![]() In that respect, Berlyne Theory has raised interest in sensory and consumer science because it means that accounting for product complexity before launch could serve to avoid certain food product failures (Köster and Mojet, 2007). These properties are called “collative” because they imply a comparison (a collation) with previous experiences (Berlyne, 1967 p. In addition, it was stressed that complexity, considered with other collative properties such as novelty, determine the arousal potential of a product. For each individual, this response may thus be represented with an inverted-U curve. This theory asserts that, for each individual, hedonic response to a stimulus increases with its complexity until an optimal level is reached, then it declines. Furthermore, it has even been theorized that complexity could influence consumer preferences (Berlyne, 1971). Sensory complexity of a food product refers mainly to the quality and number of perceived sensations and to their temporal evolution although there is no clear consensus on the definition of sensory complexity in the literature (Palczak et al., 2019) and some authors question this assessment (Spence and Wang, 2018a). ![]() The process of innovation should account for the mastery of complexity where ingredients, texture and taste merge to create this complexity. Innovations can also be a result of a combination of ingredients from existing recipes (Messeni Petruzzelli and Savino, 2014). It also highlights the benefits for the science of working with chefs.įood innovation can be considered as a process of combining ingredients using new techniques and/or elements. This study identifies several ways to drive food design through mastery of sensory complexity. The sensory results attest the effect of the strategies used, and results from naive participants confirm that the products exhibited the expected complexity levels intended by chefs. They combined different flavors and tastes, they contrasted textures, they worked on the temporal evolution of sensations, and they aimed to surprise the consumer. The results showed that the chefs used different design strategies to attain complexity. Fourth, fifteen naive participants (150 in total) evaluated the complexity of each sample within a triad (balanced order). Third, a technical testing session was set up with five tasters to perform sensory characterization of each sample. Second, each chef was invited to an individual 1-h interview to understand how he/she intended to deliver complexity. The recipe was to be sweet or savory but consumed cold and served in an opaque verrine (thick-walled cup usually used for small portion dish or amuse-bouche). First, ten pastry and culinary chefs from the Institut Paul Bocuse were asked to design three variants of a recipe of their choice varying in complexity: low, medium and high complexity. However, there are still unanswered questions: How far should innovation go in terms of complexity? How can food complexity be designed? How is structural complexity perceived by consumers? Here we set out to answer these questions following a four-step approach. These innovations are often characterized by different multi-textured and/or multi-flavored layers. For example, in the dairy category, innovation processes have upgraded yogurts to gourmet desserts. New products offer a benchmark showing how complexity is often a driver of food innovation.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |