Criteria Marking

Scheme
Title/Objective 5
Hypothesis 5
Skills Sample 15
preparation
FOOD TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT Method of 15
serving
Procedure 10
Knowledge
LABORATORY REPORT NO 3
Safety 10
CODE & MODUL DMT40143- STATISTICS AND
SENSORY EVALUATION FOR FOOD Work Area 10
SCIENCE
TITLE Result Raw data 5
BASIC TASTE RECOGNITION TEST
Data 10
Analysis
NAME Discussion 10
Conclusion 5
ZULAIKA BINTI MOHAMAD NORDIN TOTAL 100

MATRIX NO
02DMH21F2025

CLASS
DMH4A

LECTURER
ENCIK SAIFUL AZLEY BIN SAMSUDIN

DATE
SCORE
Student’s copy
CUT HERE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LABORATORY REPORT NO 3
CODE & MODUL DMT40143- STATISTICS AND SENSORY EVALUATION FOR FOOD SCIENCE
TITLE
BASIC TASTE RECOGNITION TEST

NAME
ZULAIKA BINTI MOHAMAD NORDIN

MATRIX NO
02DMH21F2025
CLASS
DMH4A
LECTURER ENCIK SAIFUL AZLEY BIN SAMSUDIN

DATE
SCORE
Lecturer’s copy
 BASIC TASTE RECOGNITION TEST

OBJECTIVES
At the end of the lab student able to
1. explain four basic tastes: sour, salty, sweet and bitter.
2. identify the four basic tastes.
3. indicate solution with the correct concentration.
4. prepare stock solution.
5. design specific form for the test of four basic tastes.

HYPOTHESIS
NULL HYPOTHESIS:

• There is no statistically significant difference in the sensory acuity between panelists

who have undergone screening for basic taste and odor identification, as well as
sensitivity testing, and those who have not been screened.
ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHES:

• Panelists who have been subject to screening for basic taste and odor identification, as
well as sensitivity testing, will exhibit a significantly higher level of sensory acuity in
comparison to panelists who have not undergone such screening.

In this hypothesis, we aim to investigate whether the screening process, which includes
assessing the panelists' ability to recognize basic tastes and common odors, and testing their
sensitivity to sensory attributes, has a measurable impact on the sensory acuity of the panelists.
The alternative hypothesis posits that screened panelists will demonstrate superior abilities in
discerning differences in flavor and texture intensities, emphasizing the significance of these
screening procedures in the selection of panelists for sensory evaluations in food-related
studies.
 RAW DATA AND PROCEDURE :
TEST 1 :-
BASIC SUBSTANCE CONCENTRATION
TASTE
Sweet Sucrose 1.0% w/v (2.5 g/250 mL)
Salty Sodium chloride 0.2% w/v (0.5 g/250 mL)
Sour Citric acid 0.04% w/v (0.1 g/250 mL)
Caffeine 0.05% w/v (0.125 g/250 mL)
Bitter 0.00125% w/v (0.003 g/250
quinine sulfate
mL)

Serve the
solutions in
Prepare these Additionally, randomly arrange
separate cups and Instruct the
solutions using prepare a blank the coded
assign codes for panelists to assess
distilled water a water sample and samples in a
assessment the samples and
day in advance distribute it unique order for
(approximately 25 complete the
and let them randomly among each panelist
– 30 mL of sensory
stabilize the basic taste during the
solution is evaluation form
overnight. solutions. assessment
required per
panelist

TEST 2 :-
• Sucrose 7.5% (18.75 g/250 mL)
• Sucrose 10.0% (25 g/250 mL)
• Sucrose 12.5% (31.25 g/250 mL)
• Sucrose 15.0% (37.5 g/250 mL)

Assign unique codes to

Create solutions with Instruct the panelists to
the samples and
varying concentrations rank the sweetness levels
distribute them
for assessment by the by differentiating their
randomly to each
panelists. intensity.
panelist
 RESULT
BALLOT FOR BASIC TASTE RECOGNITION TEST

Name: BATCH 3
Date: 4 / OCT /2023

Basic Taste Recognition

Please taste each of the solutions in the order indicated on the ballot, from top to bottom. The solution may
taste sweet, sour, salty or bitter. There may be one or more samples of only water among the basic taste
solutions. Identify the taste solution in each coded cup. Rinse your mouth with water before you begin tasting
and also between each sample.

