Quality Assessment and Acceptability of Hog Plum Fruit

1
QUALITY ASSESSMENT AND ACCEPTABILITY OF HOG PLUM FRUIT
(Spondias pinnata.) MARMALADE
THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTINGS
Background of the Study
Fruits play an important role in human nutrition. Due to their perishable nature
and seasonal availability, they are typically processed into more stable forms such as
jams, jellies, juices, pickles, and marmalades. (Taylor & Francis,2018). Marmalade is a
jelly-like substance formed from correctly prepared juice and peel, together with sugar,
and is often created from citrus fruit. The principles of jelly making, therefore, apply
also to the preparation of marmalade. Using of citrus peel adds extra nutrition to the
marmalade and reduces the wastage of citrus fruits. (Inam.,et.al, 2013)
Local names for Spondias include alabihod, abihid, lanu, and alambihod. This
blooming plant is a member of the cashew family, which includes 17 species. Because
of its vividly colored skin, it was also known as 'Golden Apples.' This fruit was largely
utilized in cooking as an ingredient in many worldwide cuisines. In the Philippines,
Libas is used to make “Sinigang na Isda” and fresh fish soup, however this type of fruit
is hard to come by.
This plant is commonly found in tropical climate nations such as the Philippines.
Hog plum fruit also known as Libas has an edible and sour flavor which is suits in
cooking dishes., as well as has several health advantages for the body. Because of its
medicinal characteristics, libas has long been employed in treating and preventing a
2
variety of ailments, in addition to culinary applications. It also has antibacterial,
antimicrobial, antiviral, and anti-inflammatory effects. It also includes a lot of
antioxidants, which assist the body fight free radicals, which may be harmful to our
health. It can also help to keep our teeth and bones healthy, reduce our cholesterol
levels, and cure wounds, cuts, burns, and skin problems.
In the literature, hog plum often used as additives in cooking or as medicine;
however, using hog plum in making marmalade was not reported in the literature. Thus,
the researcher aimed to develop a marmalade using hog plum.
Statement of the Problem
The main objective of this study is to develop Hog Plum (Spondias pinnata) fruit
marmalade and conduct a quality evaluation and testing test the product’s acceptability.
Specifically, this study focused on the following research objectives:
1. To develop marmalade rom hog plum fruit with the following treatments:
a) 50% Hog plum fruit and 50% sugar
b) 25% Hog plum fruit and 75% sugar
c) 0% Hog plum fruit and 100% orange and sugar
2. To assess the sensory characteristics of Hog Plum marmalade treatments as
evaluated by panel evaluators in terms of:
a) Color;
b) Aroma;
c) Texture;
d) Flavor;
3
e) Consistency
3. To determine the level of acceptability of Hog Plum Marmalade as evaluated by the
40 respondents from Brgy. Bote.
4. To determine if there are significant differences in the sensory characteristics of
Hog Plum Marmalade as rated by the expert evaluators.
5. To determine if there are significant differences in the level of acceptability of Hog
Plum Marmalade as evaluated by 40 respondents from Brgy. Bote.
Research Hypothesis
- There is no significant difference in the sensory characteristics of hog plum
marmalade as evaluated by the expert evaluators.
- There is no significant difference in the sensory characteristics of hog plum
marmalade as evaluated by the 40 respondents each age group.
- There is no significant difference in the level of acceptability of Hog Plum
Marmalade.
Significance of the Study
This study sought to utilize and recognize a local commodity hog plum fruit to
create a marmalade product which would provide the same qualities as the other well-
known marmalades that exist and to assess the acceptability of this fruit marmalade
being a new product that might be produced in markets through evaluation at Brgy.
Bote. The study would benefit the following:
To the community –This study will enhance the knowledge of the community people
to recognize the use of hog plum fruit in producing new product. Also, to help them to
4
commercialize and in improving the production of new products made with hog plum
fruit.
To the consumer –The consumer will be aware that hog plum fruit can be consumed
by making it as a main ingredient in making new product. This would provide valuable
information for market products with using hog plum fruit as the main ingredient.
To the researcher – This study will help them to improve the products by gathering
other data and thinking new ideas on how to utilize hog plum fruit in making innovated
product or new product as its main ingredient.
Scope and Delimitations
The main purpose of the study is to provide information regarding Hog Plum and
how can It be utilized in making marmalade. This study considers the hog plum as the
main ingredient in making marmalade.
This study will be limited only on the population of Brgy. Bote. Data will be
collected will be done through a taste test and sensory evaluation questionnaires.
The availability of the hog plum fruit affects treatments used in making hog plum
marmalade. The researcher used 3 treatments in conducting the study in assessing the
acceptability and sensory evaluation of hog plum marmalade.
Definition of Terms
 Hog Plum – the raw material/ main ingredient used to make marmalade in the
study.
5
 Acceptability – the factor to determine whether the respondents sees the Hog
Plum Marmalade to be consumed by the consumers.
 Quality Assessment- the process where the researcher sought to evaluate the
quality characteristics of the Hog Plum Marmalade in terms of color, flavor,
texture, aroma and consistency.
 Color - quality characteristic to describe the natural color of the marmalade
 Texture - the quality characteristic that describe the softness or hardness of the
marmalade inside the mouth.
 Aroma – quality characteristic that describe the smell of Hog Plum Marmalade.
 Flavor – the quality characteristics that describe the overall taste of the
marmalade.
 Consistency – the outside appearance of the marmalade whether thick sticky or
watery.
6
Chapter 2
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES
Related Literature
Libas is a tree reaching a height of about 25 meters and a diameter of about 60
centimeters. Bark surface is smooth, with irregular cracks, grey to pale reddish brown, exuding a
clear, sticky sap with a turpentine smell. Leaves are alternate, pinnately compound, 20
centimeters or more in length. Leaflets are pointed at the apex, rounded or abruptly pointed at the
base, 7 to 14 centimeters in length. Flowers are small and in panicles. Fruit is rounded, yellow, a
one-seeded drupe, with a finely flavored, edible pulp. (Godofredo Umali Stuart's Cyber-
Warehouse) In other part of the world, it is also known as lannu, lanu (Cagayan), libas (Bataan,
Tayabas, Capiz, Cotabato, Zamboanga, Pilipino, Bicol) and wild Mango, mambulichi, puli ilai,
Andaman mombin, kaattu maamaram, tawitaw, indian mombin and marimaa (Florido and
Cortiguerra, 2003). It is a deciduous plant bearing with edible fruit. It is the known souring agent,
in the Bicol Region (Florido and Cortiguerra, 2003). The young leaves when dried can be used in
the preparation of a very popular Bicolano dish called as laing. When fresh, it is used for
preparation of sinanglay as filling for fish cooked in coconut milk.
Different varieties of fruit jam, jellies, marmalade and beverages are available globally
and there has been an increased consumption of fruit jam, juices, marmalade and beverages due
to consumer awareness of nutritional and health benefits. Marmalade, nowadays generally refers
to a fruit preserve made from the juice and peel of citrus fruits boiled with sugar and water.
Today, the word marmalade is used to describe a citrus jam containing bits of candied rind.
7
Typically marmalade is associated with oranges, but all citrus fruits are good marmalade
candidates. (Kasav, et.al. 2019)
By processing products from it or preserving the fruit by adopting suitable means of food
preservation can increase the utility of this fruit.( Ahmed, 1966) stated that hog-plum can be used
to prepare good preserve (Morobba) and also jam, pickle and chutney.
For today’s consumers, the primary consideration for selecting and eating a food
commodity is the product’s palatability or eating quality, and other quality parameters,
such as nutrition and wholesomeness are secondary (Meiselman & MacFie, 1996;
Lawless & Heymann, 1998). In order for players in the food and beverage industry, to
have a market edge/success, they should ensure that the quality of food is appealing and
appetising or more specifically that the eating quality attributes of; aroma, taste,
aftertaste, tactual properties and appearance is acceptable to the consumer so that they
crave for more. Thus, if we accept that food quality is that “which the consumer likes
best” and that the grades of quality are understood more by the degree of desirable
attributes and absence of undesirable characteristics which are primarily detected by the
consumer’s sensory organs, then a good method of deciding quality of a food is through
sensory evaluation.
Sensory evaluation has been defined as a scientific discipline used to evoke,
measure, analyses and interpret those responses to products as perceived through the
senses of sight, smell, touch, taste and hearing (Sidel & Stone, 1993). Each aspect in this
definition has a specific meaning, requirement or implication: To evoke reactions,
requires specific, rigorous research methods. It also requires an understanding of
physiology, anatomy, biochemistry, psychology, genetics (e.g. taste or odour blindness
for certain substances), the requirements for and influence of the test procedures, the test
8
environment. To measure reactions, requires measuring instruments that are qualitative or
quantitative in nature to determine human reaction to one or more variables in a product
or material. It requires knowledge regarding measuring instruments and their application,
statistics, computer science, research methodologies/protocols, the effect of the test
environment, requirements for tests, test facilities and more. To analyse reactions,
requires the application of the correct statistical software, test statistics, computer
literacy, as well as knowledge of physiology, psychology, behavioral science and more to
evaluate qualitative and quantitative results. To interpret reactions, requires knowledge of
statistics, food science, computer software, chemistry, biochemistry, physics, gastronomy
and more. It also requires the ability to write detailed and precise executive summaries. It
requires good presentation skills and the ability to advise courses of action based on the
facts, without being prescriptive. Perceived through the senses, requires knowledge about
physiology and psychology in general (e.g. the effect of satiety and emotion on
perception). It also requires knowledge regarding the physiology of the eyes, ears,
tongue, mouth, fingers and nose.
The study used of Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) to determine the difference on
the quality attributes of the treatments and its acceptability. An ANOVA test is a way to
find out if survey or experiment results are significant. In other words, they help you to
figure out if you need to reject the null hypothesis or accept the alternate hypothesis.
ANOVA test: Definition, types, examples (2020).
Descriptive statistics are used to describe the basic features of the data in a study.
They provide simple summaries about the sample and the measures. Together with
simple graphics analysis, they form the basis of virtually every quantitative analysis of
data.
9
Descriptive statistics are typically distinguished from inferential statistics. With
descriptive statistics you are simply describing what is or what the data shows. With
inferential statistics, you are trying to reach conclusions that extend beyond the
immediate data alone. For instance, we use inferential statistics to try to infer from the
sample data what the population might think. Or, we use inferential statistics to make
judgments of the probability that an observed difference between groups is a dependable
one or one that might have happened by chance in this study. Thus, we use inferential
statistics to make inferences from our data to more general conditions; we use descriptive
statistics simply to describe what’s going on in our data.
Descriptive Statistics are used to present quantitative descriptions in a manageable form.
In a research study we may have lots of measures. Or we may measure a large number of
people on any measure. Descriptive statistics help us to simplify large amounts of data in
a sensible way. Each descriptive statistic reduces lots of data into a simpler summary. Prof
William M.K. Trochim ()
Related Studies
Spondias (hog plum), underexploited members of the Anacardiaceae, are rarely
growing in the Philippines for its edible fruits. Fruits can be eaten fresh, cooked or made
into value added products. Unripe fruits can be made into pickle, chutney or relishes or
used for flavoring sauces, soups and stews. In some places young leaves are eaten raw or
steamed as vegetable for eating with salted fish and rice. It may play a vital role in
nutritional, neutraceutical and in economy of rural people, which has received little
research attention. Fruits are reported to be rich in vitamin A, vitamin C and iron content.
10
The fruits are used to treat heart ailments and urinary troubles and are used on wounds,
sores and burns and for digestion. K. Das, D. Roy, P. Nandi, S. Kundu, P. Dutta (2019)
Fifty three species of wild edible plants were utilized as fruits cooked as vegetables, food
additive, flavouring and candy. Tubers and corm are boiled and consumed as meal. Seventy-nine
and twenty five percent can be source of food and income while twenty and seventy-five percent
can be source of food, but not sold in the market. (Arquion, R. D. et.al, 2015)
Fruit pulp extract of Spondias pinnata Linn. Kurz (EESP) on an experimental model of
diabetes in albino rats. EESP significantly reduced the blood glucose level as compared to the
diabetes control group. However, further studies in detail are required to explore its active
ingredients responsible for the beneficial actions and the mechanisms involved in its antidiabetic
actions. Diptimayee D.et. Al (2016).
The technological flow for marmalade production is the following: Washing.
Harvested fruit is washed to remove soil, micro-organisms and pesticide residues. Fruit
washing can be carried out by immersion, by spray/ showers or by combination of these
two processes which is generally the best solution: pre-washing and washing. Washing
must be done before the fruit is cut in order to avoid losing high nutritive value soluble
substances (vitamins, minerals, sugars, etc.). Sorting. Fruit sorting covers two main
separate processing operations (a)removal of damaged fruit and any foreign bodies
(which might have been left behind after washing); (b)qualitative sorting based on
organoleptic criteria and maturity stage. Trimming and peeling (skin removal) This
processing step aims at removing the parts of the fruit which are either not edible or
difficult to digest especially the skin. Cutting This step is performed according to the
specific requirements of the fruit processing technology. Sugar syrup. Sugar syrup
addition is one of the oldest methods of minimizing oxidation. It was used long before the
11
causative reactions were understood and remains today a common practice for this
purpose. Sugar syrup minimizes oxidation by coating the fruit and thereby preventing
contact with atmospheric oxygen. Sugar syrup also offers some protection against loss of
volatile fruit esters and it contributes sweet taste to otherwise tart fruits. Blog, F. (2020,
January 23)
With an overrepresentation of low interactional answers among the young year
intervals, a relationship between the age and the willingness to participate in a survey can
be discussed. This study shows an indication that there could be a positive relationship
between the age and the level of interaction whilst filling out a survey. However, to
establish a more certain relationship a bigger study must be made. The research would
also benefit from examining other fields where age and the level of participation are put
together. To summarize; it appears to be a relationship between the age of the respondent
and the willingness to interact in a survey, all though a larger quantity of surveys should
be examined to fully establish this relationship. Sandberg
Sensory evaluation is a scientific method that evokes, measures, analyzes and interprets
responses to products, as perceived through the senses of sight, smell, touch, taste and sound.
This widely accepted definition is used by sensory evaluation committees within various
professional organizations. Like other scientific methods of taking measurements, sensory
evaluation is concerned with precision, accuracy and sensitivity and with avoiding false-positive
result. Reliable sensory evaluation is based on the skill of the sensory analyst in optimizing four
factors: definition of the problem, test design, instrumentation and interpretation of results. Sung
Eun Choi, PhD, RD.
According to the study conducted by, Dimple Singh-Ackbarali & Rohanie Maharaj
(2013), the success of sensory evaluation does not only lie in the application of individual tests
12
and techniques but sensory principles can be combined with principles from other disciplines to
ensure that producers stay abreast of client requirements and expectations. In the final analysis,
success in product development and sensory evaluation is determined by speed to market and
success in the marketplace. The most advanced procedures and methodologies only mean
something when it results in the predicted sales and envisioned product success of new or
optimized products.
The Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) test has long been an important tool for researchers
conducting studies on multiple experimental groups and one or more control groups. However,
ANOVA cannot provide detailed information on differences among the various study groups, or
on complex combinations of study groups. To fully understand group differences in an ANOVA,
researchers must con duct tests of the differences between particular pairs of experimental and
control groups. Tests conducted on subsets of data tested previously in another analysis are called
post hoc tests. A class of post hoc tests that provide this type of detailed information for ANOVA
results are called “multiple comparison analysis” tests. The most commonly used multiple
comparison analysis statistics include the following tests: Tukey, Newman-Keuls, Scheffee,
Bonferroni and Dunnett. Mary L. McHugh (2011).
Valid use of the traditional independent samples ANOVA procedure requires that the
population variances are equal. Previous research has investigated whether variance homogeneity
tests, such as Levene's test, are satisfactory as gatekeepers for identifying when to use or not to
use the ANOVA procedure. This research focuses on a novel homogeneity of variance test that
incorporates an equivalence testing approach. Instead of testing the null hypothesis that the
variances are equal against an alternative hypothesis that the variances are not equal, the
equivalence-based test evaluates the null hypothesis that the difference in the variances falls
outside or on the border of a predetermined interval against an alternative hypothesis that the
difference in the variances falls within the predetermined interval. Thus, with the equivalence-
based procedure, the alternative hypothesis is aligned with the research hypothesis (variance
13
equality). A simulation study demonstrated that the equivalence-based test of population variance
homogeneity is a better gatekeeper for the ANOVA than traditional homogeneity of variance
tests. Yoosun Jamie Kim and Robert A. Cribbie (2017).
In the study conducted by Lynn M. Walsh,et.al (2012) about Color Preference and
Food Choice Among Children, shows that The effects of color on children's food
choices were investigated. Subjects were 120 children who were equally
distributed among each of the combinations of age (5 vs. 9 years old), sex (male
vs. female), food type (3 types of candies), and color (red, green, yellow, and
orange) in a counterbalanced, factorial, analysis-of-variance design with repeated
measures on subjects. A significant main effect for color indicated that children
preferred foods that were red, green, orange, and yellow, in that order.
Interpretation of this main effect was not interfered with by main effects or
interaction terms involving age, sex, or food type, which served as alternative rival
hypotheses.
Judgments in one sensory modality or dimension are often affected by
information in other sensory dimensions even if they do not physically or physiologically
interact. Examples of such psychological contextual effects are the enhancing effects of
color and odor on judgments of sweetness. Children might be expected to be more
influenced by irrelevant dimensions and thus might show increased context effects when
asked about specific attributes. Two experiments investigated the effect of color change
in a fruit beverage on sweetness judgements and the effects of an added aromatic flavor
(vanilla) on judgments of sweetness, creaminess and liking of milk. Three groups of
American children were tested, in age groups of 5 to 7, 8 to 10 and 11 to 14-years-old,

14
and their responses and contextual effects were compared to those of adults. The
strongest and most consistent effect across age groups was the enhancement of rated
sweetness by added vanilla flavor in milk. Children did not show the expected effect of
darker red colors raising sweetness judgments in the fruit beverage, and the 11 to 14-
year-old group showed a trend in the opposite direction from adults (lighter red color
judged as sweeter). The concept of sweetness may be more strongly associated to sweet
aroma characteristics at an early age than to specific colors. The differences between
adults and the 11 to 14-year-old group could arise from a number of sources, including
product experiences, developmental and/ or cohort effects, and are worthy of further
study. Joseph G.Lavin Harry T.Lawless (1988)
In the study conducted by F M Clydesdale (1933) states that nature teaches us to
make judgements on our environment based in large measure on color. As such, it plays a
key role in food choice by influencing taste thresholds, sweetness perception, food
preference, pleasantness, and acceptability. Its role is elusive and difficult to quantify,
however, which at times has placed color in a secondary role to the other sensory
characteristics, a position not entirely consistent with the facts. Color, in a quantitative
sense, has been shown to be able to replace sugar and still maintain sweetness perception
in flavored foods. It interferes with judgments of flavor intensity and identification and in
so doing has been shown to dramatically influence the pleasantness and acceptability of
foods. Studies in the literature have used cross-sectional population panels to study these
effects, but a recent investigation of color-sensory interactions in beverages has compared
the response of a college age group with the response of a panel consisting of a more
mature population. Interestingly, the older group showed significant differences from the
15
college age group in their response to the effects of color on several sensory parameters
as well as showing a direct correlation between beverage consumption and color. Color is
often taken for granted, but this position must be reevaluated in view of such studies and
the need to create more appealing foods for different segments of our society.
Studies of flavor perception can generally be divided into either sensitivity to
chemical stimuli or the hedonic dimension of flavor. The former includes thresholds,
intensity judgements and sensory adaptation. Ratings of pleasantness or preferences are
descriptors of hedonic response. Here, however, flavor is defined as the perceptual
attribute of foods and beverages resulting from integration of multiple primary sensory
inputs from the gustatory, olfactory and trigeminal systems. The interactions among these
anatomically distinct senses are essential in to fully understand flavor perception, but will
not be addressed here. Instead, the focus of this paper is the independent gustatory and
olfactory components of flavor, as they are highly salient and the most often investigated.
Taste and smell play key roles in the acceptance or rejection of food. Taste refers
to the sensation resulting from chemicals stimulating taste receptors in the tongue and
oropharynx. Smell contributes to flavor via the aromas of substances, which then are
driven into the nasal cavity where the olfactory receptors reside. This component of smell
is called retronasal olfaction. Other senses of touch, temperature and irritation elicited by
substances in the oral and nasal cavities activate the trigeminal system, whose nerves
mediate much of the chemesthetic flavor sensations. Some well-known examples of
chemesthetic sensations are the stinging or tingling of carbonation in the nose and mouth
and tear-induction by onions. Allison C Hoffman et. al.(2016)

