ArticleNutrients2020
Discrimination of Isointense Bitter Stimuli in a Beer Model System.
Article in Nutrients, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Flavor science in the context of research on electronic cigarettes.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Review
- The gastrointestinal tract in hunger and satiety signalling.United European gastroenterology journal · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Prior work suggests humans can differentiate between bitter stimuli in water. Here, we describe three experiments that test whether beer consumers can discriminate between different bitterants in beer. In Experiment 1 (n = 51), stimuli were intensity matched; Experiments 2 and 3 were a difference from control (DFC)/check-all-that-apply (CATA) test (n = 62), and an affective test (n = 81). All used a commercial non-alcoholic beer spiked with Isolone (a hop extract), quinine sulfate dihydrate, and sucrose octaacetate (SOA). In Experiment 1, participants rated intensities on general labeled magnitude scales (gLMS), which were analyzed via ANOVA. In Experiment 2, participants rated how different samples were from a reference of Isolone on a 7-point DFC scale, and endorsed 13 attributes in a CATA task. DFC data were analyzed via ANOVA with Dunnett's test to compare differences relative to a blind reference, and CATA data were analyzed via Cochran's Q test. In Experiment 3, liking was assessed on labeled affective magnitude scales, and samples were also ranked. Liking was analyzed via ANOVA and rankings were analyzed with a Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test. Experiment 1 confirmed that samples were isointense. In Experiment 2, despite being isointense, both quinine (
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.