Cognitive Keys in Psychophysical Estimation of Chemosensory Perception in University Students

dc.contributor.authorMaria Martinez-Sanchez, Laura
dc.contributor.authorParra-Martinez, Cecilio
dc.contributor.authorEugenio Martinez-Garcia, Tomas
dc.contributor.authorMartinez-Garcia, Concha
dc.contributor.authoraffiliation[Maria Martinez-Sanchez, Laura] Univ Cadiz, Fac Educ Sci, Dept Didact Phys Plast & Mus Educ, Puerto Real 11519, Spain
dc.contributor.authoraffiliation[Parra-Martinez, Cecilio] Univ Huelva, Fac Expt Sci, Dept Chem, Huelva 21007, Spain
dc.contributor.authoraffiliation[Eugenio Martinez-Garcia, Tomas] Juan Ramon Jimenez Univ Hosp, Dept Internal Med, Huelva 21005, Spain
dc.contributor.authoraffiliation[Martinez-Garcia, Concha] Univ Huelva, Fac Educ Psychol & Sports Sci, Dept Social Dev & Educ Psychol, Huelva 21007, Spain
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-07T14:38:26Z
dc.date.available2025-01-07T14:38:26Z
dc.date.issued2021-12-01
dc.description.abstractPsychophysical methods allow us to measure the relationship between stimuli and sensory perception. Of these, Detection Threshold (DT) allows us to know the minimum concentration to produce taste identification. Given this, we wonder whether, for example, wine tasting experts are more capable of perceiving their sensory properties than other people, or whether they can distinguish them because they are better able to "describe" them. To verify this, this study analyses the influence of having prior knowledge of the name astringency and, failing that, to detect it and distinguish it between the four basic tastes. One-hundred-and-sixty-two university students with an average age of 19.43 (SD = 2.55) years were assigned to three experimental conditions: an experimental group (G.2) without previous knowledge of the name astringency and with alimentary satiety, and two control groups, both with previous knowledge of the name, these being G.1, with satiety, and G.3, with hunger. DT was collected for the four basic tastes and astringencies. Results showed significant differences in the identification of astringency, being the least identified experimental group with respect to the control groups. It is striking that G.2, without prior knowledge of the name, identified astringency as a bitter taste in most cases. This supports our hypothesis of the importance of attending to linguistic cognitive processes when psychophysically estimating taste in humans.
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/foods10123134
dc.identifier.essn2304-8158
dc.identifier.pmid34945685
dc.identifier.unpaywallURLhttps://www.mdpi.com/2304-8158/10/12/3134/pdf?version=1640165071
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10668/26550
dc.identifier.wosID807189000001
dc.issue.number12
dc.journal.titleFoods
dc.journal.titleabbreviationFoods
dc.language.isoen
dc.organizationSAS - Hospital Universitario Juan Ramón Jiménez
dc.publisherMdpi
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International
dc.rights.accessRightsopen access
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subjecttaste perception
dc.subjectpsychophysical measures
dc.subjectabsolute threshold
dc.subjectastringency
dc.subjectTaste
dc.subjectAstringency
dc.subjectActivation
dc.subjectHunger
dc.subjectWine
dc.titleCognitive Keys in Psychophysical Estimation of Chemosensory Perception in University Students
dc.typeresearch article
dc.type.hasVersionVoR
dc.volume.number10
dc.wostypeArticle

Files