MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2726680096 · doi:10.1111/1750-3841.13799

Using Preferred Attribute Elicitation to Determine How Males and Females Evaluate Beer

2017· article· en· W2726680096 on OpenAlexaffabout
Elizabeth Muggah, Matthew B. McSweeney

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Food Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSensory Analysis and Statistical Methods
Canadian institutionsAcadia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCraftBrewingFood scienceNova scotiaPsychologyGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The variety of beers available for consumption has increased due to the recent emergence of many craft brewing operations and it has been suggested that this is affecting how consumers evaluate beer. Currently, beer consumers are mostly male and only 20% of women are primarily beer drinkers. The main objective of this project is to compare and contrast descriptions of beer products created by males and females. The preferred attribute elicitation (PAE) method was used to create a description of 4 beers common to residents of Nova Scotia, Canada. Four PAE sessions were held: 2 sessions consisted of females (n = 16 and 15) and 2 sessions of males (n = 11 and 17). Four beer samples were chosen from locally available commercial beers, 2 of these samples were considered to be craft-brewed beer and the other samples were nationally available brands (macrobrewed). Both the males and females generated descriptions that included 5 identical terms; however, they differed in the importance they assigned to each attribute. Notably, bitterness was perceived to be of more importance to female panelists. Throughout all PAE sessions, the craft-brewed beers were associated with considerably more sensory attributes than the macrobrewed beers. It can be concluded that both the female and male groups found discernible differences between the craft and macrobrewed beers; however, they place importance on different sensory attributes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.398
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.016 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Food ScienceSame topicSensory Analysis and Statistical MethodsFrench-language works237,207