16
In the study, to be published in the February 2005 issue of Pediatrics, researchers
compared taste sensitivity and food-related behaviors across three genotypes of the
TAS2R38 gene, which encodes a taste receptor responsive to bitter taste. To provide a
behavioral measure of sensitivity to bitter taste, children – who were between 5 and 10
years of age - and mothers categorized three concentrations of a bitter-tasting compound
(propylthiouracil; PROP) as tasting either "like water" or "bitter or yucky." Children and
adults with two bitter-sensitive alleles (PP) were more sensitive to bitter taste than those
with just one (AP). Genetic influences on bitter taste sensitivity were in some cases
modified by age. In individuals with the mixed AP genotype, children were more
sensitive to bitter than adults, with 64% of children but only 43% of adults able to detect
bitterness in the weakest PROP solution. Monell Ceter (2005)
Age was a significant factor in the motivation to eat for positive feelings, while
education had a significant influence on perceptions regarding healthy eating. Face
reading technology was found to be sufficiently accurate to detect differences in facial
expressions induced by different tastes of food, for groups with and without DD. In
conclusion, many factors are of high importance in the analysis of food choices, Elena
Bartkiene (2019)
SYNTHESIS OF RELATED LITERATURE and STUDIES
Additional information about hog plum and marmalade is presented to the literature and
studies stated. The researchers present the medicinal purposes of the hog plum, from its stem,
tree and leaves and fruit. The researchers show the different nutritional content that is present to
the hog plum and that are helpful to human’s health and proves the medicinal effectiveness on
17
different diseases as well as on the uses of the hog plum in different Filipino dishes. It also
presents the standard procedure on how to make marmalade out of different fruits.
GAPS in the REVIEW BUDGET OF THE PRESENT STUDY
Above studies presents limited use of hog plum as a main ingredient in making a product.
The present studies seek to develop a new product (marmalade) made of Hog Plum fruit
and introduce other use of hog plum fruit not just as medicine but also as something that a
person can consume that will also give the same nutritional content. The researcher choose
marmalade as the product to be develop since it easy to make as well as everyone can consume
it. Thus, the researcher attempted to address this gap in the literature and studies.
Conceptual Framework
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE DEPENDENT VARIABLE
A. Sensory characteristics of
developed Hog Plum Marmalade in
term of:
1. Making of Hog Plum Marmalade a. Color
2. Development of Hog Plum b. aroma
Marmalade c. texture
d. flavor
The different treatments used: e. consistency
(Hog Plum: Controlled) B. Acceptability of Hog Plum
Marmalade as evaluated by the
treatment A: (50:50)
consumer subjects by various age
treatment B: (25:75) group:
treatment C: (0:100) a. 5-10 yrs. old
b. 11-13 yrs.old
c. 14-18 yrs. old
e. 19 and older
Figure 1 – Schematic Variables

18
The treatment comprises for the marmalade sample using hog plum fruit. The figure 1
illustrates the independent and dependent variable of the research. Independent variables consist
the making and development of the marmalade and the treatments used in the process of making
marmalade. The dependent variables consist of the sensory evaluation process in terms of the
quality characteristics and determination of acceptability with various age groups.
Chapter 3
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
This chapter presents the discussion of the procedures involved in the study.
Specifically, it discusses the methods, procedures, the data gathering and instruments used in
this study.
Design of the Study
This study made use of experimental method of research using Compete Randomized
Design to determine the sensory characteristics of the Hog Plum Marmalade and to determine
the level of acceptability of the product.
Experimental research is a scientific approach to research, where one or more
independent variables are manipulated and applied to one or more dependent variables to
measure their effect on the latter. The effect of the independent variables on the dependent
variables is usually observed and recorded over some time, to aid researchers in drawing a
19
reasonable conclusion regarding the relationship between these 2 variable types. Blog, F. (2020,
January 23)
Complete Randomized trials were also used in this study. In a Completely randomized
design, treatment levels or combinations are assigned to experimental units at random. This is
typically done by listing the treatment levels or treatment combinations and assigning a random
number to each. By sorting on the random number, researcher produce a random order for
application of the treatments to experimental units. (Lesson 6: Experimental design | STAT 502.
(n.d.). PennState: Statistics Online) Completely randomized design (CRD) refers to the random
assignment of experimental units to a set of treatments. It is essential to have more than one
experimental unit per treatment to estimate the magnitude of experimental error and to make
probability statements concerning treatment effects (n.d.). Welcome to the UC Davis Plant
Breeding Academy - Plant Breeding Academy.)
Thus, the study sought to assess the quality characteristics and acceptability of
marmalade made from hog plum fruit (Spondias pinnata.).
Sources of Data
The study comes from both primary and secondary sources. The primary sources are the
experimental product of the researcher and the evaluation of expert panelists and 40 selected
respondents from Brgy. Bote and group the respondents based on their ages. The secondary
sources of data gathered are come from the previous research, published and unpublished and
also information from the web.
The product was evaluated by a three-person panel of evaluators who used a quantitative
scale for frequency, allowing the results to be statistically analyzed. The criteria of evaluators
were determined through the following:
1. A person who has experience in food-related researches.

20
2. A person who is an expert in terms of food processing
3. A person who teaches food processing/production, or any food-related courses.
The evaluators could come from a variety of Catanduanes institutions and food
establishments with experience and the above credentials. One (1) of the selected panelist is a
retired teacher of H.E in Bote Integrated School, 1 of them is a retired Exploratory Course TLE
teacher in Bato Rural Development High School and one of the evaluator is a Senior High
School TVL strand adviser in Bato Rural Development High School.
To determine the level acceptability of the hog plum marmalade 5-point hedonic rating
scale is used, in terms of color, aroma, texture, flavor and consistency. The scorecard is used to
calculate and assess the level of acceptability of the hog plum marmalade. The consumers are
specified in different age groups: 5-10 years, 11-13 years, 14-18 years, and 19 years old and
above. Various age group was adapted in USDA Dietary Guidelines (2010) which is used to
observe the dietary intake of the children and adults.
Instrumentation and Its Validation
The tools that will be used in the collection of data (sensory evaluation) were the score
cards and Hedonic Scale which contains the quality characteristics of Hog Plum Marmalade in
terms of color, texture, aroma, consistency and flavor using Complete Randomized Design
(CRD) to determine the quality characteristics of the Hog Plum Marmalade and to determine the
level of acceptability of the product.
Sensory Evaluation is the scientific measurement method of food quality based on
sensory characteristics as perceived by five senses (e.g. taste, smell, appearenace and texture)
(Chap 3 Sensory Evaluation, Seung Eun Choi, PHd Rd. pp.83) Sensory evaluation has been
defined as a scientific discipline used to evoke, measure, analyse and interpret those responses
21
to products as perceived through the senses of sight, smell, touch, taste and hearing (Sidel &
Stone, 1993).
This study used of 5-point Hedonic Scale to determine the quality characteristics of the
hog plum marmalade. Hedonic Scale is which judges or evaluator indicate their likes or dislikes
for the sensory characteristics of the food. (Chap 3 Sensory Evaluation, Seung Eun Choi, PHd
Rd. pp.83)
Data Gathering Procedure
This study was composed of a test trial in determining the quality characteristics and
level of acceptability of the product, the researcher sought permission from the 40 respondents
to conduct evaluation. Each of them will be given a score card.
Ratings were given such:
RATINGS DESCRIPTION
5 Excellent
4 Very Good
3 Good
2 Fair
1 Poor
Table 1. Mean Quantitative Rating and Qualitative Response

22
The 5 – Point Hedonic Scale was used wherein the evaluators and respondents indicate
the extent of their like or dislike for the product.5 – Like Extremely. 4 – Like Very Much, 3 –
Like Moderately, 2 – Like Slightly and 1 – Dislike.
Scale Range of Score Description Interpretation
5 4.5 – 5.00 Like Extremely Highly Acceptable
4 3.5 – 4.4 Like Very Much Very Acceptable

3 2.5 – 3.4 Like Moderately Acceptable
2 1.5 – 2.4 Like Slightly Fair Acceptable
1 1.00 – 1.4 Dislike Not Acceptable
Table 2. 5-Hedonic Scale and its Interpretation
Stage 1: Development of Hog Plum Marmalade
Stage 2: Evaluation of Quality Characteristics
Stage 3: Determination of Level of Acceptability
Figure 2. Stages of Development, Evaluation and Determination of Acceptability of Hog

Plum Marmalade
Stage 1: Development of Hog Plum (Spodias pinnata.) Marmalade. The flow chart below shows
the preparation of Hog Plum (Spondias pinnata.) Marmalade.
Harvesting of Hog Peeling the Hog

Washing the fruits
Plum Fruit Plum Fruit
Cooking the Cutting the hog

Cooling Marmalade plum fruit
23
Storing
Figure.3 Process of Making Hog Plum (Spondias pinnata) Marmalade
Stage 2: Evaluation of Quality Characteristics. The different treatments will be evaluated by
selected three (3) evaluator panelists. Also, the researcher will seek for 40 respondents in Brgy.
Bote using Complete Block design (CRD) to assess and evaluate the quality characteristics in
terms of color, texture, flavor, aroma and consistency of the Hog plum (Spondias pinnata.)
Marmalade.
Stage 3: Determination of Level of Acceptability. To determine the acceptability of Hog Plum
Marmalade, the researcher will be sought permission to (30) respondents/ consumer from Brgy.
Bote with various age group; 5-10 yrs. old, 10-15 yrs. old, 15-18, yrs. old and 19 yrs. old and
above using the Complete Randomized Design (CRD).
Statistical Analysis of Data
Mean is used to determine the average response of the panelist and respondents for
particular characteristics such as color, aroma, texture, flavor and consistency as well as the
degree of acceptability of the marmalade made with hog plum fruit.
Descriptive Statistics will be used to process the scores given by the evaluators and
respondents on the treatments in terms or color, flavor, consistency, aroma and texture.
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) will be used to determine the differences in the quality
characteristics of both the experimental and controlled products as well as the level of the
acceptability of the experimental product (Hog Plum Marmalade). Tukey-Kramers Multiple
Comparisons Test was used as post hoc analysis to determine the differences in the quality
characteristics of the used treatments in making Hog Plum Marmalade.

24
Chapter 4
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
This chapter presents the analysis and interpretations of the results of the data gathered.
The primary source of this study is to utilize hog plum (Spondias pinnata.) fruit in making
marmalade and assess its quality characteristics and acceptability. The study utilized three (3)
samples namely: JRV as the controlled variable, JVP (50:50 treatment) and JCV (25:75
treatment) as the experimental variable.

25
This study was sought to answer the following questions. (1) To determine the level of
acceptability of Hog Plum Marmalade as evaluated by the 30 respondents from Brgy. Bote. (2)
To determine if there are significant differences in the sensory characteristics of Hog Plum
Marmalade as rated by the evaluators. (3) To determine if there are significant differences in the
level of acceptability of Hog Plum Marmalade as evaluated by 40 respondents from Brgy. Bote.
The respondents were group based on age, starting from 5 years old to 19 years old and
above. Each age group has 10 respondents to evaluate the acceptability and sensory
characteristics of the hog plum marmalade.
Based on these questions, it was hypothesized that there is a significant difference in the
sensory characteristics of hog plum marmalade as evaluated by the expert evaluators. There is a
significant difference in the sensory characteristics of hog plum marmalade as evaluated by the
40 respondents each age group. There is no significant difference in the level of acceptability of
Hog Plum Marmalade.
SENSORY CHARACTERISTICS EVALUATION BY EXPERTS

26
EXPERTS
5
5
4.8 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
4.6
4.4 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3
4.2 4
4
3.8
3.6
3.4
3.2
3
COLOR AROMA TEXTURE FLAVOR CONSISTENCY
JVP JCV JRV
FIGURE 4. SENSORY EVALUATION OF HOG PLUM MARMALADE BY EXPERT

EVALUATORS
The figure shows the average of the three treatments rated by the expert evaluators each
of its attributes.
In terms of color, JVP (50:50 treatment) has the highest mean of 4.6 with a QR of 5
which means “Excellent” compared to the other 2 treatments: JRV (controlled variable) and JCV
(25:75 treatment) that has an mean of 4.3 with a QR of 4 which means “Very Good”. In terms
aroma, the experimental variable JVP(50:50 treatment) has the highest mean of 4.6 with a QR of
5 which means “Excellent” compared to the other 2 treatments: JRV (controlled variable) and
JCV (25:75 treatment) that has an mean of 4.3 with a QR of 4 which means “Very Good”. In
terms of texture, the experimental variable JVP (50:50 treatment) has the highest mean of 4.6
with a QR of 5 which means “Excellent”, followed by the experimental variable JCV (25:75
treatment) which has the average of 4.3 with a QR of 4 that means “Very Good” and controlled
variable JRV with the average of 4 with a QR of 4 that means “Very Good”. In terms of flavor,
the experimental variable JVP (50:50 treatment) and controlled variable JRV has the highest
mean of 4.6 with a QR of 5 which means “Excellent” and experimental variable JCV (25:75
treatment) has a mean of 4.3 with a QR of 4 that which means “Very Good”. In terms of
consistency, the controlled variable JRV has the mean of 5 with a QR of 5 which means
27
“Ecellent” while the experimental variables JVP (50:50) and JCV (25:75) has a mean of 4.6 with
a QR of 5 which means “Excellent”.
ANOVA RESULTS in the QUALITY ATTRIBUTES (COLOR) ASSESSED BY
EXPERT EVALUATOR
The expert evaluators ratings of quality characteristics of hog plum marmalade in terms
of color have no difference. To tell if the ratings have a significant difference between the
treatments, One Way ANOVA was used.
The research hypothesis as alternative hypothesis posed that there is a significant
difference in the quality characteristic (color) of hog plum marmalade in different treatments. The
null hypothesis is that there is no significant difference in the quality characteristic (color) of hog
plum marmalade in different treatments. The H o shall be rejected if computed F-value is greater
than the F critical value or if p-value is less than 0.05 level of significance; otherwise, it will not
be rejected.
Table 1: Results of ANOVA for the Quality Characteristics (Color) of Hog Plum
Marmalade in Different Treatments Assessed by Expert Evaluator
Source of
Variation SS Df MS F P-value F crit
Between Groups 0.2222 2 0.1111 0.3333 0.7290 5.1433
Within Groups 2.0000 6 0.3333
Total 2.2222 8
H o : There is no significant difference in the quality characteristics (color) of hog plum

marmalade treatment in different treatments
Level of significance= 0.05
Table 1 presents the result of ANOVA. The computed F value was 0.3333 which is less
than the F critical value 5.1433. Furthermore, p-value of 0.7290 is greater than 0.05 level of
significance. Therefore, the null hypothesis was failed to reject. There is no significant difference
28
in terms of color in the quality characteristics of hog plum marmalade in different treatments as
evaluated by experts.
of aroma have no difference. To tell if the ratings have a significant difference between the
difference in the quality characteristic (aroma) of hog plum marmalade in different treatments.
The null hypothesis is that there is no significant difference in the quality characteristic (aroma)
of hog plum marmalade in different treatments. The H o shall be rejected if computed F-value is
greater than the F critical value or if p-value is less than 0.05 level of significance; otherwise, it
will not be rejected.
Table 1.A : Results of ANOVA for the Quality Characteristics (Aroma) of Hog Plum
Source of
Between Groups 0.2222 2 0.1111 0.3333 0.7290 5.1433
Total 2.2222 8
H o : There is no significant difference in the quality characteristics (aroma) of hog plum

Table 1.A presents the result of ANOVA. The computed F value was 0.3333 which is
less than the F critical value 5.1433. Furthermore, p-value of 0.7290 is greater than 0.05 level of
in terms of aroma in the quality characteristics of hog plum marmalade in different treatments as
29
of texture have no difference. To tell if the ratings have a significant difference between the
difference in the quality characteristic (texture) of hog plum marmalade in different treatments.
The null hypothesis is that there is no significant difference in the quality characteristic (texture)
of hog plum marmalade in different treatments. The H o shall be rejected if computed F-value is
Table 2: Results of ANOVA for the Quality Characteristics (Texture) of Hog Plum
Source of
1.500
Between Groups 0.6667 2 0.3333 0 0.2963 5.1433
Total 2.0000 8
H o : There is no significant difference in the quality characteristics (texture) of hog

plum marmalade treatment in different treatments
in terms of texture in the quality characteristics of hog plum marmalade in different treatments as
of flavor has no difference. To tell if the ratings have a significant difference between the

30
difference in the quality characteristic (flavor) of hog plum marmalade in different treatments.
The null hypothesis is that there is no significant difference in the quality characteristic (flavor) of
hog plum marmalade in different treatments. The H o shall be rejected if computed F-value is
Table 3: Results of ANOVA for the Quality Characteristics (Flavor) of Hog Plum Marmalade in Different
Treatments Assessed by Expert Evaluator
Source of
Between Groups 0.2222 2 0.1111 0.3333 0.7290 5.1433
Total 2.2222 8
H o : There is no significant difference in the quality characteristics (flavor) of hog plum

in terms of flavor in the quality characteristics of hog plum marmalade in different treatments as
of consistency have no difference. To tell if the ratings have a significant difference between the
difference in the quality characteristic (consistency) of hog plum marmalade in different
treatments. The null hypothesis is that there is no significant difference in the quality
31
characteristic (consistency) of hog plum marmalade in different treatments. The H o shall be
rejected if computed F-value is greater than the F critical value or if p-value is less than 0.05 level
of significance; otherwise, it will not be rejected.
Table 4: Results of ANOVA for the Quality Characteristics (Consistency) of Hog Plum
Source of
Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
0.500
Between Groups 0.2222 2 0.1111 0 0.6297 5.1433
Total 2.2222 8

in terms of consistency in the quality characteristics of hog plum marmalade in different
treatments as evaluated by experts.

32
SENSORY CHARACTERISTICS of HOG PLUM MARMALADE BY AGE
GROUP
COLOR
5
5 4.9 4.9 4.9
4.8 4.8
4.8 4.6
4.6 4.5
4.4 4.4
4.4
4.2 4.1 4.1
4
3.8
3.6
3.4
3.2
3
5-10 YRS. OLD 11-13 YRS OLD 14-18 YRS OLD 19 AND BOVE
JVP JCV JRV
FIGURE 5. Color Attributes of JVP, JCV and JRV by Age Group
The figure shows the sensory characteristics rated by 10 respondents each age group. In
the age group of 5-10 years old, it shows that JRV (controlled variable) has the most excellent
attributes in terms of color which has 4.9 average rated by 10 respondents, followed by JVP
(50:50 treatment) which has 4.6 average which means excellent and JCV (25:27) which has the
average of 4.1 which means very good. In the age group 11-13 years old, it shows that JRV
(controlled variable) has the most excellent attributes in terms of color which has the average of
33
4.9 followed by JVP (50:50 treatment) which has 4.5 which means excellent and JCV (25:75
treatment) which has 4.4 average that means very good. It also shows that in the age group of 14-
18 years old, JVP (50:50 treatment) has the most excellent attributes in terms of color which has
the average of 5, followed JCV (25:75 treatment) which has the average of 4.8 which means
excellent and JRV (controlled variable) which has 4.4 average that means very good. . In the age
group of 19 years old and above, it shows that JRV (controlled variable) has the most excellent
attributes in terms of color which has 4.9 average rated by 10 respondents, followed by JVP
(50:50 treatment) which has 4.8 average which means excellent and JCV (25:27) which has the
average of 4.1 which means very good.
ANOVA RESULTS in the QUALITY ATTRIBUTES (COLOR) in DIFFERENT

AGE GROUP
The 5 – 10 years old age group ratings of quality characteristics of Hog Plum Marmalade
in terms of color has difference. To tell if the ratings have a significant difference between the
difference in the quality characteristics (color) of Hog Plum Marmalade in different treatments.
The null hypothesis is that there is no significant difference in the quality characteristics (color)
of Hog Plum Marmalade in different treatments. The Ho shall be rejected if computed F-value is
Table 1: Results of ANOVA for the Quality Characteristics (Color) of Hog Plum Marmalade in Different
Treatments Assessed by 5-10 Years Old Age Group
Source of
Between Groups 0.8667 2 1.6333 10.5000 0.0004 3.3541
Total 7.4667 29
H o: There is no significant difference in the quality characteristics (color) of hog plum

34

Table 1 presents the result of ANOVA. The computed F value was 10.5000 which is
greater than the F critical value 3.3541. Furthermore, p-value of 0.0004 is less than 0.05 level of
significance. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected.
It can be concluded that there is at least one significant difference in the quality
characteristics (color) of hog plum marmalade in different treatments in the preference of 5-10
age group. Since there is a significant difference, post hoc analysis must be administered to
determine which among the treatments have a significant difference.
Tukey-Kramers Multiple Comparisons Test was used as post hoc analysis. There is a
significant different if the absolute difference is greater than the critical value; if not, there is no
significant difference.
Table 1.1. Tukey-Kramers Multiple Comparisons Test for the Quality Characteristics
(Color) of Hog Plum Marmalade in Different Treatments Using Assessed by 5 – 10 Years
Old Age Group
Absolute Std. Error of Critical
Comparison Difference Difference Range Results
Means are
JVP to JCV 0.5 0.124722 0.437774 different
Means are not

JVP to JRV 0.3 0.124722 0.437774 different
Means are
JCV to JRV 0.8 0.124722 0.437774 different
Table 1.1 presents the result of Tukey-Kramers Multiple Comparisons Test.
Results shows that in the 5-10 years old age group, there is a significant difference
between the color of JVP and JCV with an absolute difference of 0.5 which is greater
than the critical range of 0.437774. There is also a difference between the color of JCV
and JRV with an absolute difference of 0.8 which is greater than the critical range of
0.437774. The rest of the comparisons has no significant difference with absolute
35
difference lower than the critical range. This concludes that JVP with a mean of 4.6 and
JRV with a mean of 4.9 has better color than JCV with the mean of 4.1
A significant main effect for color indicated that children preferred foods that
were red, green, orange, and yellow, in that order. Lynn M. Walsh, et.al (2012) It shows
that the most preferred treatment by the age group 5-10 years old is the controlled
variable (50%orange and 50% sugar) in terms of color.
The 11-13 years old age group ratings of quality characteristics of Hog Plum Marmalade
Marmalade in Different Treatments Assessed by 11-13 Years Old Age Group
Source of
Between Groups 3.8 2 1.9 15.08824 0.00003 3.354131
Total 7.4667 29
H o:There is no significant difference in the quality characteristics (color) of hog plum

36
greater than the F critical value 3.354131. Furthermore, p-value of 0.00003 is less than 0.05 level
of significance. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected.
years old age group. Since there is a significant difference, post hoc analysis must be
administered to determine which among the treatments have a significant difference.
Table 2.1. Tukey-Kramers Multiple Comparisons Test for the Quality

Characteristics (Color) of Hog Plum Marmalade in Different Treatments Using Assessed by
11-13 Years Old Age Group
JVP to JCV 0.7 0.112217 0.393881 Means are different
JVP to JRV 0.1 0.112217 0.393881 Means are not different
JCV to JRV 0.8 0.112217 0.393881 Means are different
Table 2.1 presents the result of Tukey-Kramers Multiple Comparisons Test. Results
shows that in the 11-13 years old age group, there is a significant difference between the color of
JVP and JCV with an absolute difference of 0.7 which is greater than the critical range of
0.393881. There is also a difference between the color of JCV and JRV with an absolute
difference of 0.8 which is greater than the critical range of 0.393881. The rest of the comparisons
has no significant difference with absolute difference lower than the critical range. This concludes
that JVP with a mean of 4.8 and JRV with a mean of 4.9 has better color than JCV with the mean
of 4.1.
37
The concept of sweetness may be more strongly associated to sweet aroma
characteristics at an early age than to specific colors. The differences between adults and
the 11 to 14-year-old group could arise from a number of sources, including product
experiences, developmental and/ or cohort effects, and are worthy of further study. Joseph
G.Lavin Harry T.Lawless (1988) This implies that the most preferred treatment of 11-13 years old
is the controlled treatment (50% orange and 50% sugar).
The 14-18 years old age group ratings of quality characteristics of Hog Plum Marmalade
Source of
Between Groups 3.2667 2 1.6333 11.9189 0.0002 3.3541

38
Total 6.9667 29

greater than the F critical value 3.3541. Furthermore, p-value of 0.0002 is less than 0.05 level of
significance. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected.
years old age group. Since there is a significant difference, post hoc analysis must be
(Color) of Hog Plum Marmalade in Different Treatments Using Assessed by 14-18 Years
Old Age Group
Std. Error
Absolute of Critical
Table 3 presents the result of Tukey-Kramers Multiple Comparisons Test. Results
shows that in the 14-18 years old age group, there is a significant difference between the
color of JVP and JCV with an absolute difference of 0.5 which is greater than the critical
range of 0.41089. There is also a difference between the color of JCV and JRV with an
absolute difference of 0.8 which is greater than the critical range of 0.41089. The rest of
39
the comparisons has no significant difference with absolute difference lower than the
critical range. This concludes that JVP with a mean of 4.7 and JRV with a mean of 5 has
better color than JCV with the mean of 4.2.
Color, in a quantitative sense, has been shown to be able to replace sugar and
still maintain sweetness perception in flavored foods. It interferes with judgments of
flavor intensity and identification and in so doing has been shown to dramatically
influence the pleasantness and acceptability of foods. The older group showed
significant differences from the college age group in their response to the effects of
color on several sensory parameters. F.M Clydesdale (1933)
Thus, implies that the treatment that is more preferable to age group is the
controlled variable.
The 19 years old and above age group ratings of quality characteristics of Hog
Plum Marmalade in terms of color have difference. To tell if the ratings have a significant
difference between the treatments, One Way ANOVA was used.
difference in the quality characteristics (color) of Hog Plum Marmalade in different
characteristics (color) of Hog Plum Marmalade in different treatments. The H o shall be
rejected if computed F-value is greater than the F critical value or if p-value is less than
0.05 level of significance; otherwise, it will not be rejected.
Marmalade in Different Treatments Assessed by 19 Years Old and Above Age Group
40
Source of
Between Groups 3.8 2 1.9 15.08824 0.00003 3.354131
Total 7.2 29
H o:There is no significant difference in the quality characteristics (color) of hog plum

Table 4 presents the result of ANOVA. The computed F value was 15.08824
which is greater than the F critical value 3.354131. Furthermore, p-value of 0.00003 is
less than 0.05 level of significance. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected.
characteristics (color) of hog plum marmalade in different treatments in the preference of
11-13 years old age group. Since there is a significant difference, post hoc analysis must
be administered to determine which among the treatments have a significant difference.
Tukey-Kramers Multiple Comparisons Test was used as post hoc analysis. There
is a significant different if the absolute difference is greater than the critical value; if not,
there is no significant difference.
(Color) of Hog Plum Marmalade in Different Treatments Using Assessed by 19 Years Old
and Above Age Group
41
JRV with a mean of 4.9 has better color than JCV with the mean of 4.1.
Color, in a quantitative sense, has been shown to be able to replace sugar and
still maintain sweetness perception in flavored foods. It interferes with judgments of
flavor intensity and identification and in so doing has been shown to dramatically
influence the pleasantness and acceptability of foods. The older group showed
significant differences from the college age group in their response to the effects of
color on several sensory parameters. F M Clydesdale (1933)
Thus, implies that the treatment that is more preferable to age group is the
controlled variable.
42
AROMA
5 5
5 4.9 4.9
4.8
4.8 4.7 4.7
4.6
4.4
4.4 4.3
4.2 4.1
4 4
4
3.8
3.6
3.4
3.2
3
5-10 YRS OLD 11-13 YRS OLD 14-18 YRS OLD 19 AND ABOVE
JVP JCV JRV

FIGU
RE 6. Aroma Attributes of JVP, JCV and JRV by Age Group
The figure shows the sensory characteristics rated by 10 respondents each age
group. In the age group of 5-10 years old, shows that JRV (controlled variable) has the
most excellent attributes in terms of aroma which has average of 5 rated by 10
respondents, followed by JVP (50:50 treatment) which has 4.8 average which means
43
excellent and JCV (25:27) which has the average of 4.4 which means very good. In the
age group 11-13 years old, it shows that JVP (50:50 treatment) has the most excellent
attributes in terms of aroma which has the average of 5 followed by JRV (controlled
variable) and JCV (25:75 treatment) which has average of 4 that means very good. It also
shows that in the age group of 14-18 years old, JRV (controlled variable) has the most
excellent attributes in terms of aroma which has the average of 4.9, followed JVP (50:50
treatment) which has the average of 4.7 which means excellent and JCV (25:75
treatment) which has 4.3 average that means very good. In the age group of 19 years old
and above, it shows that JRV (controlled variable) has the most excellent attributes in
terms of aroma which has 4.9 average rated by 10 respondents, followed by JVP (50:50
treatment) which has 4.7 average which means excellent and JCV (25:27) which has the
average of 4.1 which means very good.
ANOVA RESULTS in the QUALITY ATTRIBUTES (AROMA) in DIFFERENT

AGE GROUP
The 5 – 10 years old age group ratings of quality characteristics of Hog Plum
Marmalade in terms of aroma has slight difference. To tell if the ratings have a significant
difference in the quality characteristics (aroma) of Hog Plum Marmalade in different
characteristics (aroma) of Hog Plum Marmalade in different treatments. The Ho shall be

44
Table 1: Results of ANOVA for the Quality Characteristics (Aroma) of Hog Plum
Source of
Between Groups 1.866667 2 0.933333 6.3 0.0056823 3.354131
Within Groups 4 27 0.148148
Total 5.866667 29

marmalade in different treatments
greater than the F critical value 3.354131. Furthermore, p-value of 0.0056823 is less than
0.05 level of significance. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected.
characteristics (aroma) of hog plum marmalade in different treatments in the preference
of 5-10 age group. Since there is a significant difference, post hoc analysis must be
(Aroma) of Hog Plum Marmalade in Different Treatments Using Assessed by 5 – 10 Years
Old Age Group
Absolute Std. Error of
Comparison Difference Difference Critical Range Results
JVP to JCV 0.4 0.121716 0.427224 Means are not different

