↓ Skip to main content

Lexicon Development, Consumer Acceptance, and Drivers of Liking of Quinoa Varieties

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Food Science, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
104 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Lexicon Development, Consumer Acceptance, and Drivers of Liking of Quinoa Varieties
Published in
Journal of Food Science, March 2017
DOI 10.1111/1750-3841.13677
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Quinoa is becoming increasingly popular, with an expanding number of commercially available varieties. To compare the sensory properties of these quinoa varieties, a common sensory lexicon needs to be developed. Thus, the objective of this study was to develop a lexicon of cooked quinoa and examine consumer acceptance of diverse varieties. A trained panel (n = 9) developed aroma, taste/flavor, texture, and color descriptors to describe the sensory properties of 21 quinoa varieties. In addition, texture of the cooked quinoa was determined using a texture analyzer. Results indicated that the developed lexicon could distinguish among these quinoa varieties, showing significant differences in aromas, taste/flavors, and texture attributes. Specifically, quinoa variety effects were observed for the aromas of caramel, nutty, buttery, grassy, earthy, and woody; taste/flavor of sweet, bitter, grain-like, nutty, earthy, and toasty; and firm, cohesive, pasty, adhesive, crunchy, chewy, astringent, and moist textures. Three varieties, "QQ74," "Linares," and "CO407D," exhibited an adhesive texture that has not been described in other commercialized quinoa. Subsequent consumer evaluation (n = 100) on 6 selected samples found that the "Commercial Red" sample was the most accepted overall whereas the least accepted was the field variety "QQ74." For all consumers, overall acceptance of quinoa was driven by higher intensities of grassy aroma, and firm and crunchy texture. Segmentation of the consumers into 4 groups was explored and showed that consumers varied in their acceptance of specific attributes, particularly texture. From the present study, the quinoa lexicon and key drivers of consumer acceptance can be utilized in the industry to evaluate quinoa varieties, product quality and processing procedures.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 104 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 13%
Researcher 13 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Other 6 6%
Other 16 15%
Unknown 33 32%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 31 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 6%
Engineering 4 4%
Chemistry 4 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Other 20 19%
Unknown 35 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 May 2017.
All research outputs
#20,422,914
of 22,974,684 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Food Science
#4,568
of 5,130 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#268,321
of 307,959 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Food Science
#51
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,974,684 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,130 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 307,959 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.