We often talk about the tests that consumer associations and other organizations periodically carry out on food products – from tomato sauce to chocolate, from coffee to panettone. But have you ever wondered how reliable these tests really are? Do they all use equivalent and verifiable parameters? The answer, in reality, is no. And it is precisely to overcome this problem that an important innovation arrives: the first scientific protocol to guarantee reliability, transparency and homogeneity in comparative taste tests on food products.
Attention: we are talking specifically about sensory tests, i.e. those based on the taste, smell, consistency and appearance of the products. They do not concern chemical or nutritional analyzes (which measure, for example, the presence of contaminants or nutrient content), but precisely those tests where different products are tasted and compared to draw up approval rankings.
The need for a shared protocol
The University of Gastronomic Sciences of Pollenzo, at the request of Unionfood, conducted an analysis that highlighted various critical issues in the comparative sensory tests published by specialized magazines, sector websites and digital creators.
First of all, the selection of products is often uneven: products with very different expiry dates, packages with different weights, or even artisanal products with industrial ones are compared – which have completely different sensorial characteristics and are not really comparable.
But there’s more. Evaluation methods are unclear or completely absent, without standardized scientific protocols. Sometimes we don’t even know how the tests were conducted, who did them and with what criteria. And there is also an improper use of technical terms, which creates confusion between subjective satisfaction and objective quality of the product.
The result? Tests that risk being unreliable and can orient consumers incorrectly.
The solution?
The protocol proposes three scientifically validated methodological approaches, designed to adapt to different editorial and budgetary needs. Let’s see them in detail.
Method 1: Basic satisfaction test
The first level involves a panel of at least 50 real consumers of the analyzed product. Participants must be actual users of that category of food – there is no point in letting someone who never drinks it taste coffee.
The evaluation takes place “blind”, therefore without consumers seeing brands or packaging, using standardized satisfaction scales. The data is then analyzed using statistical methods to identify significant differences between products.
Method 2: Comprehensive testing with descriptive analysis
The second level is more in-depth and requires a panel of 100-120 consumers. In addition to the satisfaction ranking, a detailed sensorial profile of each product is created and the so-called “preference drivers” are identified – that is, what makes consumers really like a product.
This method allows us to understand, for example, that a panettone is appreciated because it is particularly soft and has a good butter aroma, while another is less appreciated due to the crumb being too moist.
Method 3: Professional analyses
The third level involves the use of a panel of qualified tasters who provide an in-depth analytical description of the sensory characteristics. It is the most technical and rigorous method, suitable when an extremely detailed analysis is desired.
Key recommendations for truly transparent testing
In addition to the three main methods, the University of Pollenzo protocol provides some fundamental recommendations that should always be followed. First of all, it is essential to ensure that the selection of products is homogeneous: only comparable products should be compared, avoiding mixing artisanal and industrial ones, and choosing those with expiry dates in a similar time interval and packages with comparable weights.
It is equally important to guarantee maximum transparency on the method adopted. Each test should be accompanied by a clear information table indicating who organized the test, how many and which products were evaluated, with what selection criteria, who participated in the tasting, which method was used and which evaluation scale was adopted.
The conditions of administration of the samples must be standardized: all products must be served in the same conditions, with anonymous codes to avoid psychological influences, and with the use of “palate cleansers” such as crackers or water between one tasting and another; furthermore, the order of presentation of the products must be randomized to avoid distortions.
Finally, the results cannot be based on subjective impressions, but must be processed with rigorous statistical analyses, capable of highlighting truly significant differences between products.
Because it is an important protocol
Sensory tests conducted with shared criteria, rigorous methods and communicated in a transparent way are essential to obtain reliable results that can improve the quality of the information offered to consumers and operators in the sector – explains Luisa Torri, Pro-Rector of the University of Pollenzo.
For consumers, it means they can finally rely on truly reliable tests when choosing what to put in their cart. No more arbitrary or unclear rankings, but results based on verifiable scientific methodologies.
For food companies, however, they represent a guarantee of fairness: their products will be evaluated according to uniform scientific criteria, strengthening credibility with consumers.
The University of Pollenzo protocol represents a first concrete step towards the harmonization of testing practices in the food sector. The objective is to raise information standards through rigorous methodologies that are also applicable outside academic laboratories.
Now the ball is in the court of magazines and websites: will they really adopt these standards?
