Comparing information obtained from ranking and descriptive tests of four sweet corn products

Descriptive profiling is known to require long and expensive training of assessors to provide reliable and consistent results. However, alternative methods for obtaining this type of information are limited. Two experiments were conducted to compare the quality of results obtained by conventional profiling and an alternative solution, a ranking test. In the first experiment, a trained panel of eight assessors evaluated 10 attributes of sweet corn whereas in the second experiment, an untrained panel of 20 assessors performed the same task on the same samples but using a ranking procedure. The results from both experiments are coherent as far as overall product discrimination is concerned. Slight discrepancies were found in the discriminating attributes from one panel to another. These experiments also showed that methods used to measure consensus for profile data such as generalised Procrustes analysis can be applied to ranking data to provide the same kind of results. The findings suggest that whenever one has insufficient time to train a panel, one should consider using an untrained panel and conduct a ranking test. Further studies, however, are needed to verify if ranking tests can be used fruitfully or adapted to a wider range of products and a greater number of attributes.