JP2020176897A - Fragrance evaluation method and evaluation device - Google Patents
Fragrance evaluation method and evaluation device Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- JP2020176897A JP2020176897A JP2019078693A JP2019078693A JP2020176897A JP 2020176897 A JP2020176897 A JP 2020176897A JP 2019078693 A JP2019078693 A JP 2019078693A JP 2019078693 A JP2019078693 A JP 2019078693A JP 2020176897 A JP2020176897 A JP 2020176897A
- Authority
- JP
- Japan
- Prior art keywords
- evaluation
- scent
- result
- evaluated
- subject
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Granted
Links
Abstract
Description
本発明は、例えば、香りの嗜好性や強度を評価する評価方法および評価装置に関する。 The present invention relates to, for example, an evaluation method and an evaluation device for evaluating the palatability and intensity of a scent.
例えば、香りの嗜好性を評価する方法として、評価対象となる香りを被験者に複数回嗅がせてその都度嗜好性を評価させ、評価が上がった香りを嗜好性の高い香りと判定する方法が知られている。 For example, as a method of evaluating the scent preference, a method is known in which a subject is made to smell the scent to be evaluated multiple times and the preference is evaluated each time, and the evaluated scent is judged to be a highly favorite scent. Has been done.
しかし、上述した従来の評価方法によると、被験者は、複数回同じ香りを嗅ぐことで嗅覚が鈍くなり、正常な評価が難しくなる場合がある。この場合、当然のことながら、評価結果の信頼性も低いものとなる。また、人間の嗅覚は、温度や湿度、時間帯や空腹度合い、または健康状態などによって、変化することが知られている。つまり、香りの嗜好性評価は、試験環境に左右され易く、安定した評価結果を得ることが難しい。 However, according to the above-mentioned conventional evaluation method, the subject may have a dull sense of smell by smelling the same scent multiple times, which may make normal evaluation difficult. In this case, as a matter of course, the reliability of the evaluation result is also low. It is also known that the human sense of smell changes depending on temperature, humidity, time of day, degree of hunger, health condition, and the like. That is, the evaluation of fragrance preference is easily influenced by the test environment, and it is difficult to obtain a stable evaluation result.
本発明は、上記の点に鑑みてなされたもので、信頼性の高い安定した評価結果を得ることができる香りの評価方法および評価装置を提供することを目的とする。 The present invention has been made in view of the above points, and an object of the present invention is to provide a scent evaluation method and an evaluation device capable of obtaining a highly reliable and stable evaluation result.
本発明の香りの評価方法の一態様によると、被験者が第１の評価対象物の第１の香りを嗅いでＮ段階（Ｎは任意の整数）で評価した第１の評価結果を取得し、その後に、同じ被験者が第１の香りと異なる少なくとも１つの第２の評価対象物それぞれの第２の香りを嗅いでＮ段階で評価した少なくとも１つの第２の評価結果を取得し、さらにその後に、同じ被験者が第１の香りと同じ香りであることを知らされずに第１の香りと同じ第３の評価対象物の香りを嗅いでＮ段階で評価した第３の評価結果を取得し、評価の基準となるしきい値をＴｔｈとし、第１および第３の評価結果が下の不等式を満たす場合に、少なくとも１つの第２の評価結果を少なくとも１つの第２の評価対象物それぞれの第２の香りの評価と判定する。
｜第３の評価結果−第１の評価結果｜／Ｎ＜Ｔｔｈ
According to one aspect of the scent evaluation method of the present invention, a subject sniffs the first scent of the first evaluation object and obtains a first evaluation result evaluated in N steps (N is an arbitrary integer). After that, the same subject sniffs the second scent of each of at least one second evaluation object different from the first scent and obtains at least one second evaluation result evaluated on an N stage, and thereafter. , The same subject was not informed that the scent was the same as the first scent, and the scent of the third evaluation object, which was the same as the first scent, was sniffed to obtain the third evaluation result evaluated in N stages. When the threshold value used as the evaluation standard is Tth and the first and third evaluation results satisfy the following inequality, at least one second evaluation result is set for each of the at least one second evaluation object. It is judged as the evaluation of the second scent.
| Third evaluation result-First evaluation result | / N < Th
また、本発明の香りの評価方法の一態様によると、被験者が第１の評価対象物の第１の香りを嗅いでＮ段階で評価した第１の評価結果を取得し、その後に、同じ被験者が第１の香りと異なる少なくとも１つの第２の評価対象物それぞれの第２の香りを嗅いでＮ段階で評価した少なくとも１つの第２の評価結果を取得し、さらにその後に、同じ被験者が第１の香りと同じ香りであることを知らされずに第１の香りと同じ第３の評価対象物の香りを嗅いでＮ段階で評価した第３の評価結果を取得し、評価の基準となるしきい値をＴｔｈとし、第１および第３の評価結果が下の不等式を満たす場合に、少なくとも１つの第２の評価結果を少なくとも１つの第２の評価対象物それぞれの第２の香りの評価と判定するとともに、第１の評価結果を第１の香りの評価と判定する。
｜第３の評価結果−第１の評価結果｜／Ｎ＜Ｔｔｈ
Further, according to one aspect of the scent evaluation method of the present invention, the subject obtains the first evaluation result evaluated in N stages by smelling the first scent of the first evaluation object, and then the same subject. At least one second evaluation object different from the first scent is obtained by sniffing the second scent of each of the second evaluation objects and evaluating at least one second evaluation result on an N stage, and then the same subject is given the second evaluation result. Without being informed that the scent is the same as the scent of 1, the scent of the third evaluation object, which is the same as the first scent, is sniffed and the third evaluation result evaluated in N stages is obtained and used as the evaluation standard. When the threshold value is Tth and the first and third evaluation results satisfy the following inequality, at least one second evaluation result is the second scent of each of the at least one second evaluation target. In addition to determining the evaluation, the first evaluation result is determined as the evaluation of the first fragrance.
| Third evaluation result-First evaluation result | / N < Th
また、本発明の香りの評価装置の一態様は、被験者が第１の評価対象物の第１の香りを嗅いでＮ段階で評価した第１の評価結果、同じ被験者が第１の香りを嗅いだ後に第１の香りと異なる少なくとも１つの第２の評価対象物ぞれぞれの第２の香りを嗅いでＮ段階で評価した少なくとも１つの第２の評価結果、および同じ被験者が少なくとも１つの第２の香りを嗅いだ後に第１の香りと同じ香りであることを知らされずに第１の香りと同じ第３の評価対象物の香りを嗅いでＮ段階で評価した第３の評価結果を記録する記録手段と、評価の基準となるしきい値をＴｔｈとし、記録手段に記録した第１および第３の評価結果が下の不等式を満たす場合に、記録手段に記録した少なくとも１つの第２の評価結果を少なくとも１つの第２の評価対象物それぞれの第２の香りの評価と判定する判定手段と、を有する。
｜第３の評価結果−第１の評価結果｜／Ｎ＜Ｔｔｈ
Further, in one aspect of the scent evaluation device of the present invention, as a result of the first evaluation in which the subject sniffed the first scent of the first evaluation object and evaluated in N stages, the same subject sniffed the first scent. After that, at least one second evaluation result different from the first scent and at least one second evaluation result evaluated by smelling the second scent of each of the second evaluation objects on an N-stage, and at least one subject having the same subject. After smelling the second scent, the third evaluation result was evaluated in N stages by smelling the scent of the third evaluation object, which is the same as the first scent, without being informed that it is the same scent as the first scent. At least one recorded in the recording means when the first and third evaluation results recorded in the recording means satisfy the following inequality, where Tth is set as the recording means for recording and the threshold value which is the reference of the evaluation. It has a determination means for determining the second evaluation result as the evaluation of the second scent of each of at least one second evaluation object.
| Third evaluation result-First evaluation result | / N < Th
さらに、本発明の香りの評価装置の一態様は、被験者が第１の評価対象物の第１の香りを嗅いでＮ段階で評価した第１の評価結果、同じ被験者が第１の香りを嗅いだ後に第１の香りと異なる少なくとも１つの第２の評価対象物それぞれの第２の香りを嗅いでＮ段階で評価した少なくとも１つの第２の評価結果、および同じ被験者が少なくとも１つの第２の香りを嗅いだ後に第１の香りと同じ香りであることを知らされずに第１の香りと同じ第３の評価対象物の香りを嗅いでＮ段階で評価した第３の評価結果を記録する記録手段と、評価の基準となるしきい値をＴｔｈとし、記録手段に記録した第１および第３の評価結果が下の不等式を満たす場合に、記録手段に記録した少なくとも１つの第２の評価結果を少なくとも１つの第２の評価対象物それぞれの第２の香りの評価と判定するとともに、記録手段に記録した第１の評価結果を第１の香りの評価と判定する判定手段と、を有する。
｜第３の評価結果−第１の評価結果｜／Ｎ＜Ｔｔｈ
Further, in one aspect of the scent evaluation device of the present invention, as a result of the first evaluation in which the subject sniffed the first scent of the first evaluation object and evaluated in N stages, the same subject sniffed the first scent. After that, at least one second evaluation result obtained by smelling the second scent of each of at least one second evaluation object different from the first scent and evaluating in N stages, and at least one second evaluation result by the same subject. After smelling the scent, without being informed that it is the same scent as the first scent, the scent of the third evaluation object, which is the same as the first scent, is smelled and the third evaluation result evaluated in N stages is recorded. When the first and third evaluation results recorded in the recording means satisfy the following inequality, where Tth is set as the recording means and the threshold value as a reference for evaluation, at least one second second recorded in the recording means. A determination means for determining the evaluation result as the evaluation of the second scent of each of at least one second evaluation object and the determination means for determining the first evaluation result recorded in the recording means as the evaluation of the first scent. Have.
| Third evaluation result-First evaluation result | / N < Th
本発明の一態様によれば、信頼性の高い安定した香りの評価結果を得ることができる。 According to one aspect of the present invention, a highly reliable and stable scent evaluation result can be obtained.
