Literature DB >> 27501332

Psychophysical Tracking Method to Measure Taste Preferences in Children and Adults.

Julie A Mennella1, Nuala K Bobowski2.   

Abstract

The Monell two-series, forced-choice, paired-comparison tracking method provides a reliable measure of sweet taste preferences from childhood to adulthood. The method, which is identical for children, adolescents, and adults, is of short duration (< 15 min), does not rely on sustained attention or place demands on memory (which would yield spurious age differences), and minimizes the impact of language development, making this method amenable to the cognitive limitations of pediatric populations. In this whole-mouth tasting method, subjects are asked to taste (without swallowing) pairs of solutions of different sucrose concentrations and to point to the solution they prefer. Each subsequent pair contains the participant's preceding preferred concentration and an adjacent stimulus concentration. The procedure continues until the subject chooses either a given concentration of sucrose when paired with both a higher and a lower concentration, or the highest or lowest concentration two consecutive times. Subjects are prevented from reaching response criteria on the basis of first or second position bias by the two-series design of the method, which counterbalances the order of solution presentation within each pair between the series (the weaker concentration is presented first in Series 1, second in Series 2). The geometric mean of the two sucrose concentrations chosen in Series 1 and 2 is an estimate of the participant's most preferred level of sucrose. Sucrose preference as determined with this laboratory-based measure has been shown to be associated with preference for sugars in foods and beverages and with taste receptor genotype, family history of alcoholism, and race/ethnicity, as well as depressive symptomatology among pediatric populations. The method has real-world relevance and has been applied to determine most preferred level of other tastes (e.g., salt), making it a valuable psychophysical tool.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27501332      PMCID: PMC6445264          DOI: 10.3791/54163

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vis Exp        ISSN: 1940-087X            Impact factor:   1.355


  19 in total

Review 1.  Learning to prefer the familiar in obesogenic environments.

Authors:  Leann L Birch; Stephanie Anzman-Frasca
Journal:  Nestle Nutr Workshop Ser Pediatr Program       Date:  2011-10-03

2.  U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2010. 7th Edition, Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, January 2011.

Authors:  Shelley McGuire
Journal:  Adv Nutr       Date:  2011-04-30       Impact factor: 8.701

3.  Factors contributing to individual differences in sucrose preference.

Authors:  M Yanina Pepino; Julie A Mennella
Journal:  Chem Senses       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 3.160

4.  Effects of cigarette smoking and family history of alcoholism on sweet taste perception and food cravings in women.

Authors:  Marta Yanina Pepino; Julie A Mennella
Journal:  Alcohol Clin Exp Res       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 3.455

5.  Tests for screening olfactory and gustatory function in school-age children.

Authors:  David G Laing; C Segovia; T Fark; O N Laing; A L Jinks; J Nikolaus; T Hummel
Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 3.497

6.  Sweet preferences and analgesia during childhood: effects of family history of alcoholism and depression.

Authors:  Julie A Mennella; M Yanina Pepino; Sara M Lehmann-Castor; Lauren M Yourshaw
Journal:  Addiction       Date:  2010-02-09       Impact factor: 6.526

7.  Evaluation of the Monell forced-choice, paired-comparison tracking procedure for determining sweet taste preferences across the lifespan.

Authors:  Julie A Mennella; Laura D Lukasewycz; James W Griffith; Gary K Beauchamp
Journal:  Chem Senses       Date:  2011-01-12       Impact factor: 3.160

8.  Genetic and environmental determinants of bitter perception and sweet preferences.

Authors:  Julie A Mennella; M Yanina Pepino; Danielle R Reed
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 7.124

9.  Taste development: differential growth rates of tongue regions in humans.

Authors:  Elizabeth C Temple; Ian Hutchinson; David G Laing; Anthony L Jinks
Journal:  Brain Res Dev Brain Res       Date:  2002-04-30

Review 10.  Optimizing oral medications for children.

Authors:  Julie A Mennella; Gary K Beauchamp
Journal:  Clin Ther       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 3.393

View more
  4 in total

1.  Personal Variation in Preference for Sweetness: Effects of Age and Obesity.

Authors:  Nuala Bobowski; Julie A Mennella
Journal:  Child Obes       Date:  2017-05-12       Impact factor: 2.992

2.  Psychophysical Tracking Method to Assess Taste Detection Thresholds in Children, Adolescents, and Adults: The Taste Detection Threshold (TDT) Test.

Authors:  Paule V Joseph; Julie A Mennella; Beverly J Cowart; M Yanina Pepino
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2021-04-21       Impact factor: 1.355

3.  Exposure to a slightly sweet lipid-based nutrient supplement during early life does not increase the level of sweet taste most preferred among 4- to 6-year-old Ghanaian children: follow-up of a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Harriet Okronipa; Mary Arimond; Charles D Arnold; Rebecca R Young; Seth Adu-Afarwuah; Solace M Tamakloe; Maku E Ocansey; Sika M Kumordzie; Brietta M Oaks; Julie A Mennella; Kathryn G Dewey
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 7.045

4.  Characterizing Individual Differences in Sweet Taste Hedonics: Test Methods, Locations, and Stimuli.

Authors:  May M Cheung; Matthew Kramer; Gary K Beauchamp; Sari Puputti; Paul M Wise
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2022-01-15       Impact factor: 5.717

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.