SENSORY ACCEPTABILITY OF BANANA, KAMOTE AND

TARO CHIPS

Hanna Vania C. Cortez, Chrizel S. Samsona

Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering Department
Mindanao State University, General Santos City

This section is the abstract of the activity. This should summarized the entire report
briefly but comprehensively. Details may be vague but the conclusion or overall assessment must
be clear. The abstract should not be more than 200 words.

INTRODUCTION

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This section presents the materials and methods used in the conduct of the activity. Since
the procedures will be given to you, no need to rewrite them all here. Instead, summarize the
procedures and compress them in one-three paragraphs. Details may not be necessary anymore.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Three (3) treatments were designed for this experiment. Each treatment corresponds to
different commodities used as chips; banana, kamote and taro. The product was then evaluated
according to five (5) acceptability criteria (color, texture/crispiness, taste, general acceptability).
Replication was done randomly by choosing thirty (30) respondents for the product sensory
evaluation. Each criterion was rated by every replication following the provided scale (9-like
extremely, 8-like very much, 7-like moderately, 6-like slightly, 5-neither like nor dislike, 4-
dislike slightly, 3-dislike moderately, 2-dislike very much, 1-dislike extremely) for each sample.
Data analysis was done for the interpretation of the results.

Product Sensory Evaluation

The data for the three treatments for chips were analyzed using ANOVA: Two-Factor
with Replication. The varying commodities and the sensory criteria were the two independent
variables, whereas the acceptability ratings of the respondents were the dependent variable. The
average acceptability for each sample was calculated and displayed to a graph for analysis.

9
8
7
Acceptability

6
5
4
3
2
1
Color Texture/Crispiness Taste General Acceptability

Figure 1. Samples’ Acceptability Graph

As shown in the graph above, the banana chips were evidently had the highest
acceptability specifically in terms of its texture/crispiness, taste and general acceptability
averaging to 8.31 as presented in appendix A. Among these, the respondents like the banana as
chips very much. It was however, the kamote chips that had the highest average acceptability in
terms of color with 8.47 rating. Whereas the taro chips gained the lowest acceptability in five
criteria given, being the texture/crispiness of the taro chips the lowest.

Further, the data were analyzed in the ANOVA table found in appendix A that the F
value of 7.82 was greater than the Fcrit. Therefore, using 5% level of significance, there is a high
significant effect on the sensory acceptability of the chips under the three different commodities.
Also, the sensory criteria have a significant effect on the acceptability of the chips. Moreover, the
varying commodities and the chip has no interaction.

CONCLUSIONS

This laboratory was conducted to evaluate the acceptability of the three chip samples;
banana, kamote, and taro chips. Color, texture/crispiness, taste, general acceptability were the
parameters being tested for the sensory assessment of the three chips. The result showed that the
banana chips had the highest average acceptability rate. It was maybe for the reason that banana
is well suited for deep frying due to its low content of water and sugar, while having high starch
content (Encyclopedia of Food and Health, 2016). Thus, banana as chips was more considerably
in likeness of consumers than the other two chips.
 On the other hand, taro chips had the lowest average acceptability among the samples.
This would probably be rooted to its taste and texture as chips because taro root has a very mild
and slightly nutty flavor. Taro absorbs other flavors quite easily, which is what makes it so
versatile. It tastes sweet and vanilla-like in desserts, but can also taste starchy and nutty in soups
and stir-fries. That is why, it is important to consider the variety of taro to be used since larger
varieties have a stronger, nuttier flavour where the smaller varieties, on the other hand, have a
milder flavour (Ferko, 2022).

In conclusion, the preparation for the three chip samples were not fixed based on the ratio
and modification of the ingredients used. Samples were produced subjectively. This factor
contributed to the results of the study. Additionally, since the crispiness of the chips can be
greatly affected by the time it was cooked, the three samples were prepared in different time
period. The kamote was cooked and served first. It was almost two hours before the other
samples were cooked and served for sensory testing. Such factor could contribute to the squashy
texture of the chips. It was recommended to be conscious of the time when doing the laboratory.
Moreover, identify the controlled and varying variables for the next laboratory for accurate and
comparable results. Hence, banana, kamote and taro have potential for chip consumption.

