phenomenon · claim-type · cross-domain-transfer · mechanism · claim-relation · replication-status · limitation — grounded in the full text| phenomenon | sensory discrimination testing— “The triangle test and the 2-AFC test or paired comparison are commonly used discrimination tests.” | |
| claim-type | method— “The purpose of this study was to provide a direct comparison of a self-defined 2-AFC test to the non-directional triangle procedure.” | |
| method — evidence | — “Over 600 tests were conducted in both simple and complex food and beverage systems.” | |
| transfer | from psychophysics / signal detection theory (Thurstonian scaling): d-prime as the measure of sensory difference, so that food-discrimination tests are scored on a psychophysical sensitivity scale rather than by proportion correct— “However, in some cases the SD-2- AFC produced lower d-prime values indicating lower absolute levels of sensory differentiation.” | transfers[0] |
| mechanism | choosing an irrelevant attribute in the self-defined test adds irrelevant variation, which degrades the panellist's later discrimination— “As shown by the group analysis, choosing a ‘‘wrong” dimension, i.e. attending to some aspect of irrelevant variation, will degrade the subject’s performance.” | mechanisms[0] |
| mechanism | wider discriminal dispersion in some subjects makes rank-order reversals (inversions) of the two products more likely, so their responses oppose the majority— “If the discriminal dispersions are greater for some subjects than others, the possibility of such reversals becomes more likely and thus the choice of a response that is at odds with the ‘‘correct” or majority opinion.” | mechanisms[1] |
| mechanism | the triangle test requires three implied paired comparisons, whose combined variability lowers its power relative to a directional AFC test— “Part of the difficulty with the triangle procedure arises from the inherent variability of the three implied paired comparisons that must be performed in order to select the ‘‘odd” or outlying (most different) sample.” | mechanisms[2] |
| builds-on | Pfaffmann (1953)— “Such a testing procedure was mentioned by Pfaffmann in 1953 who discussed both the benefits of incidental warm-up in repeated testing and the possibility of using a personally defined attribute in a two-sample choice test.” | claim_relations[0] |
| extends | O'Mahony and Goldstein (1986); O'Mahony et al. (1988) warmed-up paired comparison— “This statement thus foreshadowed the warmed-up paired comparison method of O’Mahony and Goldstein (1986) and O’Mahony et al. (1988) as well as the SD-2-AFC used here.” | claim_relations[1] |
| contradicts | Angulo et al. (2007)— “However, examination of the d-prime values shows that the increase in d-prime was not significant (.52–.98 for N = 9, z = 0.56).” | claim_relations[2] |
| sense | discrimination - as STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE: how reliably a method returns a significant result, on which the SD-AFC beats the triangle— “Together these results support the suitability of the SD-AFC as an alternative to the triangle test in terms of statistical differentiation.” | senses[0] |
| sense | discrimination - as ABSOLUTE SENSORY DISTANCE: the Thurstonian d-prime, on which the same SD-AFC comes out LOWER than the triangle for the same products— “However, when comparing the d-prime values, a different pattern emerged. For the soup, the SD-AFC had a lower d-prime than the triangle (z = 2.04, p < .05) and for the tea, it had a lower d-prime than the triangle with preview” | senses[1] |
| sense | preview - a single presentation of both test stimuli before testing, explicitly contrasted with the more extensive warm-up— “A preview sample was defined as a presentation of both test stimuli before beginning the actual testing procedure.” | senses[2] |
| sense | d-prime - stated here as the Thurstonian measure of sensory difference, and used precisely because it is claimed to allow comparison ACROSS methods— “Thurstonian distance estimates (d-prime values) allow direct comparisons across different methods for the degree of sensory difference that is perceived.” | senses[3] |
| sense | inversion - a subject using a relevant attribute but ranking the two products the wrong way round, which the paper distinguishes from choosing an irrelevant attribute— “Another problem arises when the subject attends to a relevant dimension, but has difficulty rank ordering the stimuli correctly, which we have termed here ‘‘inversion” in our data.” | senses[4] |
| control | subjects were randomly assigned across the five discrimination procedures for simple stimuli — held — rules out that a difference between procedures is a difference between the subjects who happened to use each— “Subjects testing simple stimuli were randomly assigned to one of the following five procedures: triangle, triangle with preview, 2-AFC, 2-AFC with preview, or self-defined 2-AFC (SD-2-AFC).” | controls[0] |
| edge | sensory difference —operationalised-as→ d-prime— “An increase in d-prime, the Thurstonian measure of sensory difference” | concept_edges[0] |
| edge | preview samples —renamed-across-fields→ familiarization samples— “Rousseau, Rogeaux, and O’Mahony (1999) showed that preview samples (called familiarization samples) function differently than full warm-up procedures.” | concept_edges[1] |
| outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation) | control — held | controls[0] |
| for which use | limitation — the comparison between the two test procedures: RE-TASTING WAS ALLOWED DURING THE PREVIEW PHASE, BUT WAS NOT RECORDED, so drift toward a fuller tasting cannot be excluded— “Re-tasting was allowed during the preview phase, but was not recorded.” | limitations[0] |
| for which use | limitation — the between-food variation: SOME OF THE VARIATION AMONG THE DIFFERENT FOODS WAS UNDOUBTEDLY CONTRIBUTED BY DIFFERENCES AMONG JUDGES | limitations[1] |
| for which use | limitation — independence across product systems: NO ATTEMPT WAS MADE TO EXCLUDE EARLIER PARTICIPANTS FROM A SUBSEQUENT FOOD PRODUCT TEST, ALTHOUGH THEY WERE OF COURSE RESTRICTED TO PARTICIPATION IN ONLY ONE CONDITION PER PRODUCT | limitations[2] |
| for which use | limitation — choosing a discrimination test on statistical power: the paper reports the SD-AFC as statistically superior to the triangle while returning lower Thurstonian d-prime values for the same products | limitations[3] |
| for which use | limitation — any d-prime of zero in this paper's subgroup table: it may be an assigned floor rather than a measured value, since below-chance groups were set to zero for the comparison Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[4] |
| for which use | limitation — the typical/atypical split as a measure of attending to the right attribute: the groups were defined by what a plurality of subjects said, and all other subjects were categorised as atypical Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[5] |
| for which use | limitation — comparing discrimination results across product systems: the authors state the variation was partly due to differences among judges and to who shows up on a given day Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[6] |
| for which use | limitation — the value of an inspection or preview phase in discrimination testing: the paper states this remains an open question and may depend on the product Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[7] |
| for which use | limitation — citing Rousseau et al. (1999) for a familiarization effect: this paper reports that none of the individual comparisons were significant and that no test of the combined claim was reported Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[8] |
| replication | untested | |
| limitation | Re-tasting during the preview was permitted but not recorded, so the procedure may have drifted toward a full warm-up protocol for some subjects. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[0] |
| limitation | Variation between the food systems may reflect differences between the judges who happened to participate rather than the methods. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[1] |
| limitation | Participants were not excluded from later product tests, so the same people could recur across product systems. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[2] |
| limitation | The two measures of the same thing disagree in direction: the method with the statistical advantage returns the LOWER estimate of absolute sensory difference, and the paper calls this paradoxical. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[3] |
| limitation | Below-chance performance was not recorded as below chance: those groups were assigned a d-prime of zero so that the comparison could be run. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[4] |
| limitation | What counts as the CORRECT attribute is set by the majority of subjects, not by the manipulation, and a subject can be scored as atypical for disagreeing with the plurality. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[5] |
| limitation | Who turns up decides part of the result, and the authors say so, crediting a reviewer. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[6] |
| limitation | The central question the paper set out to inform is left open. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[7] |
| limitation | A result relied on in this literature is reported as untested: an overall difference was claimed by taking three non-significant comparisons together, with no test of that claim reported. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[8] |
finding · quantity · variable · definition · key-term — grounded in the full text| finding | The three AFC formats, including the new self-defined 2-AFC, detected the sensory difference more reliably than the triangle test did. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[0] |
| finding | Poorer discrimination in the self-defined 2-AFC went with panellists naming the wrong critical attribute or judging the difference in the reverse direction during the inspection phase. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[1] |
| finding | Letting panellists preview both samples before a triangle or 2-AFC test brought no measurable benefit. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[2] |
| finding | Although statistically more powerful, the self-defined 2-AFC produced smaller Thurstonian d-prime values than the triangle test, i.e. less absolute sensory differentiation. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[3] |
| finding | Panellists who chose the same attribute as the majority reached higher d-prime values than those who chose an atypical attribute, significantly so for the fruit drink. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[4] |
| finding | Panellists who reversed the majority direction of the attribute (calling the sweeter sample less sweet) discriminated worse than typical non-inverted panellists in the fruit drink and tea. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[5] |
| finding | The attribute a panellist stated during the preview predicted whether that panellist would answer correctly on later trials. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[6] |
| finding | Self-reported confidence after a preview barely predicted subsequent discrimination performance. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[7] |
| finding | For all 2-AFC tests, presenting the weaker sample before the stronger gave more correct answers than the reverse order. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[8] |
| quantity | Over 600 — number of individual discrimination tests run across the four food systems Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[0] |
| quantity | 30 to 40 — number of subjects used per testing condition, chosen to match industrial discrimination panels Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[1] |
| quantity | z = 2.04, p < .05 — size of the deficit in d-prime for the self-defined 2-AFC relative to the triangle in the soup system Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[2] |
| quantity | v2 = 13.81, p < .05 — chi-squared advantage of the self-defined 2-AFC over the triangle in correct responses for the tea Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[3] |
| quantity | 9% or 10% (w/v) — the sucrose levels distinguishing the two fruit-drink samples Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[4] |
| quantity | 3.5 g/L — monosodium glutamate added to the modified vegetable broth Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[5] |
| quantity | over 600 — discrimination tests conducted across the four food and beverage systems Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[6] |
| variable | total number correct (dependent) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[4] |
| variable | d-prime (dependent) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[5] |
| variable | attribute selected by subjects (moderator) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[6] |
| variable | randomized order of presentation (control) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[10] |
| definition | self-defined 2-AFC (SD-2-AFC) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[0] |
| definition | preview sample Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[1] |
| definition | paradox of the discriminatory nondiscriminators Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[4] |
| concept | d-prime Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[0] |
| concept | sensory difference Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[1] |
| concept | preview samples Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[2] |
| concept | familiarization samples Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[3] |
| concept | triangle test Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[4] |
| concept | inversion Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[5] |
| chi-squared v2 | as written: v2 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[0] |
| z-test z | as written: z-Test comparisons Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[1] |
| beta-binomial model | as written: The beta binomial model Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[2] |
| effect size (Thurstonian d-prime) d0 | as written: d-prime Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[3] |
| variance | as written: Variances of the d-prime values Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[4] |
| t-test t | as written: t-tests Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[5] |
| ANOVA | as written: analysis of variance Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[6] |
| Tukey post hoc test | as written: Tukey tests Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[7] |
| binomial test p | as written: binomial p-values Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[8] |
When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote for that row; on this page it is withheld with the article, and the article is at its publisher. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.
Tag layer © the Meta-Tagging Project, CC BY 4.0. The paper text is © its authors/publisher
and is linked, not reproduced. Excerpts shown are short quotations for identification and verification.
· back to index
· concepts · authors
· עברית
© 2026 Shir Sivroni · ORCID 0009-0000-2597-2824