以下、本発明の実施形態に係る香りの評価方法および評価装置について説明する。
評価対象となる香りは、例えば、芳香剤などの香りを含む。評価対象物は、液体、ゲル、個体、気体などいかなる形態のものであってもよい。また、評価対象物は、実際の香り製品そのものであってもよく、香料または香料の単品原料であってもよい。香りの評価は、基本的には、被験者が実際に評価対象物の香りを嗅いで点数を付けて段階的に評価する。例えば、香りを７段階で評価する場合、評価値が４ではなく５に近いと感じた被験者は評価値を５と判断し、評価値が６ではなく５に近いと感じた被験者は評価値を５と判断する。つまり、被験者が段階的に評価する評価値には、ある程度の幅があり、評価値が５である場合には４．９や５．１などを含んでいることになる。なお、本実施形態に係る香りの評価方法および評価装置は、悪臭の確認試験に利用することもできる。
Hereinafter, the scent evaluation method and the evaluation device according to the embodiment of the present invention will be described.
The scent to be evaluated includes, for example, a scent such as an air freshener. The evaluation object may be in any form such as a liquid, a gel, a solid, or a gas. In addition, the evaluation target may be the actual fragrance product itself, or may be a fragrance or a single raw material for the fragrance. Basically, the scent is evaluated step by step by the subject actually smelling the scent of the evaluation target and giving a score. For example, when the scent is evaluated on a 7-point scale, the subject who feels that the evaluation value is close to 5 instead of 4 judges the evaluation value as 5, and the subject who feels that the evaluation value is close to 5 instead of 6 gives the evaluation value. Judge as 5. That is, the evaluation value evaluated stepwise by the subject has a certain range, and when the evaluation value is 5, it includes 4.9, 5.1, and the like. The scent evaluation method and evaluation device according to the present embodiment can also be used for a malodor confirmation test.
被験者が香りを嗅ぐ方法として、例えば、試験紙などの媒体に評価対象物を付着させて間接的に嗅いだり、容器に評価対象物を入れて直接嗅いだり、密閉空間に評価対象物を入れて一定時間経過後に空間に漂う香りを嗅いだりする方法がある。香りを嗅ぐ方法は、いかなる方法であってもよく、ここに記載した方法に限定されるものではない。 As a method for the subject to smell the scent, for example, the evaluation object is attached to a medium such as a test paper and indirectly smelled, the evaluation object is put in a container and directly smelled, or the evaluation object is put in a closed space. There is a way to smell the scent floating in the space after a certain period of time. The method of smelling the scent may be any method and is not limited to the method described here.
香りの評価は、例えば、香りの嗜好性に関する評価を含む。香りの嗜好性とは、人それぞれに異なる香りの好みを表す指標であり、嗜好性に関する評価は、例えば、芳香消臭脱臭剤協議会の自主基準にある九段階快・不快度表示法に従い九段階（極端に快、非常に快、快、やや快、快でも不快でもない、やや不快、不快、非常に不快、極端に不快）で評価することができる。 The evaluation of the scent includes, for example, an evaluation regarding the palatability of the scent. The scent preference is an index showing different scent preferences for each person, and the evaluation regarding the preference is, for example, according to the nine-step pleasantness / discomfort display method in the voluntary standard of the Aroma Deodorant Deodorant Council. It can be evaluated in stages (extremely pleasant, very pleasant, pleasant, somewhat pleasant, neither pleasant nor unpleasant, slightly unpleasant, unpleasant, very unpleasant, extremely unpleasant).
また、香りの評価は、例えば、香りの強度に関する評価を含んでもよい。香りの強度とは、香りの濃さを表す指標であり、強度に関する評価は、例えば、芳香消臭脱臭剤協議会の自主基準にある六段階臭気強度表示法に従い六段階（強烈なにおい、強いにおい、楽に感知できるにおい、何のにおいであるかがわかる弱いにおい、やっと感知できるにおい、無臭）で評価することができる。 Further, the evaluation of the scent may include, for example, an evaluation regarding the intensity of the scent. The intensity of the scent is an index showing the intensity of the scent, and the evaluation of the intensity is, for example, six levels (strong odor, strong) according to the six-stage odor intensity display method in the voluntary standard of the Aroma Deodorant Deodorant Council. It can be evaluated by odor, easily perceptible odor, weak odor that can be understood what the odor is, finally perceptible odor, and odorless).
なお、評価対象となる香りの種類、評価対象物の形態、香りの何を評価するのか、香りを嗅ぐ方法、香りの評価方法や評価装置などは、本実施形態で記載した例に限定されるものではなく、発明の範囲を超えることなく、任意に変更および選択が可能なものである。 The type of scent to be evaluated, the form of the object to be evaluated, what to evaluate the scent, the method of smelling the scent, the scent evaluation method, the evaluation device, etc. are limited to the examples described in this embodiment. It is not a thing, and can be arbitrarily changed and selected without exceeding the scope of the invention.
本実施形態の評価方法により評価対象物の香りを評価する場合、評価対象となる１つの評価対象物だけを用意するのではなく、互いに香りの異なる複数種類の評価対象物を用意する。つまり、本実施形態によると、香りの異なる複数の評価対象物の香りを同時に評価することができる。このため、本実施形態では、同じ香り（第１の香り）の評価対象物を２つ用意し、それとは異なる香り（第２の香り）の評価対象物を少なくとも１つ用意する。異なる香りの評価対象物を２つ以上用意する場合、これら２つ以上の評価対象物は互いに異なる香りの評価対象物とする。 When evaluating the scent of an evaluation object by the evaluation method of the present embodiment, not only one evaluation object to be evaluated is prepared, but a plurality of types of evaluation objects having different scents are prepared. That is, according to the present embodiment, the scents of a plurality of evaluation objects having different scents can be evaluated at the same time. Therefore, in the present embodiment, two evaluation objects having the same scent (first scent) are prepared, and at least one evaluation object having a different scent (second scent) is prepared. When two or more evaluation objects having different scents are prepared, these two or more evaluation objects are evaluated objects having different scents.
被験者が１回の試験で実際に香りを嗅いで評価する評価対象物の数は、５つ（４種類）程度が好ましく、評価対象物の数が７つ（６種類）を超えると嗅覚が鈍って、評価の信頼度が低下する傾向が見られる。よって、本実施形態では、５つ（４種類）の評価対象物の香りを評価する場合について説明するが、評価対象物の数は３つ以上（２種類以上）であればよく、任意に設定可能である。 The number of evaluation objects that the subject actually evaluates by smelling the scent in one test is preferably about 5 (4 types), and if the number of evaluation objects exceeds 7 (6 types), the sense of smell becomes dull and the evaluation is performed. There is a tendency for reliability to decrease. Therefore, in the present embodiment, the case of evaluating the scent of five (four types) evaluation objects will be described, but the number of evaluation objects may be three or more (two or more types) and can be arbitrarily set. is there.
また、本実施形態の評価方法によると、香りを評価する被験者は、複数人、理想的には１０人以上であることが望ましい。可能な限り全ての被験者が同じ条件で互いに香りの異なる複数の評価対象物の香りを評価できるように、全ての被験者が評価できる量の同じ香りの評価対象物を２つと、この評価対象物と異なる香りの少なくとも１つの評価対象物を用意する。 Further, according to the evaluation method of the present embodiment, it is desirable that the number of subjects for evaluating the scent is a plurality of subjects, ideally 10 or more. In order to allow all subjects to evaluate the scents of multiple evaluation objects having different scents under the same conditions as much as possible, two evaluation objects having the same scent that can be evaluated by all subjects, and this evaluation object and Prepare at least one evaluation object with a different scent.
