Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Sensory Evaluation of Food pp 203–225Cite as

Context Effects and Biases in Sensory Judgment

  • Chapter

Part of the book series: Food Science Text Series ((FSTS))

Abstract

Human judgments about a sensation or a product are strongly influenced by items that surround the item of interest, either in space or in time. This chapter shows how judgments can change as a function of the context within which a product is evaluated. Various contextual effects and biases are described and categorized. Some solutions and courses of action to minimize these biases are presented.

By such general principles of action as these everything looked at, felt, smelt or heard comes to be located in a more or less definite position relatively to other collateral things either actually presented or only imagined as possibly there.

— James (1913, p. 342)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Amerine, M. A., Pangborn, R. M. and Roessler, E. B. 1965. Principles of Sensory Evaluation of Food. Academic, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, N. 1974. Algebraic models in perception. In: E. C. Carterette and M. P. Friedman (eds.), Handbook of Perception. II. Psychophysical Judgment and Measurement. Academic, New York, pp. 215–298.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Baird, J. C. and Noma, E. 1978. Fundamentals of Scaling and Psychophysics. Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beebe-Center, J. G. 1932. The Psychology of Pleasantness and Unpleasantness. Russell & Russell, New York.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bingham, A. F., Birch, G. G., de Graaf, C., Behan, J. M. and Perring, K. D. 1990. Sensory studies with sucrose maltol mixtures. Chemical Senses, 15, 447–456.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Birnbaum, M. H. 1982. Problems with so called “direct” scaling. In: J. T. Kuznicki, A. F. Rutkiewic and R. A. Johnson (eds.), Problems and Approaches to Measuring Hedonics (ASTM STP 773). American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, pp. 34–48.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bonnans, S. and Noble, A. C. 1993. Effects of sweetener type and of sweetener and acid levels on temporal perception of sweetness, sourness and fruitiness. Chemical Senses, 18, 273–283.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Boring, E. G. 1942. Sensation and Perception in the History of Experimental Psychology. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cardello, A. V. and Sawyer, F. M. 1992. Effects of disconfirmed consumer expectations on food acceptability. Journal of Sensory Studies, 7, 253–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardello, A. V., Lawless, H. T. and Schutz, H. G. 2008. Effects of extreme anchors and interior label spacing on labeled magnitude scales. Food Quality and Preference, 21, 323–334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, C. C. and Lawless, H. T. 1994. Limiting response alternatives in time–intensity scaling: An examination of the halo-dumping effect. Chemical Senses, 19, 583–594.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, J. and Lawless, H. T. 2001. Context effects and reference standards with magnitude estimation and the labeled magnitude scale. Journal of Sensory Studies, 16, 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diehl, R. L., Elman, J. L. and McCusker, S. B. 1978. Contrast effects on stop consonant identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 4, 599–609.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dijksterhuis, G. 1993. Principal component analysis of time–intensity bitterness curves. Journal of Sensory Studies, 8, 317–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dolese, M., Zellner, D., Vasserman, M. and Parker, S. 2005. Categorization affects hedonic contrast in the visual arts. Bulletin of Psychology and the Arts, 5, 21–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eimas, P. D. and Corbit, J. D. 1973. Selective adaptation of linguistic feature detectors. Cognitive Psychology, 4, 99–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • El Gharby, A. 1995. Effect of Nonsensory Information on Sensory Judgments of No-Fat and Low-Fat Foods: Influences of Attitude, Belief, Eating Restraint and Label Information. M.Sc. Thesis, Cornell University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eng, E. W. 1948. An Experimental Study of the Reliabilities of Rating Scale for Food Preference Discrimination. M. S. Thesis, Northwestern University, and US Army Quartermaster Food and Container Institute, Report # 11–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engen, T. and Levy, N. 1958. The influence of context on constant-sum loudness judgments. American Journal of Psychology, 71, 731–736.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Frank, R. A. and Byram, J. 1988. Taste–smell interactions are tastant and odorant dependent. Chemical Senses, 13, 445.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Frank, R. A., van der Klaauw, N. J. and Schifferstein, H. N. J. 1993. Both perceptual and conceptual factors influence taste–odor and taste–taste interactions. Perception & Psychophysics, 54, 343–354.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gay, C. and Mead, R. 1992 A statistical appraisal of the problem of sensory measurement. Journal of Sensory Studies, 7, 205–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giovanni, M. E. and Pangborn, R. M. 1983. Measurement of taste intensity and degree of liking of beverages by graphic scaling and magnitude estimation. Journal of Food Science, 48, 1175–1182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, B. G., Dalton, P., Cowart, B., Shaffer, G., Rankin, K. and Higgins, J. 1996. Evaluating the ‘labeled magnitude scale’ for measuring sensations of taste and smell. Chemical Senses, 21, 323–334.