glass does not apply for the analysis of the colour or texture of olive oils. In addition, this document describes an adapted heating unit used to reach and maintain the right temperature for this analysis.
- Standard5 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard5 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
This document specifies criteria for the selection of and procedures for the training of trained sensory assessors and expert sensory assessors for food and beverages, as well as home and personal care products.
It is applicable to all industries concerned with the evaluation of products by the sense organs.
This document supplements the information given in ISO 6658.
- Standard48 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
This document specifies criteria for the selection of and procedures for the training of trained sensory assessors and expert sensory assessors for food and beverages, as well as home and personal care products. It is applicable to all industries concerned with the evaluation of products by the sense organs. This document supplements the information given in ISO 6658.
- Standard38 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard39 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
This document gives guidelines for assessing the overall performance of a quantitative descriptive panel and the performance of each panel member.
This document is applicable to the validation of the training of individual assessors or panels, as well as to the performance monitoring of established panels.
This document does not apply to the panel performance for descriptive methods where the individual scores of each assessor are not recorded, where there is no single list of attributes that is common to all the assessors, or where dominance rather than intensity is measured. Consequently, the performance of descriptive panels using methods such as consensus profile, free-choice profile, flash profile and temporal dominance of sensations (TDS) are out of scope.
The methods specified in this document are for monitoring and assessing the ability of a panel and its assessors to discriminate between products, the agreement between assessors of the same panel and the repeatability of these assessors in their intensity scoring.
Reproducibility, including both the comparison between panels and the comparison within the same panel of several evaluations conducted under different conditions (i.e. separated in time), is out of scope of this document.
The methods specified in this document can be used, in full or a selection only, by the panel leader to appraise continuously the performance of panels or individual assessors. The methods listed are not exhaustive and other appropriate methods can also be used.
- Standard31 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
This document gives guidelines for assessing the overall performance of a quantitative descriptive
panel and the performance of each panel member.
This document is applicable to the validation of the training of individual assessors or panels, as well as
to the performance monitoring of established panels.
This document does not apply to the panel performance for descriptive methods where the individual
scores of each assessor are not recorded, where there is no single list of attributes that is common to all
the assessors, or where dominance rather than intensity is measured. Consequently, the performance
of descriptive panels using methods such as consensus profile, free-choice profile, flash profile and
temporal dominance of sensations (TDS) are out of scope.
The methods specified in this document are for monitoring and assessing the ability of a panel and its
assessors to discriminate between products, the agreement between assessors of the same panel and
the repeatability of these assessors in their intensity scoring.
Reproducibility, including both the comparison between panels and the comparison within the same
panel of several evaluations conducted under different conditions (i.e. separated in time), is out of scope
of this document.
The methods specified in this document can be used, in full or a selection only, by the panel leader to
appraise continuously the performance of panels or individual assessors. The methods listed are not
exhaustive and other appropriate methods can also be used.
- Standard31 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
This document specifies a procedure for determining whether a perceptible sensory difference or similarity exists between samples of two products. The method is a forced-choice procedure. The method is applicable whether a difference exists in a single sensory attribute or in several attributes.
The method is statistically more efficient than the duo-trio test (described in ISO 10399), but has limited use with products that exhibit strong carryover and/or lingering flavours.
The method is applicable even when the nature of the difference is unknown [i.e. it determines neither the size nor the direction of difference between samples, nor is there any indication of the attribute(s) responsible for the difference]. The method is applicable only if the products are homogeneous.
The method is effective for:
a) determining that:
either a perceptible difference results (triangle testing for difference);
a perceptible difference does not result (triangle testing for similarity),
when, for example, a change is made in ingredients, processing, packaging, handling or storage;
b) selecting, training and monitoring assessors.
