» Articles » PMID: 26516297

Perception of Chemesthetic Stimuli in Groups Who Differ by Food Involvement and Culinary Experience

Overview
Date 2015 Oct 31
PMID 26516297
Citations 4
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

In the English language, there is generally a limited lexicon when referring to the sensations elicited by chemesthetic stimuli like capsaicin, allyl isothiocyanate, and eugenol, the orally irritating compounds found in chiles, wasabi, and cloves, respectively. Elsewhere, experts and novices have been shown to use language differently, with experts using more precise language. Here, we compare perceptual maps and word usage across three cohorts: experts with formal culinary education, naïve individuals with high Food Involvement Scale (FIS) scores, and naïve individuals with low FIS scores. We hypothesized that increased experience with foods, whether through informal experiential learning or formal culinary education, would have a significant influence on the perceptual maps generated from a sorting task conducted with chemesthetic stimuli, as well as on language use in a descriptive follow-up task to this sorting task. The low- and highFIS non-expert cohorts generated significantly similar maps, though in other respects the highFIS cohort was an intermediate between the lowFIS and expert cohorts. The highFIS and expert cohorts generated more attributes but used language more idiosyncratically than the lowFIS group. Overall, the results from the expert group with formal culinary education differed from the two naïve cohorts both in the perceptual map generated using MDS as well as the mean number of attributes generated. Present data suggest that both formal education and informal experiential learning result in lexical development, but the level and type of learning can have a significant influence on language use and the approach to a sorting task.

Citing Articles

Food Involvement, Food Choices, and Bioactive Compounds Consumption Correlation during COVID-19 Pandemic: How Food Engagement Influences Consumers' Food Habits.

Medoro C, Cianciabella M, Magli M, Daniele G, Lippi N, Gatti E Nutrients. 2022; 14(7).

PMID: 35406102 PMC: 9003202. DOI: 10.3390/nu14071490.


Impact of capsaicin on aroma release: in vitro and in vivo analysis.

Yang N, Galves C, Racioni Goncalves A, Chen J, Fisk I Food Res Int. 2020; 133:109197.

PMID: 32466935 PMC: 7262593. DOI: 10.1016/j.foodres.2020.109197.


Effect of Product Involvement on Panels' Vocabulary Generation, Attribute Identification, and Sample Configurations in Beer.

Elgaard L, Mielby L, Heymann H, Byrne D Foods. 2019; 8(10).

PMID: 31614834 PMC: 6835354. DOI: 10.3390/foods8100488.


Influence of biological, experiential and psychological factors in wine preference segmentation.

Pickering G, Hayes J Aust J Grape Wine Res. 2017; 23(2):154-161.

PMID: 28579910 PMC: 5451159. DOI: 10.1111/ajgw.12266.

References
1.
Nestrud M, Lawless H . Recovery of subsampled dimensions and configurations derived from napping data by MFA and MDS. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2011; 73(4):1266-78. DOI: 10.3758/s13414-011-0091-0. View

2.
DeNeve K, Cooper H . The happy personality: a meta-analysis of 137 personality traits and subjective well-being. Psychol Bull. 1998; 124(2):197-229. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.197. View

3.
Green B, Hayes J . Individual differences in perception of bitterness from capsaicin, piperine and zingerone. Chem Senses. 2004; 29(1):53-60. DOI: 10.1093/chemse/bjh005. View

4.
Green B . Temperature perception and nociception. J Neurobiol. 2004; 61(1):13-29. DOI: 10.1002/neu.20081. View

5.
Byrnes N, Hayes J . Personality factors predict spicy food liking and intake. Food Qual Prefer. 2013; 28(1):213-221. PMC: 3607321. DOI: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2012.09.008. View