of variation inherent in sensory data. Translation can remove the effect
of individual panelists who constantly under- or overscore a particular
attribute. Another source of variation occurs when subjects interpret the
same term differently. Rotation/reflection increases the similarity be-
tween the configurations (Piggott, 1986). Finally, isotropic scaling is
used to overcome the problem of subjects varying in their range of scor-
ing. One subject may use a very small range of the scale, while another
may use a much larger range to express differences between samples on
a particular attribute. GPA uniformly rescales individual assessor con-
figurations to a common overall value to eliminate this source of vari-
ation (McEwan, 1989).
MEALINESS—A MULTILINGUAL VOCABULARY
The consumption, nutritional contribution and sensory attributes of
fruit and vegetables make them important foodstuffs. Variation in their
texture has a great deal to do with their acceptability. Mealiness, in gen-
eral, is regarded as a negative characteristic except in cases where it is
a calculated aim. On the whole, it appears to be of low interest and ap-
peal (Szczesniak et al., 1971).
In the study by Andani et al. (1998), three commercially important
varieties of “fresh” dessert apples: Jonagold, Cox and Schone van
Boskoop, known to be susceptible to varying degrees of mealiness, were
evaluated. The aim of this work was to establish how consumers define
mealiness and explore crosscultural differences among European coun-
tries. The perception of mealiness among 25 consumers in five consumer
groups, the U.K., Spain, Belgium (Flemish, French) and Denmark, was
explored by the RGM and the data were analyzed by GPA.
Figure 9.5 shows the consensus plot from the repertory grid study.
The consumers were all subjected to the same GPA in order to look at
differences in perception across consumers in the different countries. To
explain the differences between perceptions, it was necessary to plot the
sample mean for the consumers within each country and then look at
their distribution around the global mean, which portrays how different
they are. From the map it can be seen that no one consumer group dif-
fered significantly from the others in terms of how they perceived the
individual samples. The position of the groups around each sample is
fairly tight. Second, consumers perceived the differences between sam-
Mealiness—A Multilingual Vocabulary 167