LITERATURES CITED

Encyclopedia of Food and Health. (2016). Banana Chips. Retrieved from ScienceDirect:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-biological-sciences/banana-chips

Ferko, T. (2022, January 31). WHAT DOES TARO TASTE LIKE? Retrieved from My Vigan
Minimalist: https://myveganminimalist.com/what-does-taro-taste-like/
A P P E N D I C E S
 APPENDIX A

Raw Data

Table 1. Scoresheets Summary for 30 Respondents

Color Texture/Crispiness Taste General Acceptability
Replications
Banana (A) Sweet Potato (B) Taro (E) Banana (A) Sweet Potato (B) Taro (E) Banana (A) Sweet Potato (B) Taro (E) Banana (A) Sweet Potato (B) Taro (E)
1 8 8 6 7 8 4 6 9 4 7 8 4
2 8 8 4 6 7 2 5 9 7 7 8 5
3 9 8 8 9 7 7 9 7 9 9 8 8
4 9 9 8 9 8 7 9 9 8 9 9 8
5 7 9 8 9 7 8 9 8 9 9 8 9
6 9 9 9 9 8 8 9 8 9 9 9 9
7 9 9 7 7 3 6 8 8 8 8 8 8
8 7 9 6 7 4 7 7 7 6 7 6 6
9 8 8 9 9 8 8 8 8 9 8 8 9
10 8 8 7 9 8 7 9 7 7 9 8 7
11 8 9 8 9 8 7 9 9 8 8 8 7
12 9 8 7 8 8 8 9 8 8 9 8 8
13 8 8 9 9 8 9 9 8 8 9 8 9
14 9 8 8 9 8 9 9 9 9 9 8 9
15 8 8 8 9 7 8 9 8 9 9 8 8
16 9 9 9 8 9 9 7 9 8 8 9 9
17 8 7 8 9 4 9 7 6 7 8 6 8
18 8 9 8 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 9 8
19 8 7 6 8 5 8 9 5 7 8 6 7
20 9 8 9 9 5 9 8 6 8 9 7 8
21 8 7 8 8 6 7 6 5 8 9 7 7
22 9 9 9 9 8 8 8 9 9 8 8 8
23 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
24 9 9 9 8 7 7 8 7 7 9 8 7
25 9 9 9 7 6 7 8 6 6 8 7 7
26 8 9 9 8 8 9 8 7 9 8 8 9
27 8 9 9 9 9 7 7 9 8 8 9 8
28 9 9 9 9 8 7 9 9 9 9 8 8
29 8 9 7 9 9 8 8 9 7 8 9 7
30 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 8 9 9 9
251 254 239 251 216 225 243 235 236 252 239 233
8.367 8.467 7.967 8.367 7.200 7.500 8.100 7.833 7.867 8.400 7.967 7.767
Table 2. Summary Table for ANOVA Analysis

Anova: Two-Factor with Replication

Texture/
SUMMARY Color Crispiness Taste General Acceptability Total
Banana Chips          
Count 30 30 30 30 120
Sum 251 251 243 252 997
Average 8.37 8.37 8.10 8.40 8.31
0.37816 1.19655 0.70245
Variance 1 0.791954023 2 0.455172414 1

Kamote Chips          
Count 30 30 30 30 120
Sum 254 216 235 239 944
Average 8.47 7.20 7.83 7.97 7.87
0.46436 1.59195 1.52829
Variance 8 2.579310345 4 0.791954023 1

Taro Chips          
Count 30 30 30 30 120
Sum 239 225 236 233 933
Average 7.97 7.50 7.87 7.77 7.78
1.55057 1.67163
Variance 5 2.327586207 1.36092 1.495402299 9

Total        
Count 90 90 90 90
Sum 744 692 714 724
8.26666 7.93333
Average 7 7.688888889 3 8.044444444
0.82696 1.36629
Variance 6 2.104369538 2 0.964294632

ANOVA
Source of
Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
19.5166 9.75833 0.00047 3.02166
Sample 7 2 3 7.815050629 9 9
15.5888 5.19629 0.00647 2.63056
Columns 9 3 6 4.161501483 3 7
14.2611 2.37685 0.07947 2.12465
Interaction 1 6 2 1.903523576 9 4
434.533 1.24865
Within 3 348 9

Total 483.9 359        

Figure 2. Scoresheet for Product Sensory Evaluation