Taste test are commonly used to determine if participants can detect a difference between products; however, any test is subject to guessing and a perception bias by the participants. The authors use economic incentives to induce subjects to reveal their perceived tasting abilities and minimize their guessing. The method provides three additional pieces of information: (1) a test of the differences between the products, (2) a measure of the subject's perceived discrimination ability, and (3) a measure of the subject's perception bias with respect to his or her true discrimination ability.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamsJ.K., and AdamsP.A., (1961), “Realism of Confidence Judgments,”Psychological Review, 68, 33–45.
2.
BatsellRichard R., and WindYoram (1979), “Product Testing: Current Methods and Need Developments,”Journal of the Market Research Society, 22(2), 115–37.
3.
BellRick, (1993), “Some Unresolved Issues of Control in Consumer Tests: The Effects of Expected Monetary Reward and Hunger,”Journal of Sensory Studies, 8, 329–40.
4.
BuchananBruce S. (1985), “Can You Pass the Comparative Ad Challenge?”Harvard Business Review, (July–August), 106–13.
5.
BuchananBruce S. (1987), “A Model for Repeat Trial Product Tests,”Psychometrika, 52(March), 61–78.
6.
BuchananBruce S., and GivonMoshe (1985), “Measuring Simple Preferences: An Approach to Blind Forced, Choice Product Testing,”Marketing Science, 4(Spring), 93–109.
7.
BuchananBruce S., and HendersonP. (1992), “Assessing the Bias of Preference, Detection and Identification Measures of Discrimination Ability in Product Design,”Marketing Science, 11(Winter), 64–75.
8.
DayRalph L. (1974), “Measuring Preferences,” in Handbook of Marketing Research, FerberRobert ed. New York: McGraw Hill, 3–101–125.
9.
GivonMoshe, (1989), “Taste Tests: Changing the Rules to Improve the Game,”Marketing Science, 8(Summer), 281–90.
10.
HorsnellG., (1977), “Paired Comparison Product Testing When Individual Preferences Are Stochastic. An Alternative Model,”Applied Statistics, 26, 162–72.
11.
KahnemanD., and TverskyA., (1979), “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk,”Econometrica, 41(2), 263–91.
12.
KramerF.M., and JeffreyR.W., and SnellM.K., (1986), “Monetary Incentives to Improve Follow-Up Data Collection,”Psychological Reports, 58, 739–42.
13.
LichtensteinS., and FischhoffB., and PhillipsL.D., (1982), “Calibration of Probabilties: The State of the Art to 1980,” in Judgments Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases, KahnemanD., and SlovicP., and TverskyA., eds. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 306–334.
14.
MorrisonDonald G. (1981), “Triangle Taste Tests: Are the Subjects Who Respond Correctly Lucky or Good?,”Journal of Marketing, 45(Summer), 111–19.
15.
MorrisonDonald G., and BrockwayGeorge (1979), “A Modified Beta Binomial Model with Applications to Multiple Choice and Taste Tests,”Psychometrika, 44(December), 427–42.
16.
MoskowitzHoward R. (1983), Product Testing and Sensory Analysis of Foods, Westport, CT: Food and Nutrition Press, Inc.
17.
OskampS., (1962), “The Relationship of Clinical Experience and Training Methods to Several Criteria of Clinical Prediction,”Psychological Monographs, 76(28: 547).
18.
ThalerR., and JohnsonE., (1990), “Gambling with the House Money and Trying to Break Even: The Effects of Prior Outcomes on Risky Choice,”Management Science, 16(6), 643–60.
