LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Savidan, Capucine; Morris, Cecile (2015)
Publisher: Wiley
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects:
Projective Mapping has recently attracted a lot of attention and the main sensory data acquisition software packages have developed interfaces to collect projective mapping data. However, the comparison between paper and computer based projective mapping has never been reported. The objectives of this research were to 1) compare the consensus maps and panelists' performances for paper and computer based projective mapping and 2) analyze the panelists' strategies while performing either tasks. In the first part of the study, 32 panelists were asked to perform both paper and computer based projective mapping on 8 beer samples. In a second part of the study, 10 panelists were asked to repeat the tasks whilst “thinking aloud” their strategy. There was no significant difference in panelists' performance as assessed by the People Performance Index (PPI) between the paper and computer tasks. The consensus maps obtained were similar with respect to sample groupings, RV coefficients and variation explained by the first 2 dimensions. Individual panelists adopted similar strategies on paper and computer but strategies differed greatly between panelists.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • CAMPOS, J. A. D. B, ZUCOLOTO, M. L., BONAFÉ, F. S. S, JORDANI, P. C. and MAROCO, J. 2011. Reliability and validity of self-reported burnout in college students: A cross randomized comparison of paper-and-pencil vs. online administration. Comp. Hum. Behavior. 27, 1875-1883 HUSSON, F., JOSSE, J., LÊ, S. and MAZET, J. 2014. Multivariate Exploratory Data Analysis and Data Mining with R (Version 1.28) PAGÈS, J. and HUSSON, F. 2001. Inter-laboratory comparison of sensory profiles: Methodology and results. Food Qual. Pref. 12, 297-309
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article