International Dairy Journal 28 (2013) 1e7

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

International Dairy Journal

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/idairyj

Consumer acceptance of regular and reduced-sugar yogurt enriched with

different types of dietary ber
Karin Hoppert a, Susann Zahn a, Luise Jnecke a, Robert Mai b, Stefan Hoffmann b, Harald Rohm a, *
a
b

Institute of Food Technology and Bioprocess Engineering, Technische Universitt Dresden, Bergstrasse 120, 01069 Dresden, Germany
Institute of Business Administration and Marketing, Technische Universitt Dresden, 01069 Dresden, Germany

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 2 July 2012
Received in revised form
22 August 2012
Accepted 23 August 2012

Reduction of energy in foods by eliminating sugar, combined with an increase in ber, frequently results
in products with sensory characteristics that cannot be compared with standard counterparts. This study
analyzed the response of young educated consumers (n 704) on standard or reduced-sugar vanilla
yogurt enriched with inulin or with inulin combined with a grain mixture, a milled mixture of akes, or
a combination of grains and milled akes. On a nine-point hedonic scale, mean acceptance was 6.4 and
6.8 for yogurt with 112 g kg1 and 160 g kg1 sugar, respectively. It was concluded from acceptance data
and from results obtained by just-about-right rating that adapting the avoring concentration might be
an appropriate tool to mask sugar reduction. In yogurt with visible ber, it is mainly the size of incorporated ber that should be considered in product optimization. In these products, sugar content
signicantly affects acceptance.
2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Yogurt is a popular dairy product with a consumption rate that
is still increasing. In 2009, per-head uptake in Germany and in the
USA was approximately 17.8 kg and 6.7 kg, respectively
(Anonymous, 2012a, 2012b). Compared with standard yogurt,
strategies to improve nutritional properties include fat reduction
and masking the consequences on texture by protein enrichment or
by using exopolysaccharide producing lactic acid bacteria,
fermentation with, or the addition of, probiotic microorganisms, or
the incorporation of prebiotics to provide specic nutrients for the
microbiota in the large intestine (e.g., Barrantes, Tamime, & Sword,
1994; Figueroa-Gonzalez, Quijano, Ramirez, & Cruz-Ferreiro, 2011;
Granato, Branco, Cruz, Fonseca Faria, & Shah, 2010; Jaros, Haque,
Kneifel, & Rohm, 2002). As regards the addition of dietary ber that
completely resists fermentation in the large intestine (e.g., cellulose; Lamsal & Faubion, 2009), the main consequences on product
quality depend on the properties and characteristics of the incorporated ber and include changes in water-holding capacity,
texture or structure.
Despite the recommendation to avoid the distinction between
soluble and insoluble ber because of physiological similarities
(Roberfroid, 2005) prebiotics such as inulin, an oligomeric fructose-

* Corresponding author. Tel.: 49 351 463 32420.

E-mail address: harald.rohm@tu-dresden.de (H. Rohm).
0958-6946/$ e see front matter 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.idairyj.2012.08.005

based carbohydrate that is associated with a pronounced bidogenic effect and other benets (Franck, 2002; Meyer & StasseWolthuis, 2009), can easily be dispersed in water. This is,
however, rarely the case for dietary ber such as bran that is, to
a large extent, resistant toward digestion; its major effect on the
human is intestinal regulation as it acts as a bulking agent (Larrauri,
1999; Ramirez-Santiago et al., 2010). The fact that a lack of ber in
the diet may be the cause of nutrition-associated diseases has been
long-known (e.g., Trowell, 1976) so that the European Food Safety
Association was obliged to recommend an average daily ber intake
of 25 g (EFSA, 2010).
Several studies showed that yogurt with visible ber (e.g.,
from asparagus, date or orange; Hashim, Khalil, & A, 2009;
Sanz, Salvadore, Jimenez, & Fiszman, 2008; Sendra et al., 2008)
is frequently downgraded in acceptance by the consumer
because of an unfamiliar appearance but also because of a berrelated off-taste. On the other hand, soluble carbohydrates are
not visible in yogurt so that the consumer has to rely on product
declaration. As previous experience with a particular food affects
decision-making and selection, consumers who favor berenriched products because of their nutritional knowledge may
perceive and accept a particular product differently than
consumers who have no attitude toward a balanced diet (Ares,
Gimenez, & Gambaro, 2008). It is therefore essential to gain
information in which way product optimization should be
carried out (Bayarri, Carbonell, Barrios, & Costell, 2011; Villegas,
Tarrega, Carbonell, & Costell, 2010).

K. Hoppert et al. / International Dairy Journal 28 (2013) 1e7

Taking the above into consideration, this study aims to identify

the main drivers that may be responsible for a lack of acceptance of
ber-enriched products, and thus hamper consumption. For that
purpose, we prepared yogurt with two levels of sugar and four
different types of ber and conducted a large-scale betweensubjects experiment with young educated consumers to compare
acceptability and just-about-right (JAR) ratings of taste and
mouthfeel of ber-enriched yogurt.

the energy-based requirement (see above). Six questions for the

JAR evaluation by untrained consumers were also established in
these sessions. In question 2, the descriptor vanilla-fruity avor
was selected because of the lemon scent of the provided vanilla
preparation (Table 2).
The yogurt was stored in a cold room and used for sensory
analysis within 4 d. Plain yogurt with 40 g kg1 vanilla preparation
and 112 or 160 g kg1 sugar served as reference (REF).

2. Materials and methods

2.3. Preliminary sensory experiments

2.1. Materials

To evaluate the effect of inulin, a pretest was conducted in

a sensory laboratory at 22  1  C with single cabins. In each of two
sessions, eleven trained panelists performed four triangle tests
with yogurt REF and INU (two with yogurt of 112 g kg1 sugar, and
two with yogurt with 160 g kg1 sugar). Approx. 40 g samples were
served at 10  2  C in 80 mL glass vials with random three-digit
numbers, and the panelists were asked to identify the odd one
(i.e., either REF or INU). Placement of triangles within each set, and
type and placement of the odd sample was randomized. An
appropriate table was used to compare the number of correct
answers with the number that is necessary for signicance
(Roessler, Pangborn, Sidel, & Stone, 1978).

A single lot of stirred plain yogurt with a fat content of 35 g kg1

served as bulk stimulus material (Molkerei Hainichen-Freiberg
GmbH, Freiberg, Germany). Commercial vanilla preparation was
from Zentis GmbH & Co KG (Aachen, Germany). The yogurt was
further manipulated in sugar content and ber type. Sugar was
purchased in a supermarket, and dietary ber was Fibruline
Instant, a medium chain inulin with a ber content of 880 g kg1
(INU; Cosucra, Warcoing, Belgium); a grain mixture containing
wheat, rye, oat, barley and millet (GR; ber content after boiling in
water: 65 g kg1; Kauand Warenhandels GmbH & Co KG, Neckarsulm, Germany); and a mixture of akes (containing oat, wheat,
rye, barley and spelt) with a ber content of 113 g kg1 (FL; Peter
Klln KGaA, Elmshorn, Germany).
2.2. Yogurt preparation
Plain yogurt was mixed with 40 g vanilla preparation per kg nal
product and with sucrose to ensure a nal sugar content of 160 or
112 g kg1 (30% reduction; residual lactose is included). The grain
mixture was boiled in tap water for 40 min whereas the akes were
milled in a Grindomix GM300 (Retsch GmbH, Haan, Germany) and
sieved to obtain a particle fraction of 0.8e1.0 mm (AS200, Retsch
GmbH). The quantities of cereals incorporated in yogurt (Table 1)
were selected on the basis of preceding sensory experiments,
which were performed to evaluate to what extent bers can be
added without negatively affecting palatability (data not shown).
Target ber content in all products was 1.5  0.05 g 100 kcal1,
which allows declaration as ber source according to EC regulations (EC, 2006). The additional incorporation of inulin to yogurt
with GR, FL and GR/FL was necessary to obtain that amount. Fiber
added to yogurt with higher sugar content was higher because of

Table 1
Enrichment of vanilla yogurt (4 g 100 g1 vanilla preparation, two sugar levels
adjusted with sucrose) to obtain a dietary ber level of 1.5 g per 100 kcal.
Component

112 g kg1 Sugar

Yogurtc (35 g kg1 fat)
Inulin
5-Grain mixture
5-Flake mixture
160 g kg1 Sugar
Yogurtc (35 g kg1 fat)
Inulin
5-Grain mixture
5-Flake mixture

Yogurt with dietary ber addition (g 100 g1)a

REF

INU

GR

FLb

GR/FL

100.0
e
e
e

98.3
1.7
e
e

88.9
1.1
10.0
e

96.5
1.5
e
2.0

87.0
1.0
10.0
2.0

100.0

97.8
2.2
e
e

88.4
1.6
10.0
e

96.0
2.0
e
2.0

e
e

86.5
1.5
8.0
2.0

a
Abbreviations are: REF, reference; INU, yogurt enriched with inulin; GR, yogurt
with grains; FL, yogurt with akes; GR/FL, yogurt with grains and akes.
b
0.8e1.0 mm Fraction of milled akes.
c
Includes 4 g vanilla preparation per 100 g product and sucrose to obtain the
desired concentration.

2.4. Acceptance testing

2.4.1. General procedure
Acceptance analysis was carried out in four sessions of
approximately 3 h duration in quiet corners of the ante-rooms of
two student canteens at our university. Under respecting privacy,
a total of 704 students (19e25 years old) were asked to spontaneously participate in the study. Each of the eight yogurt samples
(INU, GR, FL, GR/FL at two sugar concentrations) was judged by 88
students, who represent young consumers at higher educational
level. An independent test setup (one sample per subject) was
chosen because of the large number of different samples and the
expected time the subjects would be willing to spend. Half of the
students in each group were female. The sample that was presented
to the respective passers-by was randomly selected. Each participant received 40  2 g yogurt (at 12  C) in an 80 mL glass vial,
closed with a twist-off lid and encoded with a 3-digit number, and
was informed that the task was to judge ber-enriched vanilla
yogurt with respect to acceptance and specic sensory properties
by using given scales.
2.4.2. Assessment method
The rst task of each participant was affective judgment of
acceptance using an unstructured rating scale (90 mm length,
anchors: Dislike extremely and Like extremely). Each participant was instructed to mark the position of the product on that
scale that was provided on an A4 sheet. In data evaluation, the

Table 2
Questions used in just-about-right rating.a
Question
numberb

Phrasing of the question

Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6

In my opinion, sweetness of this yogurt is.

In my opinion, vanilla-fruity of this yogurt is.
In my opinion, this yogurts cereal taste is.
In my opinion, the size of cereals added to this yogurt is.
In my opinion, the amount of cereals added to this yogurt is.
To swallow this yogurt a certain effort is necessary. In my
opinion, this amount is.

a
b

Response categories to the questions were: too low; just-about-right; too high.
Only Q1 and Q2 were asked when yogurt was solely enriched with inulin.

K. Hoppert et al. / International Dairy Journal 28 (2013) 1e7

Table 3
Acceptability scores of vanilla yogurt enriched with dietary ber.
Producta

Acceptance scores at different sugar levelsb

INU
GR
FL
GR/FL

112 g kg1

160 g kg1

6.93a
5.95b
6.39ab
6.27b

6.82a
6.84a
6.89a
6.57a






1.39
1.90
1.69
1.58






1.49
1.72
1.77
1.79

as too low or too high. From that value, the overall liking mean
of respondents who judged the same property as just-about-right
was subtracted. Consequently, a drop in liking results in a negative
number. Finally, a penalty was calculated by multiplying the
percentage of not-right answers for each producteattribute
combination with the corresponding mean drop (Schraidt, 2009).
3. Results and discussion

Abbreviations are: INU, yogurt enriched with inulin; GR, yogurt with grains; FL,
yogurt with akes; GR/FL, yogurt with grains and akes.
b
Each value is arithmetic mean  standard deviation from n 88 scores. Means
with different letters differ signicantly (P < 0.05). Maximum acceptance score: 9.

acceptance scores were read from the graphic continuum to an

accuracy of 1 mm and converted to ratings from 0 to 9. Arithmetic
mean  standard deviation was calculated for each yogurt.
Subsequently, each participant had to judge six sensory properties of the yogurt using the JAR technique and a three-point
category scale with check boxes (Meilgaard, Civille, & Carr, 1999).
A three-point scale may have some disadvantages as regards scale
utilization but was favored because of its simple design, and
because its use is more compliant to yes/no decisions in daily life
(Lopez Osornio & Hough, 2010). The subjects had no information on
that task during acceptability testing so that an impact of the JAR
questions on overall liking (Gacula, Mohan, Faller, Pollack, &
Moskowitz, 2008) was avoided. The six JAR questions (see
Table 2) were printed on the back side of the A4 sheet, with corresponding check boxes labeled with too low (left), just-aboutright (midpoint), and too high (right); space for free comments
was also provided. When yogurt was solely enriched with inulin,
the JAR questionnaire comprised only the rst two questions.
Values of 1, 2 or 3 were assigned to the categories too low,
just-about-right or too high in the JAR assessments, respectively. For each yogurt and each attribute, arithmetic
mean  standard deviation was calculated, as was the relative
frequency of answers in each category. A two-tailed one-sample ttest was applied to evaluate whether each mean differed from the
scale midpoint (2) at P < 0.05 (Pitts, 2009). It was then checked
whether more than 70% of the responses were within the justabout-right category. When this was not the case it was tested
whether the number of above-JAR responses signicantly
(P < 0.05) exceeded the number of below-JAR responses or vice
versa using a binomial distribution table (Roessler et al., 1978).
To determine whether JAR ratings were associated with a drop
in spontaneous affective preference, a mean drop analysis was
performed. Separately for each attribute, the overall liking means
were calculated for respondents who judged a respective property

The purpose of the preliminary triangle test was to evaluate

whether the addition of inulin in an amount that corresponded to
a ber concentration of 1.5 g 100 kcal1 had a noticeable impact on
the sensory characteristics of avored yogurt. Such effects were
mentioned by several authors (Brennan & Tudorica, 2008;
Guggisberg, Cuthbert-Steven, Piccinali, Btikofer, & Eberhard,
2009; Kip, Meyer, & Jellema, 2006), whereas others observed the
opposite (Dello Staffolo, Bertola, Martino, & Bevilaqua, 2004;
Guven, Yasar, & Hayaloglu, 2005). Out of 44 observations in the
triangle tests, the deviating yogurt (REF or INU) was 14 times
(P 0.64) or 18 times (P 0.18) correctly picked for a sugar content
of 112 g kg1 and 160 g kg1, respectively. Based on these results,
we decided to withdraw yogurt REF from the subsequent consumer
study.
3.1. Affective acceptance of ber-enriched yogurt
The mean hedonic scores for the eight yogurt samples, given by
our student panel, ranged between 6 and 7 on the nine-point scale
(Table 3). This is high compared with data obtained using yogurt
drinks enriched with soluble dietary ber (Allgeyer, Miller, & Lee,
2010) and indicates that the products were well accepted. Except
for INU, mean ratings were higher for the products with the higher
sugar content. Two-way analysis of variance with the main factors
sugar content and ber type revealed that both affected the
respondents acceptance ratings at P < 0.05, and a signicant
(P < 0.05) interaction between the main factors. Whereas, for
yogurt with 160 g kg1 sugar, acceptance was not affected by ber
type, this value dropped signicantly for yogurt FL, GR/FL and,
especially, GR when sugar content was lower (112 g kg1). It is
evident that INU worked best to incorporate ber in yogurt, and it
may also be concluded that sugar content could serve as tool to
mask a lack in sensory quality.
3.2. Evaluation of JAR responses
Table 4 summarizes the averaged JAR scores with standard
deviations and indicates signicance of the deviation from scale

Table 4
Average just-about-right ratings for yogurt enriched with dietary ber and different sugar content.
Producta
112 g kg
INU
GR
FL
GR/FL