例えば、互いに香りの異なる４種類の評価対象物Ａ、Ｂ、Ｃ、Ｄを用意し、評価対象物Ａ（第１の評価対象物）と同じ香り（第１の香り）の評価対象物Ｅ（第３の評価対象物）を用意する。全ての評価対象物Ａ〜Ｅは、被験者にとって同じ見た目となる外観であることが好ましい。なお、この場合、同じ香りの評価対象物はＡとＥであり、それとは異なる香りの評価対象物（第２の評価対象物）がＢ、Ｃ、Ｄとなる。しかし、被験者には、評価対象物Ａと評価対象物Ｅが同じ香りであることを知らせない。そして、全ての被験者に、評価対象物Ａ、Ｂ、Ｃ、Ｄの香りをこの順番で嗅がせて、最後に評価対象物Ｅの香りを嗅がせる。 For example, four types of evaluation objects A, B, C, and D having different scents are prepared, and the evaluation object E (first scent) having the same scent as the evaluation object A (first evaluation object) (first evaluation object) A third evaluation target) is prepared. It is preferable that all the evaluation objects A to E have the same appearance for the subject. In this case, the evaluation objects having the same scent are A and E, and the evaluation objects having different scents (second evaluation objects) are B, C, and D. However, the subject is not informed that the evaluation object A and the evaluation object E have the same scent. Then, all the subjects are made to smell the scents of the evaluation objects A, B, C, and D in this order, and finally the scent of the evaluation object E is made to smell.
各被験者は、全ての評価対象物Ａ〜Ｅの香りを評価してその結果を所定の記録用紙に記録する。このとき、例えば、図１に例示した記録用紙を使用する。この記録用紙を使用する場合、香りの嗜好性を九段階（極端に快、非常に快、快、やや快、快でも不快でもない、やや不快、不快、非常に不快、極端に不快）で評価して、香りの強度を六段階（強烈なにおい、強いにおい、楽に感知できるにおい、何のにおいであるかがわかる弱いにおい、やっと感知できるにおい、無臭）で評価する。つまり、各被験者は、全ての評価対象物Ａ〜Ｅの香りをこの順番で嗅いで、記録用紙の該当する部分に記入することで評価を行う。 Each subject evaluates the scents of all the evaluation objects A to E and records the result on a predetermined recording sheet. At this time, for example, the recording paper illustrated in FIG. 1 is used. When using this recording paper, the scent preference is evaluated on a nine-point scale (extremely pleasant, very pleasant, pleasant, slightly pleasant, neither pleasant nor unpleasant, slightly unpleasant, unpleasant, extremely unpleasant, extremely unpleasant). Then, the intensity of the scent is evaluated on a six-point scale (strong odor, strong odor, easily perceptible odor, weak odor that can be understood what the odor is, finally perceptible odor, and odorless). That is, each subject makes an evaluation by smelling the scents of all the evaluation objects A to E in this order and writing them in the corresponding part of the recording sheet.
各被験者が評価を記入した記録用紙は、オペレータが回収する。オペレータは、各被験者から回収した記録用紙に記録されている情報をパーソナルコンピュータなどの評価装置へ入力する。このとき、嗜好性の評価が「極端に快」であった場合の点数を“９”とし、「非常に快」であった場合の点数を“８”とし、「快」であった場合の点数を“７”とし、「やや快」であった場合の点数を“６”とし、「快でも不快でもない」であった場合の点数を“５”とし、「やや不快」であった場合の点数を“４”とし、「不快」であった場合の点数を“３”とし、「非常に不快」であった場合の点数を“２”とし、「極端に不快」であった場合の点数を“１”とし、記録用紙に記入されている評価に相当する点数を各評価対象物の嗜好性の評価値として入力する。 The operator collects the recording sheet on which each subject fills in the evaluation. The operator inputs the information recorded on the recording sheet collected from each subject into an evaluation device such as a personal computer. At this time, the score when the evaluation of palatability was "extremely pleasant" was set to "9", the score when it was "very pleasant" was set to "8", and the score was set to "pleasant". The score is "7", the score for "slightly pleasant" is "6", the score for "neither pleasant nor unpleasant" is "5", and the score is "slightly unpleasant". The score of "4" is set to "4", the score of "unpleasant" is set to "3", the score of "very unpleasant" is set to "2", and the score of "extremely unpleasant" is set. The score is set to "1", and the score corresponding to the evaluation entered on the recording sheet is input as the evaluation value of the preference of each evaluation object.
また、このとき、強度の評価が「強烈なにおい」であった場合の点数を“５”とし、「強いにおい」であった場合の点数を“４”とし、「楽に感知できるにおい」であった場合の点数を“３”とし、「何のにおいであるかがわかる弱いにおい」であった場合の点数を“２”とし、「やっと感知できるにおい」であった場合の点数を“１”とし、「無臭」であった場合の点数を“０”とし、記録用紙に記入されている評価に相当する点数を各評価対象物の強度の評価値として評価装置へ入力する。 At this time, the score when the evaluation of the intensity was "strong odor" was set to "5", and the score when the evaluation was "strong odor" was set to "4", which was "easily perceptible odor". The score for the case is "3", the score for the "weak odor that tells what the odor is" is "2", and the score for the "finally perceptible odor" is "1". Then, the score in the case of "odorless" is set to "0", and the score corresponding to the evaluation written on the recording sheet is input to the evaluation device as the evaluation value of the strength of each evaluation object.
図２は、本実施形態に係る評価装置１０の構成を示すブロック図である。評価装置１０は、オペレータによる評価値（点数）の入力を受け付ける入力部２、入力部２を介して入力された香りの嗜好性および強度に関する評価値を所定のデータ領域で記録する記録部４（記録手段）、および記録部４から読み出した評価値に基づいて評価対象物Ａ〜Ｅの香りの評価結果の信頼度を判定する判定部６（判定手段）を有する。また、評価装置１０は、判定部６にて信頼度が高い評価値であることを判定した評価結果だけを集計してその代表値を算出する演算部８（演算手段）を有する。ここで言う代表値は、平均値、中央値、および最頻値を含む。 FIG. 2 is a block diagram showing the configuration of the evaluation device 10 according to the present embodiment. The evaluation device 10 has an input unit 2 that accepts an input of an evaluation value (score) by an operator, and a recording unit 4 (a recording unit 4) that records an evaluation value related to fragrance preference and intensity input via the input unit 2 in a predetermined data area. It has a recording unit) and a determination unit 6 (determination means) for determining the reliability of the evaluation result of the scent of the evaluation objects A to E based on the evaluation value read from the recording unit 4. Further, the evaluation device 10 has a calculation unit 8 (calculation means) that aggregates only the evaluation results determined by the determination unit 6 to be highly reliable evaluation values and calculates the representative value thereof. The representative value referred to here includes the average value, the median value, and the mode value.
図３は、記録部４のデータ領域の一例を示す図である。記録部４では、例えば、評価対象物Ａ〜Ｅの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値を被験者ごとに記録する。また、記録部４では、評価対象物Ａ〜Ｅの香りの強度に関する評価値も同様に被験者ごとに記録する。図３に例示したデータ領域では、１６人の被験者Ｐ１〜Ｐ１６による香りの嗜好性および強度に関する評価値を記録部４にて記録することができる。 FIG. 3 is a diagram showing an example of a data area of the recording unit 4. In the recording unit 4, for example, the evaluation value regarding the scent preference of the evaluation objects A to E is recorded for each subject. In addition, the recording unit 4 also records the evaluation value regarding the intensity of the scent of the evaluation objects A to E for each subject. In the data area illustrated in FIG. 3, evaluation values relating to scent preference and intensity by 16 subjects P1 to P16 can be recorded by the recording unit 4.
入力部２は、例えば、パーソナルコンピュータのキーボードであり、評価対象物Ａ〜Ｅの嗜好性および強度を被験者ごとに評価値で入力する。記録部４は、図３に例示したように、被験者ごとに用意した所定のデータ領域を有し、入力部２を介してオペレータにより入力された被験者ごとの評価対象物Ａ〜Ｅの評価値を記録する。判定部６は、記録部４の所定のデータ領域から香りの嗜好性および強度に関する評価値を読み出して、以下の手順で評価対象物Ａ〜Ｅの香りの評価結果の信頼度を判定する。香りの嗜好性に関する評価の信頼度と香りの強度に関する評価の信頼度は同様に判定することができる。よって、ここでは、香りの嗜好性に関する評価の信頼度を判定する方法について説明し、香りの強度に関する評価の信頼度を判定する方法の説明を省略する。 The input unit 2 is, for example, a keyboard of a personal computer, and inputs the preference and intensity of the evaluation objects A to E as evaluation values for each subject. As illustrated in FIG. 3, the recording unit 4 has a predetermined data area prepared for each subject, and the evaluation values of the evaluation objects A to E for each subject input by the operator via the input unit 2 are recorded. Record. The determination unit 6 reads out the evaluation values relating to the scent preference and the intensity from the predetermined data area of the recording unit 4, and determines the reliability of the evaluation result of the scent of the evaluation objects A to E by the following procedure. The reliability of the evaluation regarding the palatability of the scent and the reliability of the evaluation regarding the intensity of the scent can be similarly determined. Therefore, here, the method of determining the reliability of the evaluation regarding the taste of the scent will be described, and the description of the method of determining the reliability of the evaluation regarding the intensity of the scent will be omitted.
判定部６は、まず、評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値と評価対象物Ｅの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値を被験者Ｐ１〜Ｐ１６ごとに記録部４の所定のデータ領域から読み出して下記の不等式を満たすか否かを判定する。不等式のＮは評価の段階数であり２以上の正の整数であり、Ｔｔｈは、評価の基準となるしきい値である。Ｔｔｈについては後で詳述する。
｜第３の評価結果−第１の評価結果｜／Ｎ＜Ｔｔｈ
First, the determination unit 6 reads out the evaluation value regarding the scent preference of the evaluation object A and the evaluation value regarding the scent preference of the evaluation object E from the predetermined data area of the recording unit 4 for each of the subjects P1 to P16. Determine if the following inequality is satisfied. N in the inequality is the number of evaluation steps and is a positive integer of 2 or more, and Th is the threshold value that is the basis of evaluation. Thth will be described in detail later.
| Third evaluation result-First evaluation result | / N < Th
このとき、判定部６は、評価対象物ＡおよびＥに対して上記の不等式を満たす評価をした被験者を信頼度の高い被験者であると判定（判定〇）する。この場合、当該被験者が評価した全ての評価対象物Ａ〜Ｅに対する評価は、信頼度が高い評価と判定されて評価結果として採用される。一方、判定部６は、評価対象物ＡおよびＥに対して上記の不等式を満たさない評価をした被験者を評価の信頼度が低い被験者であると判定（判定×）する。この場合、当該被験者が評価した評価結果は、信頼度が低い評価とされて不採用となる。 At this time, the determination unit 6 determines (determination 〇) that the subject who has evaluated the evaluation objects A and E to satisfy the above inequality is a highly reliable subject. In this case, the evaluations of all the evaluation objects A to E evaluated by the subject are judged to be highly reliable evaluations and are adopted as evaluation results. On the other hand, the determination unit 6 determines (determination ×) that the subjects who have evaluated the evaluation objects A and E so as not satisfying the above inequality are those with low evaluation reliability. In this case, the evaluation result evaluated by the subject is regarded as an evaluation with low reliability and is rejected.
つまり、判定部６は、第１に、評価対象物ＡおよびＥに対して上記の不等式を満たす評価をした被験者が評価した他の評価対象物Ｂ、Ｃ、Ｄの評価値を信頼度が高いものであると判定する。この場合、評価装置１０は、当該被験者が評価対象物Ｂ、Ｃ、Ｄの香りの嗜好性を評価した評価値を評価対象物Ｂ、Ｃ、Ｄの香りの嗜好性の評価として出力することができる。 That is, first, the determination unit 6 has high reliability in the evaluation values of the other evaluation objects B, C, and D evaluated by the subject who evaluated the evaluation objects A and E so as to satisfy the above inequality. Judge that it is a thing. In this case, the evaluation device 10 may output an evaluation value obtained by the subject evaluating the scent preference of the evaluation objects B, C, and D as an evaluation of the scent preference of the evaluation objects B, C, and D. it can.
第２に、判定部６は、当該被験者が評価対象物ＡおよびＥに対して上記の不等式を満たす評価をした場合、当該被験者にとって評価対象物Ａの香りは安定した嗜好性の評価が得られる香りであるものと判定（判定〇）する。この場合、評価装置１０は、当該被験者が評価対象物Ａを評価した嗜好性の評価値を、評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性の評価として出力することができる。以上のように、判定部６は、４つの評価対象物Ａ、Ｂ、Ｃ、Ｄの香りの嗜好性の評価値の信頼度を判定することができる。 Secondly, when the subject evaluates the evaluation objects A and E to satisfy the above inequality, the determination unit 6 can obtain a stable evaluation of the palatability of the scent of the evaluation object A for the subject. Judge that it is a scent (judgment 〇). In this case, the evaluation device 10 can output the evaluation value of the preference that the subject evaluated the evaluation object A as the evaluation of the scent preference of the evaluation object A. As described above, the determination unit 6 can determine the reliability of the evaluation value of the scent preference of the four evaluation objects A, B, C, and D.
演算部８は、判定部６にて信頼度が高い評価であると判定した評価値（判定〇）だけを集計して、その代表値（平均値、中央値、最頻値など）を算出する。例えば、評価対象物Ｂ、Ｃ、Ｄの香りの嗜好性に関する評価の平均値を算出する場合、演算部８は、判定部６にて評価の信頼度が高いと判定した評価対象物Ｂ、Ｃ、Ｄの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値をそれぞれ評価対象物ごとに合計し、信頼度が高いと判定された被験者の人数でそれぞれの合計値を割る。また、評価対象物Ｂ、Ｃ、Ｄの香りの嗜好性に関する評価の中央値を算出する場合、演算部８は、信頼度が高い被験者による評価対象物Ｂ、Ｃ、Ｄの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値を評価対象物ごとに数値の大きさ順に一列に並べてその中央の値を中央値として出力する。また、評価対象物Ｂ、Ｃ、Ｄの香りの嗜好性に関する評価の最頻値を算出する場合、演算部８は、信頼度が高い被験者による評価対象物Ｂ、Ｃ、Ｄの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値のうち最も評価回数が多い（頻度の高い）評価値を評価対象物ごとの最頻値として出力する。 The calculation unit 8 aggregates only the evaluation values (judgment 〇) judged by the judgment unit 6 to be highly reliable evaluations, and calculates the representative values (mean value, median value, mode value, etc.). .. For example, when calculating the average value of the evaluations regarding the scent preference of the evaluation objects B, C, and D, the calculation unit 8 determines that the evaluation reliability is high in the determination unit 6, the evaluation objects B, C. , D, the evaluation values related to the scent preference are totaled for each evaluation target, and the total value is divided by the number of subjects judged to have high reliability. Further, when calculating the median evaluation of the scent preference of the evaluation objects B, C, and D, the calculation unit 8 relates to the scent preference of the evaluation objects B, C, and D by a highly reliable subject. The evaluation values are arranged in a row for each evaluation object in the order of the magnitude of the numerical values, and the center value is output as the median value. Further, when calculating the mode of evaluation regarding the scent preference of the evaluation objects B, C, and D, the calculation unit 8 determines the scent preference of the evaluation objects B, C, and D by a highly reliable subject. The evaluation value with the highest number of evaluations (high frequency) is output as the mode value for each evaluation target.
また、演算部８は、評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性に関する評価の平均値を算出する場合、まず、判定部６にて評価の信頼度が高いと判定した評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値を合計して、信頼度が高いと判定された被験者の人数で割る。また、このとき、演算部８は、判定部６にて評価の信頼度が高いと判定した評価対象物Ｅの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値を合計して、信頼度が高いと判定された被験者の人数で割る。そして、演算部８は、これら２つの平均値の平均を評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性に関する評価の平均値として出力する。 Further, when the calculation unit 8 calculates the average value of the evaluations regarding the scent preference of the evaluation object A, first, the determination unit 6 determines that the evaluation reliability is high. Add up the sexual assessments and divide by the number of subjects judged to be highly reliable. Further, at this time, the calculation unit 8 sums the evaluation values related to the scent preference of the evaluation object E determined by the determination unit 6 to have high evaluation reliability, and the subject is determined to have high reliability. Divide by the number of people. Then, the calculation unit 8 outputs the average of these two average values as the average value of the evaluation regarding the scent preference of the evaluation object A.
また、評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性に関する評価の中央値を算出する場合、演算部８は、まず、信頼度が高い被験者による評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値を評価対象物ごとに数値の大きさ順に一列に並べてその中央の値を取得する。また、このとき、演算部８は、信頼度が高い被験者による評価対象物Ｅの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値を評価対象物ごとに数値の大きさ順に一列に並べてその中央の値を取得する。そして、演算部８は、これら２つの中央値の平均を評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性に関する評価の中央値として出力する。 Further, when calculating the median value of the evaluation regarding the scent preference of the evaluation object A, the calculation unit 8 first evaluates the evaluation value regarding the scent preference of the evaluation object A by a highly reliable subject. Get the value in the center by arranging each in a row in the order of the magnitude of the numerical value. Further, at this time, the calculation unit 8 arranges the evaluation values related to the scent preference of the evaluation object E by the highly reliable subject in a row in the order of the magnitude of the numerical values for each evaluation object, and acquires the central value thereof. Then, the calculation unit 8 outputs the average of these two medians as the median value of the evaluation regarding the scent preference of the evaluation object A.
また、評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性に関する評価の最頻値を算出する場合、演算部８は、まず、信頼度が高い被験者による評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値のうち最も評価回数が多い（頻度の高い）評価値を取得する。また、このとき、演算部８は、信頼度が高い被験者による評価対象物Ｅの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値のうち最も評価回数が多い（頻度の高い）評価値を取得する。そして、演算部８は、これら２つの最頻値の平均を評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性に関する評価の最頻値として出力する。 Further, when calculating the mode of evaluation regarding the scent preference of the evaluation object A, the calculation unit 8 first, among the evaluation values regarding the scent preference of the evaluation object A by a highly reliable subject, is the most. Acquire an evaluation value with a large number of evaluations (high frequency). Further, at this time, the calculation unit 8 acquires the evaluation value having the highest number of evaluations (high frequency) among the evaluation values relating to the scent preference of the evaluation object E by the highly reliable subject. Then, the calculation unit 8 outputs the average of these two modes as the mode of the evaluation regarding the scent preference of the evaluation object A.
（実施例）
以下、５つ（４種類）の評価対象物Ａ〜Ｅの香りの嗜好性を評価する方法の一実施例について説明する。
本実施例では、評価対象物Ａと評価対象物Ｅの香りをせっけんの香りとし、評価対象物Ｂの香りをローズの香りとし、評価対象物Ｃの香りをフルーツの香りとし、評価対象物Ｄの香りをフローラルの香りとした。また、本実施例では、被験者の人数を１６人（Ｐ１〜Ｐ１６）とし、各被験者が５つの評価対象物Ａ〜Ｅをこの順番で嗅いだときの香りの嗜好性を７段階で評価した。このため、本実施例では、図１の記録用紙に類似した嗜好の評価を７段階にした記録用紙（図示省略）を各被験者に渡して評価試験を実施した。また、この評価試験では、同じ１６人の被験者が試験のタイミング（日にちや時間帯）を合わせて同じ評価対象物Ａ〜Ｅの香りの嗜好性を４回ずつ評価した。その評価結果を表１〜表４に示す。表１は１回目の評価結果を示し、表２は２回目の評価結果を示し、表３は３回目の評価結果を示し、表４は４回目の評価結果を示す。各表は、評価装置１０の記録部４のデータ領域を示す。また、表５には、１〜４回の評価結果を集計してまとめた。
(Example)
Hereinafter, an example of a method for evaluating the scent preference of the five (4 types) evaluation objects A to E will be described.
In this embodiment, the scent of the evaluation target A and the evaluation target E is the scent of soap, the scent of the evaluation target B is the scent of rose, the scent of the evaluation target C is the scent of fruit, and the scent of the evaluation target D is. The scent of is a floral scent. Further, in this example, the number of subjects was 16 (P1 to P16), and the scent preference when each subject sniffed the five evaluation objects A to E in this order was evaluated on a seven-point scale. Therefore, in this example, an evaluation test was conducted by handing a recording sheet (not shown) having a preference evaluation similar to the recording sheet of FIG. 1 in 7 stages to each subject. In this evaluation test, the same 16 subjects evaluated the scent preference of the same evaluation objects A to E four times at the same time (date and time zone). The evaluation results are shown in Tables 1 to 4. Table 1 shows the results of the first evaluation, Table 2 shows the results of the second evaluation, Table 3 shows the results of the third evaluation, and Table 4 shows the results of the fourth evaluation. Each table shows the data area of the recording unit 4 of the evaluation device 10. In addition, Table 5 summarizes the evaluation results of 1 to 4 times.
ここでは、評価対象物Ａ〜Ｅの香りの嗜好性を評価する方法について説明するため、各表では香りの強度に関する評価値を表示していない。また、ここでは、各被験者による評価の信頼度を各回の評価試験ごとに判定する方法について説明するとともに、信頼度の高い評価値の平均値を出力する方法について説明し、中央値や最頻値を算出する方法の説明は省略する。 Here, in order to explain the method of evaluating the scent preference of the evaluation objects A to E, the evaluation values regarding the scent intensity are not displayed in each table. In addition, here, a method of determining the reliability of evaluation by each subject for each evaluation test will be described, and a method of outputting an average value of highly reliable evaluation values will be explained, and the median value and the mode value will be described. The description of the method of calculating is omitted.
まず、表１に示す１回目の評価結果に基づいて、１回目の評価試験における各被験者Ｐ１〜Ｐ１６の評価の信頼度を判定する。本実施例では、下記の不等式を評価に用いるとともに、下記の不等式のしきい値Ｔｔｈを０．１に設定した。
｜第３の評価結果−第１の評価結果｜／Ｎ＜Ｔｔｈ（＝０．１）
しきい値Ｔｔｈは、最大で（Ｎ−１）／Ｎであり、１未満である。本実施例における評価試験のように香りの評価試験に適当なしきい値Ｔｔｈは、経験上好ましくは０．２未満と考えられる。仮に、しきい値Ｔｔｈを０．２以上に設定すると、５段階評価で第３の評価結果と第１の評価結果との差が１である場合、上記の不等式を満たさないことになり、香りの評価試験における評価の信頼度としては不十分であると考えられる。
First, based on the results of the first evaluation shown in Table 1, the reliability of the evaluation of each subject P1 to P16 in the first evaluation test is determined. In this embodiment, the following inequality is used for evaluation, and the threshold value Tth of the following inequality is set to 0.1.
| Third evaluation result-First evaluation result | / N < Th (= 0.1)
The maximum threshold value T th is (N-1) / N and is less than 1. Experience shows that the threshold Tth suitable for the scent evaluation test as in the evaluation test in this example is preferably less than 0.2. If the threshold value T th is set to 0.2 or more and the difference between the third evaluation result and the first evaluation result is 1 in the 5-step evaluation, the above inequality is not satisfied. It is considered that the reliability of the evaluation in the scent evaluation test is insufficient.
例えば、被験者Ｐ１は、最初に嗅いだ評価対象物Ａの香り（第１の香り）の嗜好性に関する評価値（第１の評価結果）が５であるのに対し、最後に嗅いだ評価対象物Ｅの香り（第１の香り）の嗜好性に関する評価値（第３の評価結果）が４であり、同じ香りを嗅いでいるにもかかわらず嗜好性に関する評価値が低くなっている。この場合、上述の不等式を満たさないため、当該被験者Ｐ１は、１回目の評価試験における評価の信頼度が低い被験者と判定（判定×）され、１回目の全ての評価対象物Ａ〜Ｅに対する評価値が信頼性の低いものとみなされて不採用となる。 For example, the subject P1 has an evaluation value (first evaluation result) of 5 regarding the preference of the scent (first scent) of the evaluation object A that was first smelled, whereas the evaluation object P1 that was last smelled. The evaluation value (third evaluation result) regarding the palatability of the scent of E (first scent) is 4, and the evaluation value regarding the palatability is low even though the same scent is smelled. In this case, since the above inequality is not satisfied, the subject P1 is determined to be a subject with low evaluation reliability in the first evaluation test (judgment ×), and all the evaluation objects A to E in the first evaluation are evaluated. The value is considered unreliable and is rejected.
被験者Ｐ２、Ｐ５〜Ｐ７、Ｐ１１〜Ｐ１６による評価結果についても、同様に、上述の不等式を満たさないため、評価値の信頼度が低いものと判定されて不採用（判定×）となる。 Similarly, the evaluation results by the subjects P2, P5 to P7, and P11 to P16 do not satisfy the above-mentioned inequality, so that the reliability of the evaluation value is judged to be low and the evaluation value is rejected (determination ×).
一方、例えば、被験者Ｐ３は、最初に嗅いだ評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値が４であり、最後に嗅いだ評価対象物Ｅの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値も４であるため、同じ香りである評価対象物Ａと評価対象物Ｅの嗜好性に関する評価が同じになっている。この場合、上述の不等式を満たすため、当該被験者Ｐ３は、１回目の評価試験における評価の信頼度が高い被験者と判定（判定〇）され、１回目の評価試験における全ての評価対象物Ａ〜Ｅに対する評価値が信頼度の高いものとみなされて採用される。 On the other hand, for example, the subject P3 has an evaluation value of 4 regarding the scent preference of the evaluation object A that was first smelled, and 4 is also an evaluation value regarding the scent preference of the evaluation object E that was last smelled. , Evaluation object A and evaluation object E having the same scent have the same evaluation regarding the preference. In this case, in order to satisfy the above inequality, the subject P3 is determined to be a subject with high evaluation reliability in the first evaluation test (judgment 〇), and all the evaluation objects A to E in the first evaluation test. The evaluation value for is considered to be highly reliable and is adopted.
被験者Ｐ４、Ｐ８〜Ｐ１０による評価結果についても、同様に、上述の不等式を満たすため、評価値の信頼度が高いものと判定されて採用（判定〇）される。 Similarly, the evaluation results by the subjects P4 and P8 to P10 are also adopted (judgment 〇) because it is judged that the reliability of the evaluation value is high in order to satisfy the above-mentioned inequality.
つまり、１回目の評価試験において、評価対象物Ｅの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値が評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値と同じである被験者（Ｐ３、Ｐ４、Ｐ８、Ｐ９、Ｐ１０）は、これらの評価値を代入した上述の不等式を満たす被験者であるため、評価の信頼度の高い被験者とみなされ、当該被験者による嗜好性の評価値が採用される。 That is, in the first evaluation test, the subjects (P3, P4, P8, P9, P10) whose evaluation value regarding the scent preference of the evaluation object E is the same as the evaluation value regarding the scent preference of the evaluation object A. Is a subject who satisfies the above-mentioned inequality in which these evaluation values are substituted, and therefore is regarded as a subject with high evaluation reliability, and the evaluation value of preference by the subject is adopted.
或いは、１回目の評価試験において、評価対象物Ｅの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値と評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値との差が１であった被験者Ｐ１、Ｐ５〜Ｐ７、Ｐ１１、Ｐ１３〜Ｐ１６については、不等式のＴｔｈの値に応じてその評価の信頼度を判定するようにしてもよい。例えば、Ｔｔｈを予め０．２に設定すれば、被験者Ｐ１、Ｐ５〜Ｐ７、Ｐ１１、Ｐ１３〜Ｐ１６による評価結果は、｜第３の評価結果−第１の評価結果｜／Ｎ＝１／７＝０．１４で不等式を満たすことになり、被験者Ｐ１、Ｐ５〜Ｐ７、Ｐ１１、Ｐ１３〜Ｐ１６は、１回目の評価試験における評価の信頼度が高い被験者と判定（判定〇）され、１回目の評価試験における全ての評価対象物Ａ〜Ｅに対する評価値が信頼性の高いものとみなされて採用される。 Alternatively, in the first evaluation test, the difference between the evaluation value regarding the scent preference of the evaluation object E and the evaluation value regarding the scent preference of the evaluation object A was 1, subjects P1, P5 to P7, and P11. , P13 to P16, the reliability of the evaluation may be determined according to the value of Tth of the inequality. For example, if T th is set to 0.2 in advance, the evaluation results by the subjects P1, P5 to P7, P11, and P13 to P16 are | third evaluation result-first evaluation result | / N = 1/7. The inequality is satisfied with = 0.14, and the subjects P1, P5 to P7, P11, and P13 to P16 are judged to be subjects with high evaluation reliability in the first evaluation test (judgment 〇), and the first evaluation test is performed. The evaluation values for all the evaluation objects A to E in the evaluation test are regarded as highly reliable and adopted.
このように、上述した不等式のＴｔｈを評価試験毎に適当な値に設定することで、評価の基準となるしきい値を変更することができ、当該評価試験において許容する評価のぶれ（第１の評価結果に対する第３の評価結果の差分）を所望する値に設定することができる。なお、本実施形態においては、Ｔｔｈを０．１に設定したため、被験者Ｐ１、Ｐ５〜Ｐ７、Ｐ１１、Ｐ１３〜Ｐ１６による評価は全て不採用となった。 In this way, by setting the Tth of the above-mentioned inequality to an appropriate value for each evaluation test, the threshold value that is the reference for the evaluation can be changed, and the evaluation fluctuation allowed in the evaluation test (No. 1). The difference between the evaluation result of 1 and the third evaluation result) can be set to a desired value. In this embodiment, since Tth was set to 0.1, all evaluations by subjects P1, P5 to P7, P11, and P13 to P16 were rejected.
評価のぶれの許容範囲は、不等式を構成する評価段階の数（Ｎ）にも依存する。例えば、１０段階評価（Ｎ＝１０）においてＴｔｈを０．１に設定した場合、評価対象物Ｅに対する評価値が評価対象物Ａに対する評価値より“１”だけ大きい評価では、不等式は成り立たなくなり、当該評価結果は不採用となる。これに対し、１１段階評価（Ｎ＝１１）においてＴｔｈを同じ値（０．１）に設定した場合、評価対象物Ｅに対する評価値が評価対象物Ａに対する評価値より“１”だけ大きい評価は、不等式が成り立つことになり、当該評価結果が採用となる。 The permissible range of evaluation blur also depends on the number of evaluation stages (N) that make up the inequality. For example, when T th is set to 0.1 in a 10-step evaluation (N = 10), the inequality does not hold if the evaluation value for the evaluation object E is larger than the evaluation value for the evaluation object A by "1". , The evaluation result will be rejected. On the other hand, when T th is set to the same value (0.1) in the 11-step evaluation (N = 11), the evaluation value for the evaluation object E is evaluated by "1" larger than the evaluation value for the evaluation object A. The inequality holds, and the evaluation result is adopted.
評価試験を実施する実施者は、評価段階Ｎを所望する値に設定してＴｔｈを適切な値に設定することで、評価結果の信頼性の有無を判定するためのしきい値を所望する値に設定することができることに加えて、評価のぶれを許容する範囲を所望するレベルに設定することができる。 The practitioner who carries out the evaluation test desires a threshold value for determining whether or not the evaluation result is reliable by setting the evaluation stage N to a desired value and setting Tth to an appropriate value. In addition to being able to set the value, the range to allow for blurring of the evaluation can be set to the desired level.
そして、上述した１回目の評価結果に基づいて、評価対象物Ａ〜Ｄの香りの嗜好性を評価する場合、信頼度の高い評価値として採用された被験者（Ｐ３、Ｐ４、Ｐ８〜Ｐ１０）による評価値だけを評価対象物Ａ〜Ｄごとに集計し、その平均値を算出する。すなわち、評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性は、（４＋６＋６＋５＋４）／５≒５．０となり、評価対象物Ｂの香りの嗜好性は、（４＋６＋４＋５＋４）／５≒４．６となり、評価対象物Ｃの香りの嗜好性は、（５＋５＋４＋３＋４）／５≒４．２となり、評価対象物Ｄの香りの嗜好性は、（４＋７＋５＋６＋４）／５＝５．２となり、評価対象物Ｅの香りの嗜好性は、（４＋６＋６＋５＋４）／５＝５．０となる。 Then, when evaluating the scent preference of the evaluation objects A to D based on the above-mentioned first evaluation result, the subjects (P3, P4, P8 to P10) adopted as highly reliable evaluation values are used. Only the evaluation values are totaled for each of the evaluation objects A to D, and the average value is calculated. That is, the scent preference of the evaluation object A is (4 + 6 + 6 + 5 + 4) / 5≈5.0, the scent preference of the evaluation object B is (4 + 6 + 4 + 5 + 4) /5≈4.6, and the evaluation object C The scent preference of the evaluation target D is (5 + 5 + 4 + 3 + 4) / 5≈4.2, the scent preference of the evaluation target D is (4 + 7 + 5 + 6 + 4) / 5 = 5.2, and the scent preference of the evaluation target E is. , (4 + 6 + 6 + 5 + 4) / 5 = 5.0.
２回目の評価試験においても、同様に、評価対象物Ｅの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値が評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値と同じである被験者（Ｐ１〜Ｐ４、Ｐ６、Ｐ７、Ｐ９、Ｐ１０、Ｐ１３、Ｐ１５）によって評価された嗜好性の評価値を採用し、評価対象物Ｅの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値が評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値と同じでない被験者（Ｐ５、Ｐ８、Ｐ１１、Ｐ１２、Ｐ１４、Ｐ１６）によって評価された嗜好性の評価値は、当該評価試験により予め設定したＴｔｈの値により、採用／不採用を決める。本実施形態では、Ｔｔｈを０．１に設定したため、被験者Ｐ５、Ｐ８、Ｐ１１、Ｐ１２、Ｐ１４、Ｐ１６による評価は全て不採用とした。 Similarly, in the second evaluation test, the subjects (P1 to P4, P6, P7,) in which the evaluation value regarding the scent preference of the evaluation object E is the same as the evaluation value regarding the scent preference of the evaluation object A. Subjects who adopted the evaluation value of palatability evaluated by P9, P10, P13, P15) and whose evaluation value regarding the scent preference of the evaluation target E is not the same as the evaluation value regarding the scent preference of the evaluation target A. The evaluation value of palatability evaluated by (P5, P8, P11, P12, P14, P16) is determined to be adopted / not adopted according to the Tth value preset by the evaluation test. In this embodiment, since Thth was set to 0.1, all evaluations by subjects P5, P8, P11, P12, P14, and P16 were rejected.
この場合、評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性は、（４＋５＋５＋６＋５＋４＋５＋４＋５＋５）／１０≒４．８となり、評価対象物Ｂの香りの嗜好性は、（３＋３＋５＋６＋５＋４＋５＋４＋３＋４）／１０≒４．２となり、評価対象物Ｃの香りの嗜好性は、（３＋４＋５＋５＋４＋２＋３＋４＋３＋５）／１０≒３．８となり、評価対象物Ｄの香りの嗜好性は、（５＋５＋４＋５＋４＋２＋４＋４＋４＋５）／１０≒４．２となり、評価対象物Ｅの香りの嗜好性は、（４＋５＋５＋６＋５＋４＋５＋４＋５＋５）／１０≒４．８となる。 In this case, the scent preference of the evaluation object A is (4 + 5 + 5 + 6 + 5 + 4 + 5 + 4 + 5 + 5) / 10≈4.8, and the scent preference of the evaluation object B is (3 + 3 + 5 + 6 + 5 + 4 + 5 + 4 + 3 + 4) / 10≈4.2. The scent preference of C is (3 + 4 + 5 + 5 + 4 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 3 + 5) / 10≈3.8, and the scent preference of the evaluation object D is (5 + 5 + 4 + 5 + 4 + 2 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 5) / 10≈4.2, and the scent preference of the evaluation object E is Is (4 + 5 + 5 + 6 + 5 + 4 + 5 + 4 + 5 + 5) / 10≈4.8.
３回目の評価試験においても、同様に、評価対象物Ｅの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値が評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値と同じである被験者（Ｐ１、Ｐ３〜Ｐ５、Ｐ７、Ｐ１０、Ｐ１３、Ｐ１６）によって評価された嗜好性の評価値を採用し、評価対象物Ｅの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値が評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値と同じでない被験者（Ｐ２、Ｐ６、Ｐ８、Ｐ９、Ｐ１１、Ｐ１２、Ｐ１４、Ｐ１５）によって評価された嗜好性の評価値は、当該評価試験により予め設定したＴｔｈの値により、採用／不採用を決める。本実施形態では、Ｔｔｈを０．１に設定したため、被験者Ｐ２、Ｐ６、Ｐ８、Ｐ９、Ｐ１１、Ｐ１２、Ｐ１４、Ｐ１５による評価は全て不採用とした。 Similarly, in the third evaluation test, the evaluation values regarding the scent preference of the evaluation target E are the same as the evaluation values regarding the scent preference of the evaluation target A (P1, P3 to P5, P7, P7, A subject (P2) who adopted the evaluation value of the palatability evaluated by P10, P13, P16) and whose evaluation value regarding the scent preference of the evaluation target E is not the same as the evaluation value regarding the scent preference of the evaluation target A. , P6, P8, P9, P11, P12, P14, P15), the evaluation value of palatability is determined to be adopted / not adopted according to the value of Tth preset in the evaluation test. In this embodiment, since Tth was set to 0.1, all evaluations by subjects P2, P6, P8, P9, P11, P12, P14, and P15 were rejected.
この場合、評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性は、（４＋５＋６＋５＋４＋４＋５＋５）／８≒４．８となり、評価対象物Ｂの香りの嗜好性は、（３＋４＋５＋４＋４＋４＋３＋４）／８≒３．９となり、評価対象物Ｃの香りの嗜好性は、（４＋５＋５＋４＋４＋４＋４＋４）／８≒４．３となり、評価対象物Ｄの香りの嗜好性は、（５＋４＋６＋５＋３＋４＋３＋４）／８≒４．３となり、評価対象物Ｅの香りの嗜好性は、（４＋５＋６＋５＋４＋４＋５＋５）／８≒４．８となる。 In this case, the scent preference of the evaluation object A is (4 + 5 + 6 + 5 + 4 + 4 + 5 + 5) / 8≈4.8, and the scent preference of the evaluation object B is (3 + 4 + 5 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 3 + 4) /8≈3.9. The scent preference of C is (4 + 5 + 5 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4) / 8≈4.3, and the scent preference of the evaluation object D is (5 + 4 + 6 + 5 + 3 + 4 + 3 + 4) /8≈4.3, and the scent preference of the evaluation object E. Is (4 + 5 + 6 + 5 + 4 + 4 + 5 + 5) / 8≈4.8.
４回目の評価試験においても、同様に、評価対象物Ｅの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値が評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値と同じである被験者（Ｐ１、Ｐ３、Ｐ４、Ｐ７、Ｐ９、Ｐ１０、Ｐ１２、Ｐ１３、Ｐ１５）によって評価された嗜好性の評価値を採用し、評価対象物Ｅの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値が評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値と同じでない被験者（Ｐ２、Ｐ５、Ｐ６、Ｐ８、Ｐ１１、Ｐ１４、Ｐ１６）によって評価された嗜好性の評価値は、当該評価試験により予め設定したＴｔｈの値により、採用／不採用を決める。本実施形態では、Ｔｔｈを０．１に設定したため、被験者Ｐ２、Ｐ５、Ｐ６、Ｐ８、Ｐ１１、Ｐ１４、Ｐ１６による評価は全て不採用とした。 Similarly, in the fourth evaluation test, the evaluation values regarding the scent preference of the evaluation target E are the same as the evaluation values regarding the scent preference of the evaluation target A (P1, P3, P4, P7, P7, The evaluation value of the scent evaluated by P9, P10, P12, P13, P15) is adopted, and the evaluation value regarding the scent preference of the evaluation object E is the same as the evaluation value regarding the scent preference of the evaluation object A. The evaluation value of the palatability evaluated by the non-subjects (P2, P5, P6, P8, P11, P14, P16) is determined to be adopted / not adopted according to the Tth value preset by the evaluation test. In this embodiment, since Tth was set to 0.1, all evaluations by subjects P2, P5, P6, P8, P11, P14, and P16 were rejected.
この場合、評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性は、（３＋５＋６＋４＋５＋４＋６＋５＋５）／９≒４．８となり、評価対象物Ｂの香りの嗜好性は、（５＋４＋６＋３＋３＋３＋６＋２＋２）／９≒３．８となり、評価対象物Ｃの香りの嗜好性は、（３＋５＋６＋４＋３＋４＋６＋４＋５）／９≒４．４となり、評価対象物Ｄの香りの嗜好性は、（５＋４＋６＋３＋４＋４＋５＋３＋５）／９≒４．３となり、評価対象物Ｅの香りの嗜好性は、（３＋５＋６＋４＋５＋４＋６＋５＋５）／９≒４．８となる。 In this case, the scent preference of the evaluation object A is (3 + 5 + 6 + 4 + 5 + 4 + 6 + 5 + 5) / 9≈4.8, and the scent preference of the evaluation object B is (5 + 4 + 6 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 6 + 2 + 2) / 9≈3.8. The scent preference of C is (3 + 5 + 6 + 4 + 3 + 4 + 6 + 4 + 5) / 9≈4.4, and the scent preference of the evaluation object D is (5 + 4 + 6 + 3 + 4 + 4 + 5 + 3 + 5) / 9≈4.3, and the scent preference of the evaluation object E is Is (3 + 5 + 6 + 4 + 5 + 4 + 6 + 5 + 5) / 9≈4.8.
１〜４回の評価試験に基づいてそれぞれ算出した評価対象物Ａ〜Ｅの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値の平均値を表５にまとめて示す。 Table 5 summarizes the average values of the evaluation values related to the scent preference of the evaluation objects A to E calculated based on the evaluation tests 1 to 4 times.
本実施形態の評価方法により得られる評価結果は、例えば、表５の形態であってもよいが、１〜４回の評価値を評価対象物ごとに平均して出力してもよい。 The evaluation result obtained by the evaluation method of the present embodiment may be, for example, the form shown in Table 5, but the evaluation values of 1 to 4 times may be averaged and output for each evaluation object.
以上のように、本実施形態によると、香りの異なる複数の評価対象物を用意して、最初に香りを嗅いだ評価対象物と同じ香りの別の評価対象物の香りを最後に嗅いだとき、香りの評価が同じであった評価結果を、信頼度の高い評価結果として採用するとともに、香りの評価が最初と最後で異なった評価結果をしきい値Ｔｔｈに応じて採用／不採用を決めるようにした。このため、本実施形態によると、従来のように全ての評価データを採用する場合と比較して、信頼性の高い安定した評価結果を得ることができる。 As described above, according to the present embodiment, when a plurality of evaluation objects having different scents are prepared and the scent of another evaluation object having the same scent as the evaluation object whose scent is first smelled is finally smelled. , The evaluation results with the same scent evaluation are adopted as highly reliable evaluation results, and the evaluation results with different scent evaluations at the beginning and the end are adopted / not adopted according to the threshold value T th. I tried to decide. Therefore, according to the present embodiment, it is possible to obtain a highly reliable and stable evaluation result as compared with the case where all the evaluation data are adopted as in the conventional case.
つまり、評価対象物Ｅの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値と評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性に関する評価値を代入した上述した不等式が満たされる場合、この評価をした被験者は、評価の信頼度が高い被験者であると判定することができる。この場合、まず、当該被験者が同時に評価した評価対象物Ｂ、Ｃ、Ｄに対する香りの嗜好性に関する評価値も信頼度の高い評価であると判定することができる。また、この場合、評価対象物Ａ自体の評価値も信頼度の高い評価であると判定することができる。 That is, when the above-mentioned inequality in which the evaluation value regarding the scent preference of the evaluation object E and the evaluation value regarding the scent preference of the evaluation object A are satisfied is satisfied, the subject who made this evaluation has a reliability of the evaluation. It can be determined that the subject is high. In this case, first, it can be determined that the evaluation value regarding the scent preference for the evaluation objects B, C, and D simultaneously evaluated by the subject is also a highly reliable evaluation. Further, in this case, it can be determined that the evaluation value of the evaluation object A itself is also a highly reliable evaluation.
このため、上述したように信頼度の高い評価値だけを集計して代表値（平均値、中央値、最頻値）を算出することで、信頼度の高い香りの評価が可能となる。この結果、最も評価の高い香りを選択することができ、評価の精度も高めることができる。例えば、上述した実施例における評価結果から、評価対象物Ａ（すなわち評価対象物Ｅ）の嗜好性に関する評価結果が最も高いことがわかり、評価対象物Ａを最も嗜好性の高い香りとして選択することができる。 Therefore, as described above, by totaling only the highly reliable evaluation values and calculating the representative values (mean value, median value, mode value), it is possible to evaluate the highly reliable scent. As a result, the most highly evaluated scent can be selected, and the accuracy of evaluation can be improved. For example, from the evaluation results in the above-mentioned examples, it is found that the evaluation result regarding the palatability of the evaluation target A (that is, the evaluation target E) is the highest, and the evaluation target A is selected as the most palatable scent. Can be done.
