• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

对于味觉刺激的享乐判断,其比较时间比强度判断的更长。

Comparison times are longer for hedonic than for intensity judgements of taste stimuli.

作者信息

Veldhuizen Maria G, Vessaz Melina N, Kroeze Jan H A

机构信息

Helmholtz Research Institute, Psychological Laboratory, Taste- and Smell Laboratory, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 2, 3584 CS, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Physiol Behav. 2005 Mar 16;84(3):489-95. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2005.01.018.

DOI:10.1016/j.physbeh.2005.01.018
PMID:15763588
Abstract

Response times of intensity and hedonic comparisons were determined in a within-subjects experimental design. Forced-choice paired comparisons of orange lemonades with various concentrations of added quinine sulfate were made by 48 subjects. Depending on experimental condition, the subjects had to focus either on intensity or on pleasantness and give their responses as fast as possible. The data showed shorter response times for intensity comparisons than for pleasantness comparisons. Although taste processing may be partially serial and partially parallel, the larger part of the response times and the differences between them may be due to cognitive processing.

摘要

在一项被试内实验设计中确定了强度和享乐比较的反应时间。48名受试者对添加了不同浓度硫酸奎宁的橙子柠檬汁进行了强制选择配对比较。根据实验条件,受试者必须专注于强度或愉悦度,并尽快给出他们的反应。数据显示,强度比较的反应时间比愉悦度比较的反应时间短。尽管味觉处理可能部分是串行的,部分是并行的,但反应时间的大部分以及它们之间的差异可能归因于认知处理。

相似文献

1
Comparison times are longer for hedonic than for intensity judgements of taste stimuli.对于味觉刺激的享乐判断,其比较时间比强度判断的更长。
Physiol Behav. 2005 Mar 16;84(3):489-95. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2005.01.018.
2
Taste intensity and hedonic responses to simple beverages in gastrointestinal cancer patients.胃肠道癌症患者对简单饮品的味觉强度和享乐反应。
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2007 Nov;34(5):505-12. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2006.12.013. Epub 2007 Jul 5.
3
Taste perception of sodium chloride in suprathreshold concentration related to essential hypertension.与原发性高血压相关的阈上浓度氯化钠味觉感知
J Hypertens Suppl. 1985 Dec;3(3):S449-52.
4
Dissociating pleasantness and intensity with quinine sulfate/sucrose mixtures in taste.
Chem Senses. 2006 Sep;31(7):649-53. doi: 10.1093/chemse/bjl005. Epub 2006 Jun 22.
5
Human hedonic responses to sweetness: role of taste genetics and anatomy.人类对甜味的享乐反应:味觉遗传学和解剖学的作用。
Physiol Behav. 2007 Jun 8;91(2-3):264-73. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2007.03.011. Epub 2007 Mar 16.
6
Individual differences in the use of pleasantness and palatability ratings.在愉悦度和适口性评分使用方面的个体差异。
Appetite. 1999 Jun;32(3):383-94. doi: 10.1006/appe.1999.0224.
7
A comparison between liking ratings obtained under laboratory and field conditions: the role of choice.实验室条件与现场条件下获得的喜好评分比较:选择的作用。
Appetite. 2005 Feb;44(1):15-22. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2003.06.002. Epub 2004 Dec 2.
8
Comparison of the hedonic general Labeled Magnitude Scale with the hedonic 9-point scale.愉悦感通用标记度量量表与愉悦感 9 点量表的比较。
J Food Sci. 2014 Feb;79(2):S238-45. doi: 10.1111/1750-3841.12342. Epub 2014 Jan 14.
9
Liking and exposure: first, second and tenth time around.喜好与接触:初次、再次及第十次接触。
Physiol Behav. 2006 Aug 30;89(1):47-52. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2006.01.036. Epub 2006 Mar 6.
10
The choice of fat-free vs. regular-fat fudge: the effects of liking for the alternative and the restraint status.无脂软糖与常规脂肪软糖的选择:对替代物的喜好以及克制状态的影响。
Appetite. 2001 Aug;37(1):27-32. doi: 10.1006/appe.2001.0410.

引用本文的文献

1
Coactivation of gustatory and olfactory signals in flavor perception.味觉和嗅觉信号在风味感知中的共激活。
Chem Senses. 2010 Feb;35(2):121-33. doi: 10.1093/chemse/bjp089. Epub 2009 Dec 23.