Food Business News - March 12, 2013 - 12

Switching sensory test protocol beneﬁts General Mills
ROSEMONT, ILL. — Switching sensory
test systems has allowed General Mills,
Inc. to improve testing accuracy and save
on costs in product reformulation, said
John Cowden, senior sensory scientist
for the Minneapolis-based company. He
spoke Feb. 27 at the Institute of Food
Technologists’ Wellness 13 conference.
For years General Mills used triangle
tests to determine whether reformulated
products, such as those with reduced fat
or sugar, had similar sensory qualities to
the previous products. The triangle test
involves people sampling three products,
such as three cookies, and giving their
opinion on which one is different from the
other two, such as in texture or flavor.
Now, General Mills has switched to a
tetrad sensory test that involves four samples. After tasting all the samples, people
pair them, such as saying cookie No. 1 and
cookie No. 3 taste the same while cookie
No. 2 and cookie No. 4 taste the same.
The change came after General Mills tried
both triangle tests and tetrad tests on nine
products: three cereals, two baked foods,

two dairy items and two spicy meals.
Switching allowed the company to avoid
two types of sampling errors, Mr. Cowden
said. Type I sensory testing errors happen
when companies wrongly conclude that
a difference exists in a product. For example, a company through sensory testing
may conclude a reduced sugar ice cream is
less sweet than the conventional ice cream
when the actual sweetness is similar. Type
I errors may send product developers back
to reformulating when no reformulation is
necessary, said Mr. Cowden.
Type II sensory testing errors happen
when companies wrongly conclude no
difference exists in products. For example, sensory testing may show a reduced
sugar ice cream has similar sweetness to
the conventional ice cream when there
is actually a significant difference in
sweetness.
Besides reducing type I and type II
errors, the tetrad system requires fewer
sensory panelists, fewer samples to make
and less testing time when compared to
the triangle system, Mr. Cowden said.

The tetrad system also is less complex
for the laboratory to execute even though
the tetrad system has four samples and
the triangle system has three samples.
Benoit Rousseau, Ph.D., senior vicepresident of The Institute of Perception,
Richmond, Va., also spoke at the Feb. 27
session on sensory testing in reformulation. He said companies should consider
five factors in sensory testing. The first
two are type I and type II errors.
For the third factor, companies need
to accurately identify how much of a difference exists between the reformulated
product and the previous product. No
two products will be equal, but the size
of difference — say the sweetness in ice
cream — may not be enough to affect
consumer acceptability.
Sample size is the fourth factor. A
greater sample size will provide greater
statistical power and reduce the chance
of errors. In other words, a sample size
of 100 people is better than a sample size
of 10 people. The testing protocol, such
as triangle or tetrad, is the fifth factor. FBN

Proﬁtable sodium reduction strategies remain elusive

ROSEMONT, ILL. — Recommendations
to reduce the sodium content in food and
beverage products continue, and the industry is responding. The challenge facing product formulators is developing
strategies that are acceptable to consumers and make sense from a cost perspective, according to two speakers during a
session at the Institute of Food Technologists’ Wellness 13 conference on Feb. 28.

FOODBUSINESS NEWS

While the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, the World Health Organization and
the American Heart Association have
recommended maximum limits for daily
sodium consumption, the industry still
faces headwinds when lowering sodium
levels, said Rachel Cheatham, Ph.D.,
vice-president of nutrition communications for Weber Shandwick, Chicago.
She cited International Food Information Council survey statistics that show
nearly 4 in 10 Americans believe the taste
of low sodium products is inferior. For
a hopeful sign in the same survey, she
said nearly two-thirds of Americans said
they believe their taste preferences may
change over time as the amount of salt in
products is reduced.
In the same session, Robert Sobel,
Ph.D., director of technology and innovation at FONA International, Geneva, Ill.,
listed four strategies in enhancing sodium taste, which decreases the amount
of sodium needed to achieve a desired
flavor in products.
Using smaller salt microspheres may
make more sodium available in the
mouth for tasting before it is swallowed,
he said. Normally, only about a quarter
of salt is perceived in the mouth and the

rest is swallowed. The smaller salt microspheres create a greater surface area
and dissolve faster, which means they
more readily interact with the tongue
and consumers experience a greater salt
perception in the mouth since less salt is
swallowed. Salt reductions of up to 50%
in products have been achieved with
smaller salt microspheres, he said.
Aromas are another strategy to enhance sodium perception, Dr. Sobel said.
Possible ingredient additions may be
sweet, sour or salty from an aroma perspective. The aroma of vanilla extracts
has been shown to enhance salt perception, as have sardine and cheese extract
aromas when used at low levels.
For a third strategy, congruent flavors
from certain salt-congruent compounds
may enhance salt perception. Finally,
umami compounds such as Parmesan,
soy sauce, green tea and tomatoes may
provide salt enhancement.
Dr. Sobel said all four strategies will
cost more than simply adding salt to products. Food and beverage companies may
pay as little as 10c a lb for salt, he said.
“Salt is very, very cheap,” Dr. Sobel
said. “You can’t really touch any of these
technologies for 10c a lb.” FBN

March 12, 2013

Food Business News - March 12, 2013

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Food Business News - March 12, 2013