Influence of Panel Inconsistency on the Outcome of Sensory Evaluations From Descriptive Panels

Different types of panelist by treatment interaction are explored to determine how they influence the outcomes of discrimination tests. The study compares the situations where panelists are considered as fixed or random effects over the range of most testing conditions for small panels (5–15 panelists) that replicate their judgements. Magnitude interaction and nonperceivers or nondiscriminators have minor effects on test outcomes. Cross‐over interaction increases the chances for a type II error, especially when panelists are considered as random effects. False discrimination increases the chances for a type I error when panelists are considered as fixed effects. Applications of methods to reduce the chances for these errors in the testing for differences among treatments are discussed.