- Standard24 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
This document gives guidelines for assessing the overall performance of a quantitative descriptive panel and the performance of each panel member. This document is applicable to the validation of the training of individual assessors or panels, as well as to the performance monitoring of established panels. This document does not apply to the panel performance for descriptive methods where the individual scores of each assessor are not recorded, where there is no single list of attributes that is common to all the assessors, or where dominance rather than intensity is measured. Consequently, the performance of descriptive panels using methods such as consensus profile, free-choice profile, flash profile and temporal dominance of sensations (TDS) are out of scope. The methods specified in this document are for monitoring and assessing the ability of a panel and its assessors to discriminate between products, the agreement between assessors of the same panel and the repeatability of these assessors in their intensity scoring. Reproducibility, including both the comparison between panels and the comparison within the same panel of several evaluations conducted under different conditions (i.e. separated in time), is out of scope of this document. The methods specified in this document can be used, in full or a selection only, by the panel leader to appraise continuously the performance of panels or individual assessors. The methods listed are not exhaustive and other appropriate methods can also be used.
- Standard22 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard22 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard23 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Standard23 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
This document specifies a method for applying magnitude estimation to the evaluation of sensory attributes. The methodology specified covers the training of assessors, and obtaining magnitude estimations as well as their statistical interpretation.
- Standard31 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard31 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard34 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Standard34 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
This document specifies a procedure for determining whether a perceptible sensory difference or
similarity exists between samples of two products. The method is a forced-choice procedure. The
method is applicable whether a difference exists in a single sensory attribute or in several attributes.
The method is statistically more efficient than the duo-trio test (described in ISO 10399), but has
limited use with products that exhibit strong carryover and/or lingering flavours.
The method is applicable even when the nature of the difference is unknown [i.e. it determines neither
the size nor the direction of difference between samples, nor is there any indication of the attribute(s)
responsible for the difference]. The method is applicable only if the products are homogeneous.
The method is effective for:
a) determining that:
1) either a perceptible difference results (triangle testing for difference);
2) a perceptible difference does not result (triangle testing for similarity),
when, for example, a change is made in ingredients, processing, packaging, handling or storage;
b) selecting, training and monitoring assessors.
- Standard24 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
- Amendment13 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
This document gives guidelines for substantiating sensory claims on food and non-food products and their packaging for advertising consumer-packaged goods. This document differentiates sensory claims from other types of claims. It provides classification and examples of the different types of sensory claims. It highlights special issues associated with testing to substantiate sensory claims. It includes case studies and references. This document does not apply to: — specific or detailed requirements for different test methods that are used to support sensory claims; — factual claims regarding a product's country of origin, ingredients, processing and nutritional components; — factual claims regarding the technical features of the product; — claims regarding a product's health, medical or therapeutic benefits, physiological effects, structure or function benefits when consumed or applied to the human body; — claims based on instrumental assessments of the attributes or performance of a product (i.e. instrumental assessments; in this case, test methods are used in which no human participant evaluates the product and/or no human participant provides a response to a product); — claims about services (e.g. a house cleaning service, airline services, automobile services); — claims about large/slow moving consumer goods (autos, refrigerators, stoves, etc.).
- Standard18 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard18 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard22 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Standard22 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
This document specifies a procedure for determining whether a perceptible sensory difference or similarity exists between samples of two products. The method is a forced-choice procedure. The method is applicable whether a difference exists in a single sensory attribute or in several attributes. The method is statistically more efficient than the duo-trio test (described in ISO 10399), but has limited use with products that exhibit strong carryover and/or lingering flavours. The method is applicable even when the nature of the difference is unknown [i.e. it determines neither the size nor the direction of difference between samples, nor is there any indication of the attribute(s) responsible for the difference]. The method is applicable only if the products are homogeneous. The method is effective for: a) determining that: either a perceptible difference results (triangle testing for difference); a perceptible difference does not result (triangle testing for similarity), when, for example, a change is made in ingredients, processing, packaging, handling or storage; b) selecting, training and monitoring assessors.
- Standard17 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard17 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard17 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Standard17 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
This document defines a test method for the detection, qualification and possible assessment of odours/flavours exogenous to cork bark selected as bottling product in contact with beverages, still, sparkling and sparkling wines, alcohols and spirits, beers and ciders. This document is applicable to: — cork bark selected as bottling product in all its forms; — all cork components of cork stoppers: granules, discs, bodies and shanks; — all types of cork stoppers, semi-finished (shaped), semi-finished (semi-finished stoppers possibly washed and possibly colmated and/or coated) or ready for use (semi-finished stoppers, possibly branded and surface treated).
- Standard7 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard7 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard7 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Standard7 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
This document specifies a method for developing a texture profile of food products (solids, semi-solids, liquids) or non-food products (e.g. cosmetics).
This method is one approach to sensory texture profile analysis and other methods exist. This method describes various steps in the process of establishing a complete description of the textural attributes of a product.
This method is applicable to:
— screening and training assessors;
— orientating assessors through the development of definitions and evaluation techniques for textural characteristics;
— characterizing the textural attributes of a product in order to establish its standard profile and to discern any later changes;
— improving old products and developing new products;
— studying various factors that can affect the textural attributes of a product, e.g. changes in process, time, temperature, ingredients, packaging or shelf-life, and storage conditions;
— comparing a product with another similar product to determine the nature and intensity of textural differences;
— correlating sensory and instrumental and/or physical measurements.
- Standard22 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
- Standard17 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard17 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard17 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard18 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Standard18 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Amendment13 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
This document specifies a method for developing a texture profile of food products (solids, semi-solids, liquids) or non-food products (e.g. cosmetics). This method is one approach to sensory texture profile analysis and other methods exist. This method describes various steps in the process of establishing a complete description of the textural attributes of a product. This method is applicable to: — screening and training assessors; — orientating assessors through the development of definitions and evaluation techniques for textural characteristics; — characterizing the textural attributes of a product in order to establish its standard profile and to discern any later changes; — improving old products and developing new products; — studying various factors that can affect the textural attributes of a product, e.g. changes in process, time, temperature, ingredients, packaging or shelf-life, and storage conditions; — comparing a product with another similar product to determine the nature and intensity of textural differences; — correlating sensory and instrumental and/or physical measurements.
- Standard22 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
- Standard17 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard17 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard17 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard18 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Standard18 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Standard7 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard7 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard7 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Standard7 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
This document specifies a method for the preparation of a liquor of tea for use in sensory tests, by means of infusing the leaf.
- Standard8 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard8 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
This document specifies a procedure for statistically analysing data from forced-choice sensory discrimination tests, such as the triangle, duo-trio, 3-AFC, 2-AFC, in which after every trial of the discrimination test the decision can be made to stop testing and declare a difference, to stop testing and declare no difference, or to continue testing. The sequential method often allows for a decision to be made after fewer trials of the discrimination test than would be required by conventional approaches that use predetermined numbers of assessments. The method is effective for: a) determining that either: a perceptible difference results; or a perceptible difference does not result when, for example, a change is made in ingredients, processing, packaging, handling or storage; b) selecting, training and monitoring assessors. N
- Standard10 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard10 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard10 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Standard10 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
This document gives guidelines for the implementation of a sensory analysis programme in quality control (QC), including general elements and procedures. It is applicable to food and non-food industries. It is limited to in-plant sensory analysis in QC.
- Standard11 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard11 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard12 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Standard12 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Standard2 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard2 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard2 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Standard2 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Amendment5 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
This document gives general guidance on the use of sensory analysis. It describes tests for the
examination of foods and other products by sensory analysis, and includes some general information
on the techniques to be used if statistical analysis of the results is required.
Generally these tests are intended only for objective sensory analysis. However, if a test can be used for
determining preference in hedonic test, this is indicated.
A hedonic test aims to determine the acceptability of the products and/or to determine preferences
among two or more products by the specified consumer population. The methods are effective for
determining whether a perceptible preference exists (difference in degree of liking), or whether no
perceptible preference exists (paired similarity test). General guidance for hedonic tests is given in
ISO 11136.
- Standard32 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
- Standard26 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard27 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
This document specifies a procedure for determining whether a perceptible sensory difference exists
between samples of two products. The method applies whether a difference exists in a single sensory
attribute or in several.
The “A” – “not A” test can be used in sensory analysis in the following ways:
a) as a difference test, particularly for evaluating samples having variations, for example, in
appearance (making it difficult to obtain strictly identical repeat samples) or in aftertaste (making
direct comparison difficult);
b) as a recognition test, particularly for determining whether an assessor or group of assessors
identifies a new stimulus in relation to a known stimulus (for example, recognition of the quality of
the sweet taste of a new sweetener);
c) as a perception test, to determine the ability of an assessor to discriminate stimuli.
The “A” – “not A” test is not appropriate for assessing if two products are sufficiently similar to be used
interchangeably (i.e. for similarity testing) because the “A” – “not A” test inherently involves replicate
evaluations of the same products by all assessors. These replicate evaluations violate the basic
assumptions for similarity tests to be statistically valid.
Examples of its application are given in Annex B.
NOTE Bi and Ennis[1] point out that the estimate of the discriminal distance, d’, between the “A” and “not
A” samples is the same regardless of the nature of the replicated evaluations performed in the test but that the
estimate of the variance of d’ does depend on how the replicate evaluations were performed. As such, no general
discussion of a Thurstonian analysis of the “A” – “not A” method, nor of the power of the test is undertaken in this
document. Interested readers are referred to Reference [1] for a detailed discussion of the topic.
- Standard17 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
- Standard13 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard13 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard13 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Standard13 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
ISO 10399:2017 specifies a procedure for determining whether a perceptible sensory difference or similarity exists between samples of two products. The method is a forced-choice procedure. The method is applicable whether a difference exists in a single sensory attribute or in several attributes.
The method is statistically less efficient than the triangle test (described in ISO 4120) but is easier to perform by the assessors.
The method is applicable even when the nature of the difference is unknown (i.e. it determines neither the size nor the direction of difference between samples, nor is there any indication of the attribute(s) responsible for the difference). The method is applicable only if the products are fairly homogeneous.
The method is effective for
a) determining that
either a perceptible difference results (duo-trio testing for difference), or
a perceptible difference does not result (duo-trio testing for similarity) when, for example, a change is made in ingredients, processing, packaging, handling or storage, and
b) for selecting, training and monitoring assessors.
Two forms of the method are described:
- the constant-reference technique, used when one product is familiar to the assessors (e.g. a sample from regular production);
- the balanced-reference technique, used when one product is not more familiar than the other.
- Standard28 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
- Standard2 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard2 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard2 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Standard2 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Amendment5 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
ISO 13301:2018 gives guidelines for - obtaining data on the detection of stimuli that evoke responses to odour, flavour and taste by a 3-AFC (three-alternative forced-choice) procedure, and - the processing of the data to estimate the value of a threshold and its error bounds, and other statistics related to the detection of the stimulus. Typically, the procedures will be used in one of the following two modes: - investigation of the sensitivity of assessors to specific stimuli; - investigation of the ability of a chemical substance to stimulate the chemoreceptive senses. (Although experiments can encompass both modes.) Examples of the first mode include studies of the differences among individuals or specified populations of individuals in sensitivities and of the effects of age, gender, physiological condition, disease, administration of drugs and ambient conditions on sensitivity. Examples of the latter mode include - studies in flavour chemistry and the impact of specified chemicals on the flavour of foods, - classification of chemicals for their impact on humans, if present in the environment, - studies on the relationship of molecular structure to capacity of a chemical to act as a stimulant, - quality assurance of gaseous effluents and of water, foods and beverages, and - studies in the mechanism of olfaction. In both modes, the way in which probability of a correct response changes with intensity of stimulus, i.e. the slope of the dose/response curve, could be an important aspect of the study as well as the threshold value, and the data processing procedures described here provide this information. The focus of ISO 13301:2018 is on data requirements and on computational procedures. Regarding the validity of the data, the text is restricted to general rules and precautions. It does not differentiate between detection and difference thresholds; fundamentally, the procedures measure a difference threshold because a test sample is compared with a reference sample. Typically, the reference sample is not intended to contain the stimulus under investigation, but the guidelines do not exclude experimental design in which the reference could contain the stimulus, or it might not be known if the reference contains the stimulus. The guidelines do not measure a recognition threshold as defined in ISO 5492. They do not address the standardization of methods of determining air quality as discussed in EN 13725.
- Standard28 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard29 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
This document specifies a procedure for determining whether a perceptible sensory difference or
similarity exists between samples of two products. The method is a forced-choice procedure. The
method is applicable whether a difference exists in a single sensory attribute or in several attributes.
The method is statistically less efficient than the triangle test (described in ISO 4120) but is easier to
perform by the assessors.
The method is applicable even when the nature of the difference is unknown (i.e. it determines neither
the size nor the direction of difference between samples, nor is there any indication of the attribute(s)
responsible for the difference). The method is applicable only if the products are fairly homogeneous.
The method is effective for
a) determining that
1) either a perceptible difference results (duo-trio testing for difference), or
2) a perceptible difference does not result (duo-trio testing for similarity) when, for example, a
change is made in ingredients, processing, packaging, handling or storage, and
b) for selecting, training and monitoring assessors.
Two forms of the method are described:
— the constant-reference technique, used when one product is familiar to the assessors (e.g. a sample
from regular production);
— the balanced-reference technique, used when one product is not more familiar than the other.
- Standard28 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
ISO 10399:2017 specifies a procedure for determining whether a perceptible sensory difference or similarity exists between samples of two products. The method is a forced-choice procedure. The method is applicable whether a difference exists in a single sensory attribute or in several attributes. The method is statistically less efficient than the triangle test (described in ISO 4120) but is easier to perform by the assessors. The method is applicable even when the nature of the difference is unknown (i.e. it determines neither the size nor the direction of difference between samples, nor is there any indication of the attribute(s) responsible for the difference). The method is applicable only if the products are fairly homogeneous. The method is effective for a) determining that either a perceptible difference results (duo-trio testing for difference), or a perceptible difference does not result (duo-trio testing for similarity) when, for example, a change is made in ingredients, processing, packaging, handling or storage, and b) for selecting, training and monitoring assessors. Two forms of the method are described: - the constant-reference technique, used when one product is familiar to the assessors (e.g. a sample from regular production); - the balanced-reference technique, used when one product is not more familiar than the other.
- Standard21 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard21 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard21 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Standard21 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
ISO 11136:2014 describes approaches for measuring, within a controlled area, the degree to which consumers like or relatively like products.
It uses tests based on collecting consumers' responses to questions, generally on paper or via a keyboard or a touch screen. Tests of a behavioural nature (such as recording quantities consumed ad libitum by the consumers) do not fall within the scope of ISO 11136:2014.
- Standard52 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
ISO 11136:2014 describes approaches for measuring, within a controlled area, the degree to which consumers like or relatively like products.
It uses tests based on collecting consumers' responses to questions, generally on paper or via a keyboard or a touch screen. Tests of a behavioural nature (such as recording quantities consumed ad libitum by the consumers) do not fall within the scope of ISO 11136:2014.
- Standard52 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
- Amendment29 pagesEnglish, French, German and Russian languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
ISO 8588:2017 specifies a procedure for determining whether a perceptible sensory difference exists between samples of two products. The method applies whether a difference exists in a single sensory attribute or in several. The "A" ? "not A" test can be used in sensory analysis in the following ways: a) as a difference test, particularly for evaluating samples having variations, for example, in appearance (making it difficult to obtain strictly identical repeat samples) or in aftertaste (making direct comparison difficult); b) as a recognition test, particularly for determining whether an assessor or group of assessors identifies a new stimulus in relation to a known stimulus (for example, recognition of the quality of the sweet taste of a new sweetener); c) as a perception test, to determine the ability of an assessor to discriminate stimuli. The "A" ? "not A" test is not appropriate for assessing if two products are sufficiently similar to be used interchangeably (i.e. for similarity testing) because the "A" ? "not A" test inherently involves replicate evaluations of the same products by all assessors. These replicate evaluations violate the basic assumptions for similarity tests to be statistically valid. Examples of its application are given in Annex B. NOTE Bi and Ennis[1] point out that the estimate of the discriminal distance, d', between the "A" and "not A" samples is the same regardless of the nature of the replicated evaluations performed in the test but that the estimate of the variance of d' does depend on how the replicate evaluations were performed. As such, no general discussion of a Thurstonian analysis of the "A" ? "not A" method, nor of the power of the test is undertaken in this document. Interested readers are referred to Reference [1] for a detailed discussion of the topic.