CODE TASTE

1 BITTER

2 SWEET

3 SOUR

4 SALTY
 RANKING FOR INTENSITY TEST

Name: BATCH 3
Date: 4 / OCT /2023

Evaluate the samples in the order listed below, from top to bottom, then arrange the samples in order of their
sweetness. Assign the sample with the sweetest a rank value of 1, the samples with the next sweetest rank value
of 2 and 3 and the sample with the least sweet a rank of 4.

CODE RANK ASSIGNED

A 3

B 1

C 4

D 2
 DISCUSSION

The Basic Taste Recognition Test is a fundamental component of sensory evaluation in

the food industry. It is designed to assess an individual's ability to recognize and differentiate
the four basic taste qualities: sweet, salty, sour, and bitter. In this test, each taste quality is
represented by a specific substance at a particular concentration. The concentrations used in
the test are as follows:
Despite the precise concentrations of these basic taste substances, it's not uncommon
for panelists to yield different results in a sensory report. Several factors can contribute to
these variations:
Everyone has a unique level of sensory acuity. Some panelists may have a more acute
sense of taste, allowing them to detect and differentiate flavors more accurately, while others
may have less sensitivity.
Genetic factors can influence an individual's ability to perceive and recognize certain
tastes. Genetic variations in taste receptors can lead to differences in how people perceive
sweetness, saltiness, sourness, and bitterness. Panelists' previous experiences with certain
tastes can affect their recognition abilities. Familiarity with specific tastes and cultural
background can lead to differences in perception. An individual's mood, focus, and overall state
of mind can influence their taste perception. A panelist's mood or stress level on the day of the
test can impact their results. The level of training and experience of the panelists also plays a
role. Trained sensory panelists who are well-versed in the descriptive language of taste may
yield more consistent results than untrained panelists. Factors such as age and health can
impact taste perception. For example, taste perception may change with age, and certain
health conditions or medications can alter one's ability to taste. The interaction of multiple
tastes in a food or beverage can lead to variations in how individual tastes are perceived. For
example, sweetness can mask bitterness to some extent.
 The discussion about the ranking of intensity tests for sucrose solutions at different
concentrations (7.5%, 10.0%, 12.5%, and 15.0%) reveals the intriguing variations in sensory
perception and highlights the factors contributing to differing results among panelists.
The human perception of sweetness is a complex sensory attribute. While it's generally
associated with the concentration of sugar in a solution, individual differences in taste
perception can lead to variations in ranking the intensity of sweetness. Not all panelists will
have the same level of sensitivity to sweet tastes. Some individuals may be more sensitive to
subtle differences in sugar concentration, while others may require a higher concentration of
sugar to perceive the same level of sweetness. These innate differences in taste sensitivity can
lead to variations in ranking.
The panelists prior exposure to different sugar concentrations can influence their
sensory perception. Individuals who regularly consume high-sugar diets may have developed a
higher tolerance for sweetness and thus might rank lower concentrations as less intense.
Cultural and dietary backgrounds can impact taste perceptions. Panelists from regions where
high-sugar diets are common may be accustomed to sweeter flavors, which can affect their
perception of sweetness intensity.
Panelists expectations can influence their sensory evaluations. If they were aware of the
varying sugar concentrations, their expectations might have led to different rankings based on
what they anticipated. Repeatedly evaluating the intensity of sweetness can lead to sensory
fatigue, where panelists become less sensitive over time. This can result in variations in
rankings, particularly if the order of presentation was not counterbalanced.
The perception of sweetness can interact with other taste qualities, such as bitterness.
The presence of bitter notes in the solutions may affect the perceived sweetness intensity
differently for various panelists. Variations in sensory perception are not uncommon, and some
degree of variability among panelists is expected. Statistical fluctuations can influence the final
rankings.
 CONCLUSION

In conclusion, variations in the results of a Basic Taste Recognition Test are common due to the
complex interplay of sensory, physiological, psychological, and environmental factors. It is
crucial to consider these factors when interpreting sensory reports and making informed
decisions about the development and evaluation of food products. Recognizing and accounting
for individual differences in taste perception is vital for producing food products that meet
consumer preferences and quality standards. While the differences in rankings for the sucrose
solutions' sweetness intensity can be attributed to the complex interplay of individual
differences in taste sensitivity, adaptation, cultural factors, and psychological variables. These
variations are inherent to sensory evaluation and highlight the importance of considering the
factors that can influence panelists' perceptions when interpreting sensory results. To reduce
the impact of these variations, it is essential to use a diverse panel, standardize testing
conditions, and carefully analyze the data to draw meaningful conclusions.