Search
Author
Title
Vol.
Issue
Year
1st Page

Journal of Animal Science Abstract - Animal Products

Determination of the effect of brand and product identification on consumer palatability ratings of ground beef patties123

 

This article in JAS

  1. Vol. 94 No. 11, p. 4943-4958
     
    Received: Aug 10, 2016
    Accepted: Sept 01, 2016
    Published: October 13, 2016


    4 Corresponding author(s): travisoquinn@ksu.edu
 View
 Download
 Share

doi:10.2527/jas.2016-0894
  1. A. K. Wilfonga,
  2. K. V. McKillipa,
  3. J. M. Gonzaleza,
  4. T. A. Housera,
  5. J. A. Unruha,
  6. E. A. E. Boylea and
  7. T. G. O’Quinn 4a
  1. a Department of Animal Sciences and Industry, Kansas State University, Manhattan 66506

Abstract

The objective of this study was to determine the effect of brand and product identification on consumer palatability ratings of ground beef patties. Six treatments were used in the study: 90/10 Certified Angus Beef (CAB) ground sirloin, 90/10 ground beef, 80/20 CAB ground chuck, 80/20 ground chuck, 80/20 ground beef, and 73/27 CAB ground beef. Ground beef was processed into 151.2-g patties using a patty former with 2 consecutively formed patties assigned to blind consumer testing and the following 2 assigned to informed testing. Following cooking to 74°C, patties were cut into quarters and served to consumers. Consumers (n = 112) evaluated samples in 2 rounds for tenderness, juiciness, flavor liking, texture liking, and overall liking. Each trait was also rated as either acceptable or unacceptable. In the first round of testing, samples were blind evaluated, with no information about the treatments provided to consumers, but in the second round, product type and brand were disclosed prior to sample evaluation. Additionally, texture profile and shear force analyses were performed on patties from each treatment. Few differences were observed for palatability traits during blind consumer testing; however, during informed testing, 90/10 CAB ground sirloin was rated greatest (P < 0.05) for all palatability traits other than juiciness. Also, 90/10 CAB ground sirloin had increased (P < 0.05; (consumer informed score − consumer blind score)/consumer blind score) ratings for tenderness (17.4%), juiciness (36.5%), flavor liking (23.3%), texture liking (18.2%), and overall liking (24.7%) due to brand disclosure. Increased (P < 0.05) ratings were found for CAB products for multiple traits due to treatment disclosure, whereas the only non-CAB-branded product that received increased (P < 0.05) ratings during informed testing was 90/10 ground beef for tenderness and juiciness. Texture results indicated that decreased fat level increased hardness, cohesiveness, gumminess, and chewiness. These results indicate that when sampling ground beef without brand and product information, few consumers find differences in eating quality among ground beef treatments; however, when consumers are aware of the brand, fat level, and subprimal blend prior to sampling, these factors have a large impact on consumer eating satisfaction.

  Please view the pdf by using the Full Text (PDF) link under 'View' to the left.

Copyright © 2016. American Society of Animal Science