Search

The purpose of this study was to understand the role of "dominance" definitions in the results of TDS applied to consumers. This study compared two temporal dominance of sensations (TDS) approaches - TDS-I - that attracts the most attention and TDS-II - most intense/strongest sensation - in the context of evaluating artisanal Minas cheeses from the Serra da Canastra and chocolate with different cocoa concentrations samples. TDS curves were constructed and a trajectory-based principal component analysis (PCA) was performed dominance rates at ten equally spaced time points. Additionally, difference curves, multiple factor analysis (MFA) and regression vector coefficient (RV coefficient) were performed to compare the two approaches. The findings showed that the two approaches produced similar results, suggesting that consumers interpret the terms dominant and intense in a similar way during TDS evaluations, the results were even closer at the chocolate study than at the cheese study. However, in both approaches were observed low dominance rates and differences between the sensation perception time, mainly in the evaluation of cheese flavor. This variability may be attributed to the complexity of the cheese's flavor and the varied interpretations of dominance among evaluators. Despite these differences, the approaches showed similar characterizations across the same samples, demonstrating high reproducibility and a strong ability to differentiate between samples. This study demonstrates that the choice between the terms dominant (which captures more attention) or intense (stronger) to guide consumers in performing the sensory test does not significantly influence the results. Consequently, it is possible to adopt greater freedom and flexibility in the terminology used to instruct participants in conducting the test., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)