This study proposes a methodology for the collection and the analysis of free‐text descriptions. Our hypotheses were that the high number of words usually required in textual data analysis could be compensated by (1) the expertise of the judges; and (2) by collecting free descriptions in the context of a Napping® evaluation (Ultra‐flash profiling [UFP]). This method was applied using 14 wine experts, who evaluated 10 red wines twice. The independent analysis of the words thus obtained is interpretable and rich of information. The comparison with the characterization obtained from an independent classical profiling both supports the results of the UFP and shows the specific contribution of this method. Moreover, the minimal quotation frequency from which the items were introduced in the analysis is discussed. In the present example, the robustness observed whatever the threshold selected is an argument in favor of the stability of this method. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS The example studied shows that it is possible to get an interpretable product space from free‐text comments provided by a limited number of judges, when judges are experts and when descriptions are collected in the context of a Napping® evaluation. Beyond the example, this study proposes a methodology for the collection and the analysis of free‐text comments.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Perrin et al. (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: