Department of Food, Bioprocessing and Nutrition Sciences, Southeast Dairy Foods Research Center, North Carolina State University, Raleigh 27695.
Nouveau Centric Co. Ltd., Bangkok 10250, Thailand.
J Dairy Sci. 2020 Apr;103(4):3107-3124. doi: 10.3168/jds.2019-17260. Epub 2020 Feb 20.
Ready-to-mix (RTM) whey protein beverages are an expanding product category, and sensory properties strongly affect consumer acceptance and purchase intent. Because consumers themselves prepare RTM whey protein beverages, understanding possible gaps between central location test (CLT) and home usage test (HUT) results is critical. The objectives of this study were to compare results obtained from a CLT and a HUT and to identify the drivers of liking and disliking vanilla-flavored RTM whey protein beverages. Fourteen commercial vanilla-flavored RTM whey protein beverages were rehydrated with spring water at 15% solids (wt/vol) and evaluated by a trained panel (n = 8). Ten representative products were selected for consumer testing. Rehydrated beverages were subsequently evaluated by protein beverage consumers (n = 160) in a CLT. Nine representative products were selected for the HUT. Consumers prepared and evaluated individual beverages over 3 consecutive weeks, trying 3 samples each week. Overall liking and other attributes were scored by consumers in both tests. Data were evaluated by univariate and multivariate statistical analyses. Overall liking scores from the HUT were higher than scores from the CLT. The products with the highest and lowest overall liking scores were consistent between the CLT and HUT. More differences were observed among beverages by CLT compared with HUT when liking was averaged across all consumers. Both methods identified 2 distinct consumer clusters. Fruity flavor and sweet taste were drivers of liking, whereas cardboard flavor and bitter taste were drivers of disliking in both methods. The HUT exclusively identified thickness (viscosity) as a driver of liking and astringency as a driver of disliking. These results suggest that a CLT can be used to differentiate consumer acceptance among vanilla-flavored RTM whey protein beverages. A HUT should be used to provide more intensive insights for mouthfeel and mixing experience-related attributes.
即饮（RTM）乳清蛋白饮料是一个不断扩大的产品类别，其感官特性强烈影响消费者的接受度和购买意愿。由于消费者自己准备 RTM 乳清蛋白饮料，因此了解中心位置测试（CLT）和家庭使用测试（HUT）结果之间可能存在的差距至关重要。本研究的目的是比较 CLT 和 HUT 的结果，并确定香草味 RTM 乳清蛋白饮料的喜好和不喜好的驱动因素。14 种商业香草味 RTM 乳清蛋白饮料用泉水在 15%的固含量（wt/vol）下重新水化，并由经过培训的小组（n=8）进行评估。选择了 10 种代表性产品进行消费者测试。随后，在 CLT 中，让蛋白饮料消费者（n=160）对重新水化的饮料进行评估。选择了 9 种代表性产品进行 HUT。消费者在连续 3 周内准备和评估个别饮料，每周尝试 3 个样本。在两个测试中，消费者都对整体喜好和其他属性进行了评分。通过单变量和多变量统计分析评估数据。HUT 的整体喜好评分高于 CLT 的评分。CLT 和 HUT 中，整体喜好评分最高和最低的产品是一致的。当所有消费者的喜好评分平均时，通过 CLT 观察到的饮料之间的差异比 HUT 观察到的更多。两种方法都确定了 2 个不同的消费者群体。水果味和甜味是喜好的驱动因素，而纸板味和苦味是两种方法中不喜好的驱动因素。HUT 仅将厚度（粘度）确定为喜好的驱动因素，将涩味确定为不喜好的驱动因素。这些结果表明，CLT 可用于区分香草味 RTM 乳清蛋白饮料的消费者接受度。HUT 应用于提供与口感和混合体验相关的属性的更深入的见解。