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hanson, H. L., Davis, J. G., Campbell, A. A., Anderson, J. H. and Lineweaver, H. 1955. Sensory test methods II. Effect of previous tests on consumer response to foods. Food Technology, 9, 56–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helson, H. H. 1964. Adaptation-Level Theory. Harper & Rowe, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • James, W. 1913. Psychology. Henry Holt and Company, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, J. and Vickers, Z. 1987. Avoiding the centering bias or range effect when determining an optimum level of sweetness in lemonade. Journal of Sensory Studies, 2, 283–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, F. N. and Marcus, M. J. 1961. The subject effect in judgments of subjective magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 40–44.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, F. N. and Woskow, M. J. 1966. Some effects of context on the slope in magnitude estimation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71, 177–180.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kamenetzky, J. 1959. Contrast and convergence effects in ratings of foods. Journal of Applied Psychology, 43(1), 47–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kofes, J., Naqvi, S., Cece, A. and Yeh, M. 2009. Understanding Presentation Order Effects and Ways to Control Them in Consumer Testing. Paper presented at the 8th Pangborn Sensory Science Symposium, Florence, Italy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson-Powers, N. and Pangborn, R. M. 1978. Descriptive analysis of the sensory properties of beverages and gelatins containing sucrose or synthetic sweeteners. Journal of Food Science, 43, 47–51.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lawless, H. T. 1983. Contextual effect in category ratings. Journal of Testing and Evaluation, 11, 346–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawless, H. T. 1994. Contextual and Measurement Aspects of Acceptability. Final Report #TCN 94178, US Army Research Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawless, H. T. and Malone, G. J. 1986a. A comparison of scaling methods: Sensitivity, replicates and relative measurement. Journal of Sensory Studies, 1, 155–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawless, H. T. and Malone, J. G. 1986b. The discriminative efficiency of common scaling methods. Journal of Sensory Studies, 1, 85–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawless, H. T., Glatter, S. and Hohn, C. 1991. Context dependent changes in the perception of odor quality. Chemical Senses, 16, 349–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawless, H. T., Horne. J. and Speirs, W. 2000. Contrast and range effects for category, magnitude and labeled magnitude scales. Chemical Senses, 25, 85–92.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lawless, H. T., Popper, R. and Kroll, B. J. 2010a. Comparison of the labeled affective magnitude (LAM) scale, an 11-point category scale and the traditional nine-point Hedonic scale. Food Quality and Preference, 21, 4–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawless, H. T., Sinopoli, D. and Chapman, K. W. 2010b. A comparison of the labeled affective magnitude scale and the nine point hedonic scale and examination of categorical behavior. Journal of Sensory Studies, 25, S1, 54–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, H.-S., Kim, K.-O. and O’Mahony, M. 2001. How do the signal detection indices react to frequency context bias for intensity scaling? Journal of Sensory Studies, 16, 33–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marks, L. E. 1994. Recalibrating the auditory system: The perception of loudness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 20, 382–396.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mattes, R. D. and Lawless, H. T. 1985. An adjustment error in optimization of taste intensity. Appetite, 6, 103–114.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McBride, R. L. 1982. Range bias in sensory evaluation. Journal of Food Technology, 17, 405–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McBride, R. L. and Anderson, N. H. 1990. Integration psychophysics. In R. L. McBride and H. J. H. MacFie (eds.), Psychological Basis of Sensory Evaluation. Elsevier Applied Science, London, pp. 93–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • McBurney, D. H. 1966. Magnitude estimation of the taste of sodium chloride after adaptation to sodium chloride. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 72, 869–873.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGowan, B. A. and Lee, S.-Y. 2006. Comparison of methods to analyze time–intensity curves in a corn zein chewing gum study. Food Quality and Preference, 17, 296–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mead, R. and Gay, C. 1995. Sequential design of sensory trials. Food Quality and Preference, 6, 271–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meilgaard, M., Civille, G. V. and Carr, B. T. 2006. Sensory Evaluation Techniques, Third Edition. CRC, Boca Raton, FL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mellers, B. A. and Birnbaum, M. H. 1982. Loci of contextual effects in judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 4, 582–601.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mellers, B. A. and Birnbaum, M. H. 1983. Contextual effects in social judgment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 157–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muñoz, A. M. and Civille, G. V. 1998. Universal, product and attribute specific scaling and the development of common lexicons in descriptive analysis. Journal of Sensory Studies, 13, 57–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, C. 1982. Effects of exposure and context on hedonics of olfactory-taste mixtures. In: J. T. Kuznicki, R. A. Johnson and A. F. Rutkeiwic (eds.), Selected Sensory Methods: Problems and Applications to Measuring Hedonics. American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, pp. 60–70.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, C. and Cain, W. S. 1980. Taste and olfaction: Independence vs. interaction. Physiology and Behavior, 24, 601–605.