JUSTIFYING COUNT-BASED COMPARISONS: JUSTIFYING COUNT-BASED COMPARISONS

作者: JOHN M. ENNIS , DANIEL M. ENNIS

DOI: 10.1111/J.1745-459X.2012.00375.X

关键词:

摘要: Count-based comparisons such as “7 out of 10” or “2 to 1” are often used quantify superior product performance. Because experimental variability, statistics needed ensure confidence in comparisons. Even so, count-based commonly appear without any statistical treatment the data. In this article, we discuss support these Specifically, identify two different types comparisons: proportional and ratio We then provide justify before providing significance tables for practitioners. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS When an advertiser claims that one offers a benefit over another, consumer needs be reasonably sure experiencing purported benefit. Similarly, when test result is compared with benchmark, it worth considering how confident comparison. Without statistics, there no reason expect results particular will experienced future. Until now, comparison have not appeared sensory literature. remedy lack by both discussion practitioners.

参考文章(29)
JOHN M. ENNIS, VIRGINIE JESIONKA, THE POWER OF SENSORY DISCRIMINATION METHODS REVISITED Journal of Sensory Studies. ,vol. 26, pp. 371- 382 ,(2011) , 10.1111/J.1745-459X.2011.00353.X
Jian Bi, Comments on D.M. Ennis' presentation on equivalence testing Food Quality and Preference. ,vol. 21, pp. 259- 260 ,(2010) , 10.1016/J.FOODQUAL.2009.12.003
E. C. FIELLER, THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE INDEX IN A NORMAL BIVARIATE POPULATION Biometrika. ,vol. 24, pp. 428- 440 ,(1932) , 10.1093/BIOMET/24.3-4.428
Daniel M. Ennis, John M. Ennis, Hypothesis Testing for Equivalence Defined on Symmetric Open Intervals Communications in Statistics - Theory and Methods. ,vol. 38, pp. 1792- 1803 ,(2009) , 10.1080/03610920802460787
Rune Haubo Bojesen Christensen, Hye-Seong Lee, Per Bruun Brockhoff, Estimation of the Thurstonian model for the 2-AC protocol Food Quality and Preference. ,vol. 24, pp. 119- 128 ,(2012) , 10.1016/J.FOODQUAL.2011.10.005
John C. Castura, Equivalence testing: A brief review Food Quality and Preference. ,vol. 21, pp. 257- 258 ,(2010) , 10.1016/J.FOODQUAL.2009.12.002
KATHRYN W. CHAPMAN, HARRY T. LAWLESS, SOURCES OF ERROR AND THE NO-PREFERENCE OPTION IN DAIRY PRODUCT TESTING Journal of Sensory Studies. ,vol. 20, pp. 454- 468 ,(2005) , 10.1111/J.1745-459X.2005.00039.X
Michael Meyners, Comment on the letters by D.M. Ennis and J. Bi Food Quality and Preference. ,vol. 19, pp. 346- ,(2008) , 10.1016/J.FOODQUAL.2007.10.002