1

Flavor

1.94
1.89
1.97
1.97

0.54
 0.51
0.48
0.41

1.77
1.51
1.59
1.47






2.33
2.22
2.30
2.24






1.91
1.92
1.88
1.88

Cereal taste

Cereal size

Amount of cereals

Effort for swallowing

0.49
0.53
0.60
0.57

ec
2.24  0.55
1.91 0.64
2.26  0.51

e
2.32  0.52
1.75  0.63
2.48  0.57

e
1.95 0.62
1.88  0.54
2.12  0.52

e
2.19  0.55
1.90 0.59
2.23  0.66

0.56
0.38
 0.47
 0.42

e
2.07 0.58
2.01 0.67
2.38  0.57

e
2.41  0.60
1.81  0.68
2.30  0.65

e
2.19  0.50
1.97 0.39
2.22  0.51

e
2.11  0.44
1.95 0.40
2.18  0.42

Sugar

160 g kg1 Sugar

INU
GR
FL
GR/FL
b

Sweetnessb

0.59
0.55
0.50
0.48

Abbreviations are: INU, yogurt enriched with inulin; GR, yogurt with grains; FL, yogurt with akes; GR/FL, yogurt with grains and akes.
Values are the arithmetic mean  standard deviation (n 88 per line); mean values in bold do not differ signicantly (P > 0.05) from scale midpoint (2.0).
A dash (e) indicates that a response was not requested when only inulin was incorporated in yogurt.

K. Hoppert et al. / International Dairy Journal 28 (2013) 1e7

Fig. 1. Frequency distributions of the JAR response for ber-enriched yogurt with 112 g kg1 sugar (left column) or 160 g kg1 sugar (right column). Sample identiers: INU, yogurt
enriched with inulin; GR, yogurt with grains; FL, yogurt with akes; GR/FL, yogurt with grains and akes. Responses: gray bars, too low; white bars, just-about-right; black bars: too
high. *Indicates a frequency of just-about-right responses  70%; # indicates that too-low responses signicantly (P < 0.05) exceeded too-high responses or vice versa (only
displayed for <70% responses in the just-about-right category).

K. Hoppert et al. / International Dairy Journal 28 (2013) 1e7

midpoint. For products with the lower sugar content, perceived

sweetness was just-about-right in 3 of the products whereas
avor intensity was generally judged as being too low (mean
score: 1.47e1.77). In products with regular sugar content
(160 g kg1), sweetness was signicantly (P < 0.05) judged as being
too high (mean score: >2.22), whereas avor ratings were close
to scale midpoint (1.88e1.92). These results indicate that a distinct
cross-modal interaction between odor and tastant perception is
likely (Burseg, Linforth, Hort, & Taylor, 2009; Nasri, Beno, Septier,
Salles, & Thomas-Danguin, 2011), and that elevating avor might
be helpful to increase the general acceptance of reduced-sugar
products. However, it should also be taken into account that JAR
scales were claimed to show lower optimum levels than hedonic
scales (Bower & Boyd, 2003; Epler, Chambers, & Kemp, 1998).
Concerning yogurt with visible ber, there was a trend toward
a too intensive cereal taste in grain-containing yogurt (i.e., GR and
GR/FL; see Table 4). Size of the ingredients was judged too low
when milled akes were used, whereas it was judged as being too
high in yogurt with GR and GR/FL. Sieving analysis of the unboiled
grain mixture revealed 55% in the size class of 2.5e3.0 mm; 26%
were larger than 3.0 mm, and 19% were smaller than 2.5 mm. Mean
JAR scores for the quantity of cereals ranged from 1.88 to 2.22. The
effort for swallowing was just-about-right for yogurt FL but
judged as being too high for the other products.

Fig. 1 gives further insight into the distribution of the individual responses. For all products, sweetness in reduced-sugar
yogurt met the a-priori criterion of 70% in the just-aboutright category, indicating no distinct need for optimization in
that attribute (Lawless & Heymann, 2010). In yogurt with
160 g kg1 sugar the just-about-right sweetness responses
were below 70%, and there was a signicant (P < 0.05) shift
toward responses in the too high category. Responses in the
too low category for avor signicantly (P < 0.05) exceeded
those in the too high category for yogurt with reduced-sugar
content. When enriched with cereals, as much as 50% of the
subjects responded in the too low category. Bi-modal distributions of the responses, i.e. <70% of responses in the justabout-right category and a similar rating frequency in the too
low and too high category (Rothman & Parker, 2009), indicate
that respondents represent different segments of consumers
who vary in their ideal attribute level. This was, for example,
observed for cereal taste in yogurt FL, or for the amount of cereal
in GR. The response distributions for cereal size clearly indicate
that, when ber-enrichment through cereals is desired, special
emphasis should be placed on the size of the particles that are
incorporated in the product. It can also be concluded that, in GR/
FL, grains rather than milled akes were responsible for the
subjects response.

Fig. 2. Mean drops as a function of JAR ratings in the too-low or too-high category. Sample identiers: INU, yogurt enriched with inulin; GR, yogurt with grains; FL, yogurt with
akes; GR/FL, yogurt with grains and akes. Open symbols, yogurt with 112 g kg1 sugar; closed symbols, yogurt with 160 g kg1 sugar.

K. Hoppert et al. / International Dairy Journal 28 (2013) 1e7

Chi-square analysis, which is helpful to identify betweenproduct differences in case of independent ratings (i.e., when
only one product is assessed by each subject; Pitts, 2009) was
separately carried out for cereal-enriched yogurt (i.e., GR, FL, and
GR/FL) with 112 or 160 g kg1 sugar. Because c2 was below the
critical value (P < 0.05) for sweetness and avor in both sets of
yogurt, it can be concluded that the corresponding perceptions are
independent of the added ber. On the other hand, c2 was significant for the cereal-associated descriptors, indicating betweenproduct differences.
3.3. Just-about-right and acceptance
Separately for each dietary ber added to yogurt, negative mean
drops were plotted versus the frequencies of answers in the too
low or too high category. A common interpretation of the mean
drop is that drops between 1.5 and 2 indicate a concerning
deviation in a particular attribute, and mean drops < 2 a very
concerning deviation (Schraidt, 2009). Apart from that, the
frequency of too low or too high responses may serve as an
alternative indicator for attributes which are on an undesired level.
Therefore, we identied coordinates close to and outside of
a circular arc from a mean drop of 2 to 40% not-right ratings with
the corresponding responses (Fig. 2).
For yogurt INU, only a few subjects who rated avor as too
high for both sugar contents were responsible for a drop of 2 as
a consequence of low acceptance scores. Thirty-three (37.5%) of
the respondents judged sweetness as too high for yogurt INU
with 160 g kg1 sugar, which resulted in a relatively low drop of
acceptance of approximately 1. In GR, cereal size appeared as the
critical issue, mainly because of the large number of too high
responses. Despite a negligible acceptance drop, 50% of the subjects
claimed avor as too low for the product with reduced-sugar
content. Cereal taste appeared as critical in yogurt FL (23% of the
respondents, mean drop of 1.6). In yogurt GR/FL, whilst a few
subjects claimed sweetness as being too low, it is mainly cereal
size and taste that would demand a reformulation.
A common interpretation of the penalty is that values < 40 are
uncritical, values between 40 and 80 indicate that product modication might be helpful, and values > 80 require action to improve
acceptance (Schraidt, 2009). For yogurt INU or GR/FL, none of the
penalties exceeded 40. As regards cereal size, penalties between 40
and 80 were observed for GR and GR/FL. In the latter, cereal taste
appeared to be critical when sugar content was 160 g kg1.
4. Conclusions
In this study we reduced sugar in standard vanilla yogurt by 30%
and increased its ber content by adding inulin or inulin and cereal
products in an amount so that appropriate claims are possible (30%
sugar reduction, >1.5 g ber per 100 kcal). Based on the response of
more than 700 students who were individually asked to assess
overall acceptance and to rate selected yogurt properties using a 3point just-about-right scale it can be summarized that (a) affective
acceptance is signicantly lower for reduced-sugar yogurt with
visible ber than for reduced-sugar yogurt with inulin, and (b) the
interaction between the perception of sweetness and avor may be
used to increase the acceptance of ber-enriched yogurt. Cereal size
and cereal taste are also important factors in product formulation
because of their impact on general acceptance.
Acknowledgment
The study was performed within the project Innovative Strategies to Overcome Implicit Product-based and Personality-based

Obstacles to Consume Healthy Food, funded by the Federal

Ministry of Education and Research, Berlin (grant 0315670).

References
Allgeyer, L. C., Miller, M. J., & Lee, S. Y. (2010). Drivers of liking for yogurt drinks with
prebiotics and probiotics. Journal of Food Science, 75, S212eS219.
Anonymous. (2012a). http://www.statista.com/statistics/184309/per-capita-consumptionof-yogurt-in-the-us-since-2000/.
Anonymous. (2012b). http://www.milchindustrie.de/de/milch/nachfrage/pro_kopf_
verbrauch_konsummilch.html.
Ares, G., Gimenez, A., & Gambaro, A. (2008). Inuence of nutritional knowledge
on perceived healthiness and willingness to try functional foods. Appetite, 51,
663e668.
Barrantes, E., Tamime, A. Y., & Sword, A. M. (1994). Production of low-calorie yogurt
using skim milk powder and fat-substitute. 4. Rheological properties. Milchwissenschaft, 49, 263e265.
Bayarri, S., Carbonell, I., Barrios, E. X., & Costell, E. (2011). Impact of sensory
differences on consumer acceptability of yogurt and yogurt-like products.
International Dairy Journal, 21, 111e118.
Bower, J. A., & Boyd, R. (2003). Effect of health concern and consumption patterns
on measures of sweetness by hedonic and just-about-right scales. Journal of
Sensory Studies, 18, 235e248.
Brennan, C. S., & Tudorica, C. M. (2008). Carbohydrate-based fat replacers in the
modication of the rheological, textural and sensory quality of yoghurt:
comparative study of the utilisation of barley beta-glucan, guar gum and inulin.
International Journal of Food Science and Technology, 43, 824e833.
Burseg, K., Linforth, R. S. T., Hort, J., & Taylor, A. J. (2009). Flavor perception in
biscuits: correlating sensory properties with composition, aroma release, and
texture. Chemosensory Perception, 2, 70e78.
Dello Staffolo, M. D., Bertola, N., Martino, M., & Bevilaqua, A. (2004). Inuence of
dietary ber addition on sensory and rheological properties of yogurt. International Dairy Journal, 14, 263e268.
EC. (2006). Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 20 December 2006 on nutrition and health claims made on foods.
Ofcial Journal of the European Union, L 404, 9e25.
EFSA. (2010). Scientic opinion on dietary reference values for carbohydrates and
dietary bre. EFSA Journal, 10, 1462.
Epler, S., Chambers, E., IV, & Kemp, K. E. (1998). Hedonic scales are a better predictor
than just-about-right scales of optimal sweetness in lemonade. Journal of
Sensory Studies, 13, 191e197.
Figueroa-Gonzalez, I., Quijano, G., Ramirez, G., & Cruz-Guerrero, A. (2011). Probiotics
and prebiotics e perspectives and challenges. Journal of the Science of Food and
Agriculture, 91, 1341e1348.
Franck, A. (2002). Technological functionality of inulin and oligofructose. British
Journal of Nutrition, 87, 287e291.
Gacula, M., Jr., Mohan, P., Faller, J., Pollack, J., & Moskowitz, H. R. (2008). Questionnaire practice: what happens when the JAR scale is placed between two
overall acceptance scales? Journal of Sensory Studies, 23, 136e147.
Granato, D., Branco, G. F., Cruz, A. G., Fonseca Faria, J. A., & Shah, N. P. (2010). Probiotic dairy products as functional foods. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science
and Food Safety, 9, 455e470.
Guggisberg, D., Cuthbert-Steven, J., Piccinali, P., Btikofer, U., & Eberhard, P. (2009).
Rheological, microstructural and sensory characterization of low-fat and whole
milk set yoghurt as inuenced by inulin addition. International Dairy Journal, 19,
107e115.
Guven, M., Yasar, K., & Hayaloglu, O. B. (2005). The effect of inulin as a fat replacer
on the quality of set-type low-fat yogurt manufacture. International Journal of
Dairy Technology, 58, 180e184.
Hashim, I., Khalil, A., & A, H. (2009). Quality characteristics and consumer
acceptance of yogurt fortied with date ber. Journal of Dairy Science, 92, 5403e
5407.
Jaros, D., Haque, A., Kneifel, W., & Rohm, H. (2002). Inuence of the starter
culture on the relationship between dry matter content and physical properties of stirred yogurt. Milchwissenschaft e Milk Science International, 57,
447e450.
Kip, P., Meyer, D., & Jellema, R. (2006). Inulins improve sensoric and textural
properties of low-fat yoghurts. International Dairy Journal, 16, 1098e1103.
Lamsal, B. P., & Faubion, J. M. (2009). The benecial use of cereal and cereal
components in probiotic foods. Food Reviews International, 25, 103e114.
Larrauri, J. A. (1999). New approaches in the preparation of high dietary ber
powders from fruit by-products. Trends in Food Science and Technology, 10, 3e8.
Lawless, H. T., & Heymann, H. (2010). Sensory evaluation of food. Principles and
practices. London, UK: Springer.
Lopez Osornio, M. M., & Hough, G. (2010). Comparing 3-point versus 9-point justabout-right scales for determining the optimum concentration of sweetness in
a beverage. Journal of Sensory Studies, 25, 1e17.
Meilgaard, M. C., Civille, G. V., & Carr, T. B. (1999). Sensory evaluation techniques.
Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press.
Meyer, D., & Stasse-Wolthuis, M. (2009). The bidogenic effect of inulin and oligofructose and its consequences for gut health. European Journal of Clinical
Nutrition, 63, 1277e1289.

K. Hoppert et al. / International Dairy Journal 28 (2013) 1e7

Nasri, N., Beno, N., Septier, C., Salles, C., & Thomas-Danguin, T. (2011). Cross-modal
interactions between taste and smell: odour-induced saltiness enhancement
depends on salt level. Food Quality and Preference, 22, 678e682.
Pitts, S. (2009). Appendix F: mean versus scale mid-point. In L. Rothman, &
M. J. Parker (Eds.), Just-about-right (JAR) scales: Design, usage, benets and risks
(pp. 27e28). West Conshohocken, PA, USA: ASTM International.
Ramirez-Santiago, D., Ramos-Solis, L., Lobato-Calleros, C., Pena-Valdivia, C., VernonCarter, E. J., & Alvarez-Ramirez, J. (2010). Enrichment of stirred yogurt with
soluble dietary ber from Pachyrhizus erosus L. urban: effect on syneresis,
microstructure and rheological properties. Journal of Food Engineering, 101,
229e235.
Roberfroid, M. B. (2005). Inulin-type fructans. Functional food ingredients. Boca
Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press.
Roessler, E. B., Pangborn, R. M., Sidel, J. L., & Stone, H. (1978). Expanded statistical
tables for estimating signicance in paired-preference, paired-difference, duotrio and triangle tests. Journal of Food Science, 43, 940e943.

Rothman, L., & Parker, M. J. (2009). Structure and use of just-about-right scales. West
Conshohocken, PA, USA: ASTM International.
Sanz, T., Salvadore, A., Jimenez, A., & Fiszman, S. M. (2008). Yogurt enrichment with
functional asparagus bre. Effect of bre extraction method on rheological
properties, colour, and sensory acceptance. European Food Research and Technology, 227, 1515e1521.
Schraidt, M. (2009). Appendix L: penalty analysis or mean drop analysis. In
L. Rothman, & M. J. Parker (Eds.), Just-about-right (JAR) scales: Design, usage,
benets and risks (pp. 50e53). West Conshohocken, PA, USA: ASTM International.
Sendra, E., Fayos, P., Lario, Y., Fernandez-Lopez, J., Savas-Barbara, E., & PerezAlvarez, J. (2008). Incorporation of citrus bers in fermented milk containing
probiotic bacteria. Food Microbiology, 25, 13e21.
Trowell, H. (1976). Denition of dietary ber and hypotheses that it is a protective
factor in certain diseases. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 29, 417e427.
Villegas, B., Tarrega, A., Carbonell, I., & Costell, E. (2010). Optimizing acceptability of
new prebiotic low-fat milk beverages. Food Quality and Preference, 21, 234e242.