Abstract
Recent studies have shown that the analytic-holistic theory is applicable in sensory science-related areas. Analytic and holistic cognitive style groups have been found to have significantly different perceptions and behaviors within food-related scenarios. These differences were further investigated and identified within the current study, focusing on specific areas of common sensory tests and analyses where analytic and holistic cognitive style groups may differ from one another. Before the main study, 419 volunteers were classified into three groups based on their scores to the Analysis-Holism Scale (AHS). The extreme groups (65 adults for each) were identified as the "analytic" and "holistic" cognitive style groups, respectively. Participants evaluated fruit-flavored beverages and fruit samples for their impression of the intensity or hedonic aspects in the study conducted over two sessions. Each session either employed solely category or line scale for the questions. Analyses focused on the analytic and holistic group comparisons in mean, variance, penalty analysis, and pre- and post-AHS score differences. Results showed that the holistic group exhibited significantly higher mean scores and standard deviations in the hedonic ratings of fruit samples than the analytic group did. Compared to the analytic group, the holistic group showed significantly smaller mean drops in overall liking across the five Just-About-Right (JAR) questions related to flavors or tastes of the mixed-fruit flavored water. A significant difference between the AHS scores measured before and after the sensory evaluation was observed in the holistic group, but not in the analytic group. In conclusion, our findings provide empirical evidence that cognitive styles affect consumer responses to food or beverage samples during sensory evaluation tasks. This implies that sensory professionals may consider these analytic-holistic contrasts while exploring consumer responses to their target samples.