- Standard17 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
- Standard13 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard13 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard13 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Standard13 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
ISO 6658:2017 gives general guidance on the use of sensory analysis. It describes tests for the examination of foods and other products by sensory analysis, and includes some general information on the techniques to be used if statistical analysis of the results is required. Generally these tests are intended only for objective sensory analysis. However, if a test can be used for determining preference in hedonic test, this is indicated. A hedonic test aims to determine the acceptability of the products and/or to determine preferences among two or more products by the specified consumer population. The methods are effective for determining whether a perceptible preference exists (difference in degree of liking), or whether no perceptible preference exists (paired similarity test). General guidance for hedonic tests is given in ISO 11136.
- Standard32 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
- Standard26 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard27 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Amendment29 pagesEnglish, French, German and Russian languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
- Standard6 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
ISO 13299:2016 gives guidelines for the overall process for establishing a sensory profile. Sensory profiles can be established for all products or samples which can be evaluated by the senses of sight, odour, taste, touch, or hearing (e.g. food, beverage, tobacco product, cosmetic, textile, paper, packaging, sample of air or water). This International Standard can also be useful in studies of human cognition and behaviour.
Some applications of sensory profiling are as follows:
- to develop or change a product;
- to define a product, production standard, or trading standard in terms of its sensory attributes;
- to define a reference "fresh" product for shelf-life testing;
- to study and improve shelf-life of a product;
- to compare a product with a reference product or with other similar products on the market or under development;
- to map a product's perceived attributes for the purpose of relating them to factors such as instrumental, chemical or physical properties, and/or to consumer acceptability;
- to characterize by type and intensity the off-odours or off-tastes in a sample (e.g. in pollution studies).
- Standard49 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
This International Standard describes a procedure for determining whether there exists a perceptible sensory difference or a similarity between samples of two products concerning the intensity of a sensory attribute. This test is sometimes also referred to as a directional difference test or a 2-AFC test (Alternative Forced Choice). In fact, the paired comparison test is a forced choice test between two alternatives. The method is applicable whether a difference exists in a single sensory attribute or in several, which means that it enables determination of whether there exists a perceptible difference concerning a given attribute, and the specification of the direction of difference, but it does not give any indication of the extent of that difference. The absence of difference for the attribute under study does not signify that there does not exist any difference between the two products.
- Amendment8 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
This International Standard gives guidelines for the overall process for establishing a sensory profile.
Sensory profiles can be established for all products or samples which can be evaluated by the senses
of sight, odour, taste, touch, or hearing (e.g. food, beverage, tobacco product, cosmetic, textile, paper,
packaging, sample of air or water). This International Standard can also be useful in studies of human
cognition and behaviour.
Some applications of sensory profiling are as follows:
— to develop or change a product;
— to define a product, production standard, or trading standard in terms of its sensory attributes;
— to define a reference “fresh” product for shelf-life testing;
— to study and improve shelf-life of a product;
— to compare a product with a reference product or with other similar products on the market or
under development;
— to map a product’s perceived attributes for the purpose of relating them to factors such as
instrumental, chemical or physical properties, and/or to consumer acceptability;
— to characterize by type and intensity the off-odours or off-tastes in a sample (e.g. in pollution studies).
- Standard49 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
This International Standard describes a procedure for determining whether there exists a perceptible sensory difference or a similarity between samples of two products concerning the intensity of a sensory attribute. This test is sometimes also referred to as a directional difference test or a 2-AFC test (Alternative Forced Choice). In fact, the paired comparison test is a forced choice test between two alternatives. The method is applicable whether a difference exists in a single sensory attribute or in several, which means that it enables determination of whether there exists a perceptible difference concerning a given attribute, and the specification of the direction of difference, but it does not give any indication of the extent of that difference. The absence of difference for the attribute under study does not signify that there does not exist any difference between the two products.
- Amendment8 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
ISO 13299:2016 gives guidelines for the overall process for establishing a sensory profile. Sensory profiles can be established for all products or samples which can be evaluated by the senses of sight, odour, taste, touch, or hearing (e.g. food, beverage, tobacco product, cosmetic, textile, paper, packaging, sample of air or water). This International Standard can also be useful in studies of human cognition and behaviour. Some applications of sensory profiling are as follows: - to develop or change a product; - to define a product, production standard, or trading standard in terms of its sensory attributes; - to define a reference "fresh" product for shelf-life testing; - to study and improve shelf-life of a product; - to compare a product with a reference product or with other similar products on the market or under development; - to map a product's perceived attributes for the purpose of relating them to factors such as instrumental, chemical or physical properties, and/or to consumer acceptability; - to characterize by type and intensity the off-odours or off-tastes in a sample (e.g. in pollution studies).
- Standard41 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard41 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard45 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Standard45 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Standard2 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard2 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard2 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Standard2 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
ISO 16779:2015 specifies methods for the determination and verification of the shelf life of foodstuffs by means of sensory tests. Sensory characteristics to be evaluated are changes in appearance, odour, flavour, taste, trigeminal sensation, and texture during assumed preservation periods. It is intended to support the development of individual approaches. ISO 16779:2015 does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this International Standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. NOTE For the purposes of calculating the shelf life, before microbiological, chemical and physical investigation results are used in addition to sensory testing.
- Standard7 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard8 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
2012-10-31 GVN: Draft for // ENQ available at ISO/CS (see notification in dataservice from 2012-10-31)
- Amendment7 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
ISO 11136:2014 describes approaches for measuring, within a controlled area, the degree to which consumers like or relatively like products. It uses tests based on collecting consumers' responses to questions, generally on paper or via a keyboard or a touch screen. Tests of a behavioural nature (such as recording quantities consumed ad libitum by the consumers) do not fall within the scope of ISO 11136:2014.
- Standard44 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard44 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard45 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
- Standard50 pagesRussian languagesale 15% off
This International Standard provides general guidance for the design of test rooms intended for the sensory analysis of products. It describes the requirements to set up a test room comprising a testing area, a preparation area, and an office, specifying those that are essential or those that are merely desirable. This International Standard is not specific for any product or test type. NOTE The test space can be similar for food and non-food products that are evaluated using sensory methods. However, the test rooms might need to be adapted for each specialized use. Modifications to the design are often needed for specific products and for specific types of testing. This is particularly true if the test rooms are to be used for the evaluation of non-food products. Although many of the general principles are similar, this International Standard does not address test facilities for the specialized examination of products in inspection or in-plant quality-control applications.
- Amendment7 pagesEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day
- Standard1 pageEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard1 pageFrench languagesale 15% off
- Standard1 pageEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard1 pageFrench languagesale 15% off
- Standard10 pagesRussian languagesale 15% off
This International Standard specifies a set of objective tests for familiarizing assessors with sensory analysis. The test methods specified can be useful to:
a) teach assessors to recognize tastes and to distinguish between them (see Clause 8);
b) teach assessors to know and to familiarize different types of threshold tests (see Clause 9);
c) make assessors aware of their own sensitivity of taste;
d) enable test supervisors to carry out a preliminary categorization of assessors.
The methods can also be used as a periodic monitor of the sensitivity of taste of assessors who are already members of sensory analysis panels.
- Standard1 pageEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard1 pageFrench languagesale 15% off
- Corrigendum1 pageEnglish languagesale 10% offe-Library read for1 day