45
between the color of JCV and JRV with an absolute difference of 0.6 which is greater
than the critical range of 0.427224. The rest of the comparisons has no significant
difference with absolute difference lower than the critical range. This concludes that JRV
with a mean of 5 has better aroma than JCV with the mean of 4.4.
The Monell Chemical Senses Center (2005) conduct research devoted to
understanding the senses of taste, smell, and chemical irritation: how they function and
how they affect our lives, from before birth through old age. The Center's approach is
multidisciplinary. Scientists from a variety of backgrounds collaborate to address topic
areas in sensation and perception, neuroscience and molecular biology, environmental
and occupational health, nutrition and appetite, health and well-being, and chemical
ecology and communication. Thus, this implies that the treatment that is more preferable
is the controlled variable.
The 11-13 years old age group ratings of quality characteristics (aroma) of Hog
Plum Marmalade in terms of aroma has difference. To tell if the ratings have a significant

46
Source of
3.26666 1.63333 11.9189

Between Groups 7 2 3 2 0.000195 3.354131
0.13703
Within Groups 3.7 27 7
6.96666
Total 7 29

which is greater than the F critical value 3.354131. Furthermore, p-value of 11.91892is
characteristics (aroma) of hog plum marmalade in different treatments in the preference
of 11-13 years old age group. Since there is a significant difference, post hoc analysis
must be administered to determine which among the treatments have a significant
difference.
(Aroma) of Hog Plum Marmalade in Different Treatments Using Assessed by 11-13 Years
Old Age Group
47

JRV with a mean of 5 has better aroma than JCV with the mean of 4.2.
Infants and children exhibited elevated sweet and salty preference relative to
adults. Age-related changes in bitter, sour, umami and fat taste were not clear and more
research would be useful. ‘Sweet’ food odors were highly preferred by children. Allison C
Hoffman et.al (2016). Thus, this implies that the most preferable treatment of the marmalade
is the controlled treatment in terms of aroma.
The 14-18 years old age group ratings of quality characteristics (aroma) of Hog
Plum Marmalade in terms of aroma has no difference. To tell if the ratings have a
significant difference between the treatments, One Way ANOVA was used.
48
Source of
Between Groups 1.0667 2 0.5333 2.2857 0.1210 3.3541
Total 7.3667 29

Table 3 presents the result of ANOVA. The computed F value was 2.2857 which
is less than the F critical value 3.3541. Furthermore, p-value of 0.1210 is greater than
0.05 level of significance. Therefore, the null hypothesis was failed to reject. There is no
significant difference in terms of aroma in the quality characteristics of hog plum
marmalade in different treatments.
The 19 years old age group ratings of quality characteristics (aroma) of Hog Plum
Marmalade in terms of aroma has difference. To tell if the ratings have a significant

49
Source of
Between Groups 1.4 2 0.7 3.259 0.054 3.354
Total 7.2 29

greater than the F critical value 3.354. Furthermore, p-value of 0.5 which was less than
0.05 level of significance. Therefore, the null hypothesis was failed to be rejected. There
is no significant difference in terms of aroma in the quality characteristics of the Hog
Plum Marmalade.
50
TEXTURE
5
5 4.9
4.8 4.8 4.8
4.8 4.7
4.6
4.6 4.5 4.5 4.5
4.4 4.4
4.4
4.2
4
3.8
3.6
3.4
3.2
3
JVP JCV JRV
FIGURE 7. Texture Attributes of JVP, JCV and JRV by Age Group

group. In the age group of 5-10 years old, it shows that JRV (controlled variable) has the
most excellent attributes in terms of texture which has average of 5 rated by 10
51
excellent and JCV (25:27) which has the average of 4.4 which means very good. In the
age group 11-13 years old, it shows that JRV (controlled variable) has the most excellent
attributes in terms of texture which has the average of 4.9 followed by JVP (50:50
treatment) which has average of 4.5 that means excellent. It also shows that in the age
group of 14-18 years old, JRV (controlled variable) has the most excellent attributes in
terms of texture which has the average of 4.8, followed JVP (50:50 treatment) and JCV
(25:75 treatment) which has 4.5 average that means excellent. In the age group of 19
years old and above, it shows that JRV (controlled variable) has the most excellent
attributes in terms of texture which has 4.8 average rated by 10 respondents, followed by
JVP (50:50 treatment) which has 4.7 average which means excellent and JCV (25:75)
which has the average of 4.4 which means very good.
ANOVA RESULTS in the QUALITY ATTRIBUTES (TEXTURE) in DIFFERENT AGE

GROUP
The 5 – 10 years old age group ratings of quality characteristics of hog plum
marmalade in terms of texture have no difference. To tell if the ratings have a significant
difference in the quality characteristic (texture) of hog plum marmalade in different
characteristic (texture) of hog plum marmalade in different treatments. The H o shall be

52
Source of
3.25862
Between Groups 1.4 2 0.7 1 0.053987 3.354131
0.21481
Total 7.2 29
H o:There is no significant difference in the quality characteristics (texture) of hog plum

which is less than the F critical value 3.354131. Furthermore, p-value of 0.053987 is
greater than 0.05 level of significance. Therefore, the null hypothesis was failed to reject.
There is no significant difference in terms of texture in the quality characteristics of hog
plum marmalade in different treatments.
The 11-13 years old age group ratings of quality characteristics of hog plum

53
Source of
Between Groups 0.866667 2 0.433333 2.017241 0.152584 3.354131
Total 6.666667 29
H o : There is no significant difference in the quality characteristics (texture) of hog plum

54
Source of
Between Groups 0.6000 2 0.3000 1.2273 0.3089 3.3541
Total 7.2000 29
H o:
There is no significant difference in the quality characteristics (texture) of hog plum
Table 3 presents the result of ANOVA. The computed F value was 1.2273which
significant difference in terms of texture in the quality characteristics of hog plum
The 19 years old and above age group ratings of quality characteristics of hog
plum marmalade in terms of texture have no difference. To tell if the ratings have a
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between Groups 0.866667 2 0.433333 1.918033 0.166385 3.354131

55
Total 6.966667 29
H o : There is no significant difference in the quality characteristics (texture) of hog plum marmalade treatment in
different treatments
which is less than the F critical value 3.354131. Furthermore, p-value of 0. 0.166385 is
FLAVOR
5
5 4.9
4.8
4.8 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7
4.6 4.6
4.6 4.5 4.5
4.4
4.2
4
3.8
3.6
3.4
3.2
3
JVP JCV JRV
FIGURE 8. Flavor Attributes of JVP, JCV and JRV by Age Group

most excellent attributes in terms of flavor which has average of 5 rated by 10
excellent and JCV (25:27) which has the average of 4.6 which means excellent. In the
56
attributes in terms of flavor which has the average of 4.8 followed by JVP (50:50
group of 14-18 years old, JRV (controlled variable) and JVP (50:50 treatment) has the
same excellent attributes in terms of flavor which has the average of 4.7, and JCV (25:75
treatment) which has 4.6 average that means excellent. In the age group of 19 years old
and above, it shows that JRV (controlled variable) has the most excellent attributes in
terms of flavor which has 4.9 average rated by 10 respondents, followed by JVP (50:50
treatment) which has 4.7 average which means excellent and JCV (25:27) which has the
average of 4.5 which means excellent.
ANOVA RESULTS in the QUALITY ATTRIBUTES (FLAVOR) in DIFFERENT

AGE GROUP
The 5 – 10 age group ratings of quality characteristics of hog plum marmalade in
terms of flavor has no difference. To tell if the ratings have a significant difference
between the treatments, One Way ANOVA was used.
difference in the quality characteristic (flavor) of hog plum marmalade in different
characteristic (flavor) of hog plum marmalade in different treatments. The Ho shall be
Table 1: Results of ANOVA for the Quality Characteristics (Flavor) of Hog Plum
57
Between Groups 0.8667 2 0.4333 2.6000 0.0928 3.3541
Total 7.2 29
H o : There is no significant difference in the quality characteristics (flavor) of hog plum marmalade
treatment in different treatments
significant difference in terms of flavor in the quality characteristics of hog plum
marmalade in terms of flavor have no difference. To tell if the ratings have a significant
Between Groups 0.066667 2 0.033333 0.169811 0.844718 3.354131

58
Total 5.366667 29
H o : There is no significant difference in the quality characteristics (flavor) of hog plum marmalade treatment in
different treatments
There is no significant difference in terms of flavor in the quality characteristics of hog
Source of
Between Groups 0.0667 2 0.0333 0.1364 0.8731 3.3541

59
Total 6.6667 29

significant difference in terms of flavor in the quality characteristics of hog plum
The 19 years old age group ratings of quality characteristics of hog plum
Source of
1.96363
Between Groups 0.8 2 0.4 6 0.159882 3.354131

60
Total 6.3 29

Table 4 presents the result of ANOVA. The computed F value was
0.169811.963636 1 which is less than the F critical value 3.354131. Furthermore, p-value
of 0.159882 is greater than 0.05 level of significance. Therefore, the null hypothesis was
failed to reject. There is no significant difference in terms of flavor in the quality
characteristics of hog plum marmalade in different treatments.
CONSISTENCY
5 5
5 4.8 4.8 4.8
4.8 4.7
4.6 4.6
4.6 4.5 4.5 4.5
4.4 4.3
4.2
4
3.8
3.6
3.4
3.2
3
JVP JCV JRV
FIGURE 9. Consistency Attributes of JVP, JCV and JRV by Age Group

most excellent attributes in terms of consistency which has average of 4.8 rated by 10
61
attributes in terms of consistency which has the average of 5 followed by JVP (50:50
group of 14-18 years old, JVP (50:50 treatment) has the most excellent attributes in terms
of consistency which has the average of 4.8 followed JRV (controlled variable) by has
the same excellent attributes in terms of consistency which has the average of 4.6, and
JCV (25:75 treatment) which has 4.5 average that means excellent. In the age group of
19 years old and above, it shows that JRV (controlled variable) has the most excellent
attributes in terms of consistency which has 5 average rated by 10 respondents, followed
by JVP (50:50 treatment) which has 4.5 average which means excellent and JCV (25:27)
which has the average of 4.3 which means excellent.
ANOVA RESULTS in the QUALITY ATTRIBUTES (TEXTURE) in DIFFERENT

AGE GROUP
The 5 – 11 age group ratings of quality characteristics of hog plum marmalade in
terms of consistency has no difference. To tell if the ratings have a significant difference
between the treatments, One Way ANOVA was used.
characteristic (consistency) of hog plum marmalade in different treatments. The H o shall
be rejected if computed F-value is greater than the F critical value or if p-value is less
than0.05 level of significance; otherwise, it will not be rejected.

