4.7 Article

Comparison of two methods to explore consumer preferences for cottage cheese

Journal

JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE
Volume 92, Issue 12, Pages 5883-5897

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.3168/jds.2009-2389

Keywords

cottage cheese; preference mapping; qualitative multivariate analysis; home usage test

Funding

  1. Dairy Management, Inc.

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In the past 2 decades, total sales of cottage cheese have declined 17% despite increases in sales for low-fat cottage cheese. There are no recent published studies investigating consumer preferences for cottage cheese. This study was conducted to identify and define sensory characteristics of commercial cottage cheese and to compare 2 approaches for characterizing consumer preferences: traditional preference mapping and a new composite qualitative approach, qualitative multivariate analysis (QMA). A sensory language was identified to document the sensory properties (visual, flavor, and texture) of cottage cheeses. Twenty-six commercial cottage cheeses with variable fat contents (4, 2, 1, and 0% fat) were evaluated by trained panelists using the sensory language. Eight representative cottage cheeses were selected for consumer acceptance testing (n = 110) and QMA with consumer home usage testing (n = 12), followed by internal and external preference mapping to identify key drivers. Principal component analysis of descriptive data indicated that cottage cheeses were primarily differentiated by cooked, milkfat, diacetyl, and acetaldehyde flavors and salty taste, and by firmness, smoothness, tackiness, curd size, and adhesiveness texture attributes. Similar drivers of liking (diacetyl and milkfat flavors, smooth texture, and mouthcoating) were identified by both consumer research techniques. However, the QMA technique identified controversial distinctions among the cottage cheeses and the influence of brand and pricing. These results can be used by processors to promote cottage cheese sales.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available