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Olabi, A. and Lawless, H. T. 2008. Persistence of context effects with training and reference standards. Journal of Food Science, 73, S185–S189.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Parducci, A. 1965. Category judgment: A range-frequency model. Psychological Review, 72, 407–418.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Parducci, A. 1974. Contextual effects: A range-frequency analysis. In: E. C. Carterette and M. P. Friedman (eds.), Handbook of Perception. II. Psychophysical Judgment and Measurement. Academic, New York, pp. 127–141.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Parducci, A. and Perrett, L. F. 1971. Category rating scales: Effects of relative spacing and frequency of stimulus values. Journal of Experimental Psychology (Monograph), 89(2), 427–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parducci, A., Knobel, S. and Thomas, C. 1976. Independent context for category ratings: A range-frequency analysis. Perception & Psychophysics, 20, 360–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, S., Murphy, D. R. and Schneider, B. A. 2002. Top-down gain control in the auditory system: Evidence from identification and discrimination experiments. Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 598–615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poulton, E. C. 1989. Bias in Quantifying Judgments. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rankin, K. M. and Marks, L. E. 1991. Differential context effects in taste perception. Chemical Senses, 16, 617–629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riskey, D. R. 1982. Effects of context and interstimulus procedures in judgments of saltiness and pleasantness. In: J. T. Kuznicki, R. A. Johnson and A. F. Rutkeiwic (eds.), Selected Sensory Methods: Problems and Applications to Measuring Hedonics. American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, pp. 71–83.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Riskey, D. R., Parducci, A. and Beauchamp, G. K. 1979. Effects of context in judgments of sweetness and pleasantness. Perception & Psychophysics, 26, 171–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandusky, A. and Parducci, A. 1965. Pleasantness of odors as a function of the immediate stimulus context. Psychonomic Science, 3, 321–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarris, V. 1967.Adaptation-level theory: Two critical experiments on Helson’s weighted-average model. American Journal of Psychology, 80, 331–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarris, V. and Parducci, A. 1978. Multiple anchoring of category rating scales. Perception & Psychophysics, 24, 35–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schifferstein, H. J. N. 1995. Contextual shifts in hedonic judgment. Journal of Sensory Studies, 10, 381–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schifferstein, H. J. N. 1996. Cognitive factors affecting taste intensity judgments. Food Quality and Preference, 7, 167–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schifferstein, H. N. J. and Frijters, J. E. R. 1992. Contextual and sequential effects on judgments of sweetness intensity. Perception & Psychophysics, 52, 243–255.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schutz, H. G. 1954. Effect of bias on preference in the difference-preference test. In: D. R. Peryam, J. J. Pilgram and M. S. Peterson (eds.), Food Acceptance Testing Methodology. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC, pp. 85–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson, R. J., Prescott, J. and Boakes, R. A. 1995. The acquisition of taste properties by odors. Learning and Motivation, 26, 433–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoer, N. L. 1992. Comparison of Absolute Scaling and Relative-To-Reference Scaling in Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products. Master’s Thesis, Cornell University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teghtsoonian, R. and Teghtsoonian, M. 1978. Range and regression effects in magnitude scaling. Perception & Psychophysics, 24, 305–314.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Thorndike, E. L. 1920. A constant error in psychophysical ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 4, 25–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Klaauw, N. J. and Frank, R. A. 1996. Scaling component intensities of complex stimuli: The influence of response alternatives. Environment International, 22, 21–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vollmecke, T. A. 1987. The Influence of Context on Sweetness and Pleasantness Evaluations of Beverages. Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, L. M. 1979. Stimulus information and sequential dependencies in magnitude estimation and cross-modality matching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 5, 444–459.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, L. M. 1987. Remembrance of sounds past: Memory and psychophysical scaling. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13, 216–227.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zellner, D. A., Allen, D., Henley, M. and Parker, S. 2006. Hedonic contrast and condensation: Good stimuli make mediocre stimuli less good and less different. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 13, 235–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Food Science, Cornell University, Stocking Hall, Room 106, Ithaca, 14853, USA

    Harry T. Lawless

  2. Department of Viticulture and Enology, University of California – Davis, 2003 RMI Sensory Building, 95616, Davis, CA, USA

    Hildegarde Heymann

Authors
  1. Harry T. Lawless
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hildegarde Heymann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lawless, H., Heymann, H. (2010). Context Effects and Biases in Sensory Judgment. In: Sensory Evaluation of Food. Food Science Text Series. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6488-5_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation