Date of Award
2024
Degree Type
Thesis
Degree Name
Master of Science in Nutrition and Food Science
Department
Nutrition
First Advisor
Kathleen Melanson
Abstract
Objective: To compare subjective palatability ratings across three meals differing by processing and nutritional quality (NQ) in healthy young adults. The aim was to match meals for subjective palatability in preparation for a larger crossover study. As such, an interim analysis was planned to determine if the meals were tracking towards similar ratings or not.
Methods: In this within-subjects individualized-testing study, 30 consented participants reported demographics. They each came for one 1-hour lab visit to sample three matched (flavor profiles, macronutrients, energy) test meals differing by processing and NQ: Low Ultra-Processed food (UPF)/High NQ (Meal 1), High UPF/High NQ (Meal 2), High UPF/Low NQ (Meal 3A or 3B). Meal administration order was randomized. All 30 participants consumed Meals 1 and 2. The midpoint analysis after 15 participants led to revising the High UPF/Low NQ meal. Thus, the first half the participants consumed Meal 3A (High UPF/Low NQ that met the nutrient-based definition of hyperpalatable). The remaining half consumed Meal 3B (High UPF/Low NQ with more similar food types to Meals 1 and 2). Palatability scores were measured using 100 mm visual analogue scales (VAS). These included scales for pleasantness, tastiness, texture appeal, sweetness, and saltiness along with an open-ended feedback question. Participants sampled a meal, consuming as much as they wanted, and rated its palatability on the VAS afterwards. This was repeated for the remaining two meals. Composite hedonic appeal scores were calculated by averaging the VAS scores for pleasantness, tastiness, and texture appeal for each meal. One way analysis of variance compared average composite hedonic and palatability scores across meals followed by Tukey post-hoc using SAS studio. Qualitative data from VAS open-ended feedback questions were analyzed using ATLAS.ti to identify themes and frequency of codes.
Results: Participants (N=30) were mostly female (n=22, 73.3%) with self-reported BMI in the normal (58.3%) range, and the rest in either the overweight (33.3%) or obese (8.3%) range. Across all four meals there were no differences in composite hedonic scores. The palatability category “sweet” was significantly higher comparing Meals 3A and 3B to Meals 1 and 2 (p < .0001) but were not significantly different from each other. Across all four meals there were no differences in palatability categories: pleasant (p=0.36), tasty (p=0.7918), texture (p=0.48) and salty (p=0.4761). All scores averaged moderately (Hedonic Appeal 52.0-64.3, Pleasant 52.4-64.6, Tastiness 53.3-67.1, Texture 48.4- 65.1, Salty 13.3- 31.0, Sweet 48.6- 80.8). Qualitative data revealed that participants reported that Meal 3A was too sweet and that participants preferred meals with higher NQ than meals that are High UPF/Low NQ.
Conclusions: These young adults did not rate hedonic appeal or palatability differently for meals varying in UPF and NQ. Meals with high UPF and low NQ were rated as more sweet, but not more palatable, which contrasts with literature that characterizes UPF as hyperpalatable. Further, NQ may be involved in subjective palatability. More research is needed with various foods and populations for defining UPFs as hyperpalatable.
Recommended Citation
Seibold, Ilayna, "COMPOSITE HEDONIC SCORES AND SUBJECTIVE PALATABILITY RATINGS IN YOUNG ADULTS CONSUMING THREE BREAKFAST MEALS DIFFERING BY LEVEL OF FOOD PROCESSING AND NUTRITIONAL QUALITY" (2024). Open Access Master's Theses. Paper 2538.
https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/theses/2538