62
Source of
Between Groups 0.466667 2 0.233333 1.016129 0.375422 3.354131
Total 6.666667 29
H o : There is no significant difference in the quality characteristics (consistency) of hog plum

significant difference in terms of consistency in the quality characteristics of hog plum
The11-13 years old age group ratings of quality characteristics of hog plum
marmalade in terms of consistency has slight difference. To tell if the ratings have a
Source of
63
Between Groups 2.066667 2 1.033333 5.693878 0.008646 3.354131
Total 6.966667 29
H o : There is no significant difference in the quality characteristics (consistency) of hog plum

characteristics (consistency) of hog plum marmalade in different treatments in the
preference of 11-13 years old age group. Since there is a significant difference, post hoc
analysis must be administered to determine which among the treatments have a
Table 2.1: Tukey-Kramers Multiple Comparisons Test for the Quality Characteristics
(Consistency) of Hog Plum Marmalade in Different Treatments Using Assessed by 11-13
Years Old Age Group
JVP to JRV 0.5 0.134715 0.47285 Means are different
64
between the consistency of JVP and JRV with an absolute difference of 0.5 which is
greater than the critical range of 0.47285. There is also a difference between the color of
JCV and JRV with an absolute difference of 0.6 which is greater than the critical range of
difference lower than the critical range. This concludes that JRV with a mean of 5 and
JVP with a mean of 4.5 has better consistency than JCV with the mean of 4.4.
marmalade in terms of consistency has no difference. To tell if the ratings have a
Source of
Between Groups 0.4667 2 0.2333 0.9692 0.3922 3.3541
Total 6.9667 29
H o : There is no significant difference in the quality characteristics (consistency) of hog

65
is greater than the F critical value 3.3541. Furthermore, p-value of 0.3922 is less than
0.05 level of significance. Therefore, the null hypothesis was failed to be rejected. There
is no significant difference in terms of flavor in the quality characteristics of hog plum
The 19years old abd above age group ratings of quality characteristics of hog
plum marmalade in terms of consistency has slight difference. To tell if the ratings have a
Source of
2.06666 1.03333 5.69387 0.00864

Between Groups 7 2 3 8 6 3.354131
0.18148
6.96666
Total 7 29
H o : There is no significant difference in the quality characteristics (consistency) of hog


66
characteristics (consistency) of hog plum marmalade in different treatments in the
preference of 19 years old and above age group. Since there is a significant difference,
post hoc analysis must be administered to determine which among the treatments have a
Table 2. Tukey-Kramers Multiple Comparisons Test for the Quality Characteristics

(Consistency) of Hog Plum Marmalade in Different Treatments Using Assessed by 19 Years
Old and Above Age Group
Results shows that in the 19 years old and above age group, there is a significant
difference between the consistency of JVP and JRV with an absolute difference of 0.5
which is greater than the critical range of 0.47285. There is also a difference between the
color of JCV and JRV with an absolute difference of 0.6 which is greater than the critical
range of 0.47285. The rest of the comparisons has no significant difference with absolute
67
difference lower than the critical range. This concludes that JRV with a mean of 5 and
JVP with a mean of 4.5 has better consistency than JCV with the mean of 4.4.
According to Abdollahi et.al. () sugar content and the main ingredients used
affects the quality characteristics of a product in terms of consistency and color tone. The
more sugar content there is more change in the concentration of the consistency, color
and texture of the product. Thus, this implies that the controlled variable is more
preferable in the age group in terms of consistency.
ACCEPTABILITY
5
5 4.9 4.9 4.9
4.8 4.8
4.8 4.7 4.7
4.6 4.6 4.6
4.6 4.4
4.4
4.2
4
3.8
3.6
3.4
3.2
3
JVP JCV JRV
FIGURE 10. Acceptability Attributes of JVP, JCV and JRV by Age Group
most excellent attributes in terms of acceptability which has average of 4.7 rated by 10
68
attributes in terms of acceptability which has the average of 4.6 followed by JVP (50:50
group of 14-18 years old, JVP (50:50 treatment) has the most excellent attributes in terms
of acceptability which has the average of 5 followed JRV (controlled variable) by has the
same excellent attributes in terms of acceptability which has the average of 4.9, and JCV
(25:75 treatment) which has 4.8 average that means excellent. In the age group of 19
years old and above, it shows that JRV (controlled variable) has the most excellent
attributes in terms of acceptability which has 4.7 average rated by 10 respondents,
followed by JVP (50:50 treatment) which has 4.8 average which means excellent and
JCV (25:27) which has the average of 4.6 which means excellent.
ANOVA RESULTS in the ACCEPTBILITY OF HOG PLUM MARMALADE in

DIFFERENT AGE GROUP AND TREATMENTS
The 5-10 years old age group ratings of overall acceptability of Hog Plum
Marmalade in the different treatments has slight difference. To tell if the ratings have a
difference in the acceptability of Hog Plum Marmalade in different treatments. The null
hypothesis is that there is no significant difference in the acceptability of Hog Plum
Marmalade in different treatments. The Ho shall be rejected if computed F-value is
greater than the F critical value or if p-value is less than 0.05 level of significance;
otherwise, it will not be rejected.

69
Table 1: Results of ANOVA for the Acceptability of Hog Plum Marmalade in Different
Source of
Between Groups 2.4667 2 1.2333 4.8261 0.0161 3.3541
Total 9.3667 29
H o : There is no significant difference in the acceptability of hog plum marmalade

It can be concluded that there is at least one significant difference in the
acceptability of hog plum marmalade in different treatments in the preference of 5-10
years old years old age group. Since there is a significant difference, post hoc analysis
difference.
Table 2. Tukey-Kramers Multiple Comparisons Test for the Acceptability of Hog

Plum Marmalade in Different Treatments Using Assessed by 5-10 Years Old Age Group
Std. Error
JCV to JRV 0.4 0.159861 0.561112 Means are not different

70
Table 2 presents the result of Tukey-Kramers Multiple Comparisons Test. Results
shows that in the 5-10 years old age group, there is a significant difference between the
acceptability of JVP and JRV with an absolute difference of 0.7 which is greater than the
critical range of 0.561112. The rest of the comparisons has no significant difference with
absolute difference lower than the critical range. This concludes that JVP with a mean of
4.9 is acceptable as a product to 5-10 years old age group preference.
Perceptions and responses to the sensory properties of food—taste, smell, and
texture—affect food preferences and eating habits (Drewnowski, 1997). Sensory
responses are influenced by genetic, physiological, and metabolic variables. Preferences
for sweet tastes, saltiness, and fatty textures may be an innate human trait or acquired
early in life.
71
Source of
5.693
Between Groups 2.0667 2 1.0333 9 0.0086 3.3541
Total 6.9667 29
H o: There is no significant difference in the acceptability of hog plum marmalade

difference.
Table 2.1 Tukey-Kramers Multiple Comparisons Test for the Acceptability of Hog
Std. Error
72
between the acceptability of JVP and JCV with an absolute difference of 0.5 which is
greater than the critical range of 0.47285. There is also a difference in the acceptability
between JVP and JRV with an absolute difference of 0.6 which is greater than the critical
range of 0.47285. The rest of the comparisons has no significant difference with absolute
difference lower than the critical range. This concludes that JVP with a mean of 5 and
JCV with a mean of 4.5 is acceptable as a product to 11-13 years old age group
preference.
early in life.

73
Source of
4.200
Between Groups 1.867 2 0.9333 0 0.0258 3.3541
Total 7.8667 29
H o: There is no significant difference in the acceptability of hog plum marmalade

difference.
Table 3.1. Tukey-Kramers Multiple Comparisons Test for the Acceptability of Hog
74
between the acceptability of JVP and JRV with an absolute difference of 0.6 which is
greater than the critical range of 0.52324. The rest of the comparisons has no significant
difference with absolute difference lower than the critical range. This concludes that JVP
with a mean of 5 is acceptable as a product to 14-18 years old age group preference.
early in life.
The 19 years old and above age group ratings of overall acceptability of Hog
Plum Marmalade in the different treatments has slight difference. To tell if the ratings
have a significant difference between the treatments, One Way ANOVA was used.
75
Treatments Assessed by 19 Years Old and Above Age Group
Source of
5.850
Between Groups 3.4667 2 1.7333 0 0.0078 3.3541
Total 11.4667 29

acceptability of hog plum marmalade in different treatments in the preference of 19 years
old and above age group. Since there is a significant difference, post hoc analysis must be

76
Plum Marmalade in Different Treatments Using Assessed by 19 Years Old and Above Age
Group
Results shows that in the 19 years old and above age group, there is a significant
difference between the acceptability of JVP and JRV with an absolute difference of 0.8
which is greater than the critical range of 0.604185. The rest of the comparisons has no
significant difference with absolute difference lower than the critical range. This
concludes that JVP with a mean of 5 is acceptable as a product to 19 years old and above
age group preference.
early in life.
77
GENERAL ACCEPTABILITY
5 4.95
4.8
4.6 4.55 4.475
4.4
4.2
4
3.8
3.6
3.4
3.2
3
JVP JCV JRV
FIGURE 11. General Acceptability of JVP, JCV and JRV by 40 Respondents

The figure shows the acceptability rated by 40 respondents on the different
treatments. JVP (50:50 treatment) gained an average of 4.95 which has a QR of 5 which
means highly acceptable. JCV (25:75 treatment) with an average of 4.55 with a QR of 4.6
which also means highly acceptable and JRV (controlled treatment) which has the
average of 4.475 with a QR of 4.5 that also means highly acceptable. This concludes that
JVP (50:50 treatment) is the most acceptable treatments between the different treatments
used in Hog Plum Marmalade.
The overall ratings of the respondents of the acceptability of Hog Plum

78
Table 4.1. Results of ANOVA for the Acceptability of Hog Plum Marmalade in Different
Treatments Assessed by 40 Respondents
Source of P-
Variation SS Df MS F value F crit
Between Groups 5.2167 2 2.6083 10.9874 0.0000 3.0738
Within Groups 27.7750 117 0.2374
Total 32.9917 29

Table 4.1 presents the result of ANOVA. The computed F value was 10.9874
which is greater than the F critical value 3.0738. Furthermore, p-value of 0.0000 is less
than 0.05 level of significance. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected.
acceptability of hog plum marmalade in different treatments in the preference of 40
respondents. Since there is a significant difference, post hoc analysis must be

79
Plum Marmalade in Different Treatments Using Assessed by 40 Respondents
Absolute Std. Error of

Comparison Difference Difference Critical Range Results
Results shows that in the 40 respondents, there is a significant difference between the
acceptability of JVP and JCV with an absolute difference of 0.4 which is greater than the
critical range of 0.258847. There is also a difference in the acceptability between JVP and
JRV with an absolute difference of 0.475 which is greater than the critical range of
JCV with a mean of 4.55 is acceptable as a product to the 40 respondent’s preference.
Overall, many factors are very important when food choices are being analyzed,
and personalized nutrition has become an important concept used to balance the diet of a
population with different social statuses. Also, results obtained using face reading
technology showed higher sensitivity than evaluations using a hedonic scale, which can
be influenced by previous emotions of participants induced by past memories of foods.
We suggest that mood also has a link to the choice of food. Elena Bartkiene (2019).
80
Chapter 5
Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations
This chapter presents the summary of the study and conclusions on findings and
the recommendations offered.
SUMMARY
This study was conducted to assess the quality characteristics and acceptability
of hog plum marmalade using different treatments.
This study was sought to answer the following questions. (1) To determine the
level of acceptability of Hog Plum Marmalade as evaluated by the 30 respondents from
Brgy. Bote. (2) To determine if there are significant differences in the sensory
characteristics of Hog Plum Marmalade as rated by the evaluators. (3) To determine if
there are significant differences in the level of acceptability of Hog Plum Marmalade as
evaluated by 40 respondents from Brgy. Bote.
The researcher posed the hypothesis that the control (JRV) and two
experimental samples (JRV and JCV) has differences in terms of color, aroma, texture,
flavor and consistency as rated and evaluated by the expert evaluators and 40
respondents. And there is no significant difference in the acceptability of hog plum
marmalade in terms of color, aroma, texture, flavor and consistency as evaluated by the
40 respondents.
The study provides information on utilizing hog plum fruit as main ingredient in
making marmalade. It is also giving an additional information and introducing hog

81
plum fruit in making food product that budget friendly and would provide nutritional
content that is the same to existing product.
The evaluation of the product was done by the 40 respondents from Brgy. Bote
and grouped the, based on their ages. The experimental design was employed in this
study. The statistical tool used was descriptive statistics using score cards and Hedonic
Scale and ANOVA using Complete Randomized Design (CRD) to determine the
significant difference that existed in the samples.
This is significant in that it will provide information to the locality with regards
to the utilization of hog plum fruit as a food product. It will also provide an opportunity
as a means of livelihood among people. They will be able to offer new delicacy that will
surely fit their consumers’ taste and as well as health.
This study focused on assessing the quality characteristics of the hog plum
marmalade and determining the level of significance in terms of quality characteristics
and its acceptability
Findings
The finding of the study is summarized as follows.
1. The following are the quality characteristics of marmalade using treatments:
sample 1 (JRV Controlled treatment, made of 50% orange and 50% sugar),
sample 2 (JVP Experimental treatment, made of 50% hog plum fruit and 50%
sugar), and sample 3 (JCV Experimental treatment, made of 25% of hog plum
fruit and 75% sugar) as evaluated by 3 expert evaluators:

82
a. In terms of color, the treatment 50% of hog plum fruit and 50% of sugar has
a rating of “Excellent” while the treatment 25% of hog plum fruit and 75%
sugar has a rating of “Very Good”. This implies that the experimental group
is more favorable to experts in terms of color.
b. In terms of aroma, the treatment 50% of hog plum fruit and 50% of sugar has
a rating of “Excellent” while the treatment 25% of hog plum fruit and 75%
sugar has a rating of “Very Good”. This implies that the experimental group
is more favorable to experts in terms of aroma.
c. In terms of texture, the treatment 50% of hog plum fruit and 50% of sugar
has a rating of “Excellent” while the treatment 25% of hog plum fruit and
75% sugar has a rating of “Very Good”. This implies that the experimental
group is more favorable to experts in terms of texture.
d. In terms of flavor, the treatment 50% of hog plum fruit and 50% of sugar and
the treatment 50% of orange and 50% of sugar has an “Excellent” rating
while the treatment 25% of hog plum fruit and 75% sugar has a “Very Good”
rating. This implies that the controlled sample and the experimental sample
with 50:50 treatment are favorable in terms of flavor.
e. In terms of consistency, all samples has an “Excellent” rating. This states that
all samples are favorable in terms of consistency.
2. Based on the data gathered all samples are accepted, however in terms of age
group the level of acceptability is as follows:

83
a. In the age group 5-10 years old, 50% of hog plum fruit and 50% of sugar has
the highest level of acceptability in terms on the overall quality
characteristics of the samples.
b. In the age group, 11-13 years old, 50% of hog plum fruit and 50% of sugar
has the highest level of acceptability in terms on the overall quality
c. In the age group, 14-18 years old, 50% of hog plum fruit and 50% of sugar
has the highest level of acceptability in terms on the overall quality
d. In the age group of 19 years old above, 50% of hog plum fruit and 50% of
sugar has the highest level of acceptability in terms on the overall quality
3. Based on the data gathered, the overall acceptability of the marmalade was
determined. The experimental sample with treatment of 50% hog plum fruit and
50% of sugar is more acceptable in terms of its quality characteristics.
4. Based on the results, there is no significant difference in the level of
acceptability in every age group. It shows that the samples has the same level of
acceptability in terms of the samples quality attributes.
5. In the overall level of acceptability of hog plum marmalade, it shows that the
treatments used are both acceptable in terms of quality characteristics.
Conclusion
Based from the findings of the study, the following conclusions are drawn:
84
1. The control sample which is the orange marmalade and the experimental sample which is
the 50:50 treatment of libas fruit and sugar obtained “excellent” quality characteristics.
And the marmalade using 25:75 treatment obtained “very good” quality characteristics
as rated and evaluated by the expert evaluators.
2. There is slight to no differences in the quality characteristics of the controlled and
experimental treatments as rated by the different age group of 40 respondents and
obtained “highly acceptable’ result in assessing its acceptability.
3. There are no significant differences in the acceptability of the experimental product as
evaluated by the different age group of 40 respondents.
Recommendation
Based on the foregoing findings and conclusions, the following recommendations
are offered:
1) To the community; Hog plum can be utilized in making product which has the same
quality characteristics as the existing product as well as developing the recipes to
commercialize it to markets.
2) To the community; People in the community especially in the landfill area should be
encouraged to enhanced and enrich the production hog plum trees especially that it is
nutritious and can be a good source of income that could be used in the production of
low cost and health-friendly products and dishes.
3) To the future researchers; further studies should be considered to find out other
techniques in the production and utilization of quality marmalade using hog plum fruit
for commercial purposes and for the improvement of the product.

85
4) To the future researchers; Topics recommended for future investigation: (a)
commercialization of hog plum marmalade. (b) Utilization and acceptability of new
products made with hog plum fruit.

Quality Assessment and Acceptability of Hog Plum Fruit

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Read this document in other languages

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Quality Assessment and Acceptability of Hog Plum Fruit

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

QUALITY ASSESSMENT AND ACCEPTABILITY OF HOG PLUM FRUIT

(Spondias pinnata.) MARMALADE

THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTINGS

Background of the Study

marmalade and reduces the wastage of citrus fruits. (Inam.,et.al, 2013)

utilized in cooking as an ingredient in many worldwide cuisines. In the Philippines,

is hard to come by.

variety of ailments, in addition to culinary applications. It also has antibacterial,

antimicrobial, antiviral, and anti-inflammatory effects. It also includes a lot of

levels, and cure wounds, cuts, burns, and skin problems.

In the literature, hog plum often used as additives in cooking or as medicine;

the researcher aimed to develop a marmalade using hog plum.

Statement of the Problem

Specifically, this study focused on the following research objectives:

a) 50% Hog plum fruit and 50% sugar

b) 25% Hog plum fruit and 75% sugar

c) 0% Hog plum fruit and 100% orange and sugar

2. To assess the sensory characteristics of Hog Plum marmalade treatments as

evaluated by panel evaluators in terms of:

3. To determine the level of acceptability of Hog Plum Marmalade as evaluated by the

40 respondents from Brgy. Bote.

4. To determine if there are significant differences in the sensory characteristics of

Hog Plum Marmalade as rated by the expert evaluators.

5. To determine if there are significant differences in the level of acceptability of Hog

Plum Marmalade as evaluated by 40 respondents from Brgy. Bote.

- There is no significant difference in the sensory characteristics of hog plum

marmalade as evaluated by the expert evaluators.

- There is no significant difference in the sensory characteristics of hog plum

marmalade as evaluated by the 40 respondents each age group.

- There is no significant difference in the level of acceptability of Hog Plum

Significance of the Study

Bote. The study would benefit the following:

product or new product as its main ingredient.

Scope and Delimitations

main ingredient in making marmalade.

acceptability and sensory evaluation of hog plum marmalade.

Plum Marmalade to be consumed by the consumers.

quality characteristics of the Hog Plum Marmalade in terms of color, flavor,

texture, aroma and consistency.

 Color - quality characteristic to describe the natural color of the marmalade

marmalade inside the mouth.

 Consistency – the outside appearance of the marmalade whether thick sticky or

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

Libas is a tree reaching a height of about 25 meters and a diameter of about 60

preparation of sinanglay as filling for fish cooked in coconut milk.

candidates. (Kasav, et.al. 2019)

Sensory evaluation has been defined as a scientific discipline used to evoke,

definition has a specific meaning, requirement or implication: To evoke reactions,

requires specific, rigorous research methods. It also requires an understanding of

physiology, anatomy, biochemistry, psychology, genetics (e.g. taste or odour blindness

environment. To measure reactions, requires measuring instruments that are qualitative or

quantitative in nature to determine human reaction to one or more variables in a product

or material. It requires knowledge regarding measuring instruments and their application,

statistics, computer science, research methodologies/protocols, the effect of the test

literacy, as well as knowledge of physiology, psychology, behavioral science and more to

evaluate qualitative and quantitative results. To interpret reactions, requires knowledge of

statistics, food science, computer software, chemistry, biochemistry, physics, gastronomy

tongue, mouth, fingers and nose.

The study used of Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) to determine the difference on

ANOVA test: Definition, types, examples (2020).