また、上述した実施例のように、同じ評価試験を異なるタイミングで複数回行うことにより、例えば、被験者が空腹のときのデータや満腹のときのデータなどを自由にとることができ、一日のうちの各時間帯における香りの嗜好性の評価傾向なども正確に把握することができる。つまり、本実施形態によると、常に安定した評価結果を得ることができ、商品開発における有効な情報を提供することができる。また、例えば、香りのトップノート、ミドルノート、ラストノートの嗜好性を個別に評価したい場合などには、本実施形態の評価方法が有効である。 Further, by performing the same evaluation test a plurality of times at different timings as in the above-described embodiment, for example, data when the subject is hungry or data when the subject is full can be freely obtained, and one day can be obtained. It is possible to accurately grasp the evaluation tendency of the scent preference in each of our time zones. That is, according to the present embodiment, stable evaluation results can always be obtained, and effective information in product development can be provided. Further, for example, when it is desired to individually evaluate the taste of the top note, middle note, and last note of the scent, the evaluation method of the present embodiment is effective.
本実施形態のように、人の嗜好性を評価する場合、多くの被験者が同じ評価を付ける場合（バランスの悪い評価結果が得られる場合）が想定される。このような場合、信頼性が高い評価値を単に平均した平均値で香りを評価すると、満足な評価結果が得られない可能性がある。これに対し、例えば、複数の評価値の中央値で香りを評価すれば、平均値で評価した場合と比べてより正確な評価が可能となる。また、このような場合、複数の評価値の最頻値で香りを評価すると、多くの被験者が評価した評価結果を把握することができ、さらに正確な評価が期待できる。 When evaluating a person's preference as in the present embodiment, it is assumed that many subjects give the same evaluation (when an unbalanced evaluation result can be obtained). In such a case, if the scent is evaluated by simply averaging the highly reliable evaluation values, a satisfactory evaluation result may not be obtained. On the other hand, for example, if the scent is evaluated by the median value of a plurality of evaluation values, more accurate evaluation becomes possible as compared with the case where the evaluation is performed by the average value. Further, in such a case, if the scent is evaluated by the mode of a plurality of evaluation values, the evaluation results evaluated by many subjects can be grasped, and more accurate evaluation can be expected.
以上、具体例をあげて本発明の実施形態について説明したが、本発明は、上述した実施形態に限定されるものではなく、本発明の要旨の範囲内で種々の変形や応用が可能なことは勿論である。 Although the embodiments of the present invention have been described above with specific examples, the present invention is not limited to the above-described embodiments, and various modifications and applications are possible within the scope of the gist of the present invention. Of course.
例えば、上述した実施例では、異なる香りの複数の評価対象物Ａ〜Ｅを用意して最初に嗅いだ評価対象物Ａの香りと同じ香りの評価対象物Ｅの香りを最後に嗅いで評価することで、間に挟まれた評価対象物Ｂ、Ｃ、Ｄの香りの評価結果の信頼度を判定するようにした。しかし、上述した実施例のように、評価対象物Ａと評価対象物Ｅの評価の間に残り全ての評価対象物Ｂ、Ｃ、Ｄの評価を必ずしも挟む必要はない。例えば、評価対象物をＡ、Ｂ、Ｃ、Ｅ、Ｄの順に評価して、評価対象物Ｅの香りの評価が評価対象物Ａの香りの評価と同じである場合に、評価対象物Ｂ、Ｃ、Ｄの香りの評価の信頼度が高いものであると判定することもできる。 For example, in the above-described embodiment, a plurality of evaluation objects A to E having different scents are prepared, and the scent of the evaluation object E having the same scent as the scent of the evaluation object A first smelled is evaluated by smelling last. As a result, the reliability of the evaluation result of the scents of the evaluation objects B, C, and D sandwiched between them was determined. However, as in the above-described embodiment, it is not always necessary to put the evaluations of all the remaining evaluation objects B, C, and D between the evaluations of the evaluation object A and the evaluation object E. For example, when the evaluation object is evaluated in the order of A, B, C, E, and D, and the evaluation of the scent of the evaluation object E is the same as the evaluation of the scent of the evaluation object A, the evaluation object B, It can also be determined that the evaluation of the scents of C and D is highly reliable.
また、上述した実施形態では、香りの嗜好性と強度を別々に評価する場合について説明したが、これに限らず、香りの強度に関する評価結果を嗜好性の評価に用いることもできる。例えば、評価対象物Ｅの香りの嗜好性に関する評価結果が評価対象物Ａの香りの嗜好性に関する評価結果と同じであり、且つ評価対象物Ｅの香りの強度に関する評価結果が評価対象物Ａの香りの強度に関する評価結果と同じである場合に、評価対象物Ａ、Ｂ、Ｃ、Ｄの香りの嗜好性に関する評価が信頼度の高い評価であるものと判定するようにしてもよい。 Further, in the above-described embodiment, the case where the scent preference and the intensity are evaluated separately has been described, but the present invention is not limited to this, and the evaluation result regarding the scent intensity can be used for the evaluation of the preference. For example, the evaluation result regarding the scent preference of the evaluation object E is the same as the evaluation result regarding the scent preference of the evaluation object A, and the evaluation result regarding the scent intensity of the evaluation object E is the evaluation result of the evaluation object A. When the evaluation result regarding the intensity of the scent is the same, it may be determined that the evaluation regarding the scent preference of the evaluation objects A, B, C, and D is a highly reliable evaluation.
２…入力部、 ４…記録部、 ６…判定部、 ８…演算部、 １０…評価装置。 2 ... Input unit, 4 ... Recording unit, 6 ... Judgment unit, 8 ... Calculation unit, 10 ... Evaluation device.
Claims (12)
その後に、同じ被験者が前記第１の香りと異なる少なくとも１つの第２の評価対象物それぞれの第２の香りを嗅いで前記Ｎ段階で評価した少なくとも１つの第２の評価結果を取得し、
さらにその後に、同じ被験者が前記第１の香りと同じ香りであることを知らされずに前記第１の香りと同じ第３の評価対象物の香りを嗅いで前記Ｎ段階で評価した第３の評価結果を取得し、
評価の基準となるしきい値をＴｔｈとし、前記第１および第３の評価結果が下の不等式を満たす場合に、前記少なくとも１つの第２の評価結果を前記少なくとも１つの第２の評価対象物それぞれの前記第２の香りの評価と判定する、
｜第３の評価結果−第１の評価結果｜／Ｎ＜Ｔｔｈ
香りの評価方法。 The subject sniffed the first scent of the first evaluation object and obtained the first evaluation result evaluated in N stages.
After that, the same subject sniffed the second scent of each of at least one second evaluation object different from the first scent, and obtained at least one second evaluation result evaluated in the N stage.
After that, the same subject was not informed that the scent was the same as the first scent, and the scent of the third evaluation object, which was the same as the first scent, was sniffed and evaluated in the N stage. Get the evaluation result,
When the threshold value as a reference for evaluation is Tth and the first and third evaluation results satisfy the following inequality, the at least one second evaluation result is the at least one second evaluation target. Judging as the evaluation of the second scent of each object,
| Third evaluation result-First evaluation result | / N < Th
How to evaluate the scent.
請求項１の評価方法。 The at least one second scent contains a plurality of different scents from each other, and the at least one second evaluation result includes a plurality of evaluation results for evaluating each of the plurality of different scents.
The evaluation method of claim 1.
請求項１乃至請求項３のいずれか１項に記載した評価方法。 The scent assessment performed by the subject includes an assessment of scent preference.
The evaluation method according to any one of claims 1 to 3.
請求項１乃至請求項４のいずれか１項に記載した評価方法。 Subject's assessment of scent includes assessment of scent intensity,
The evaluation method according to any one of claims 1 to 4.
その後に、同じ被験者が前記第１の香りと異なる少なくとも１つの第２の評価対象物それぞれの第２の香りを嗅いで前記Ｎ段階で評価した少なくとも１つの第２の評価結果を取得し、
さらにその後に、同じ被験者が前記第１の香りと同じ香りであることを知らされずに前記第１の香りと同じ第３の評価対象物の香りを嗅いで前記Ｎ段階で評価した第３の評価結果を取得し、
評価の基準となるしきい値をＴｔｈとし、前記第１および第３の評価結果が下の不等式を満たす場合に、前記少なくとも１つの第２の評価結果を前記少なくとも１つの第２の評価対象物それぞれの前記第２の香りの評価と判定するとともに、前記第１の評価結果を前記第１の香りの評価と判定する、
｜第３の評価結果−第１の評価結果｜／Ｎ＜Ｔｔｈ
香りの評価方法。 The subject sniffed the first scent of the first evaluation object and obtained the first evaluation result evaluated in N stages.
After that, the same subject sniffed the second scent of each of at least one second evaluation object different from the first scent, and obtained at least one second evaluation result evaluated in the N stage.
After that, the same subject was not informed that the scent was the same as the first scent, and the scent of the third evaluation object, which was the same as the first scent, was sniffed and evaluated in the N stage. Get the evaluation result,
When the threshold value as a reference for evaluation is Tth and the first and third evaluation results satisfy the following inequality, the at least one second evaluation result is the at least one second evaluation target. It is determined that each of the objects is evaluated as the second scent, and the first evaluation result is determined as the evaluation of the first scent.
| Third evaluation result-First evaluation result | / N < Th
How to evaluate the scent.
評価の基準となるしきい値をＴｔｈとし、前記記録手段に記録した前記第１および第３の評価結果が下の不等式を満たす場合に、前記記録手段に記録した前記少なくとも１つの第２の評価結果を前記少なくとも１つの第２の評価対象物それぞれの前記第２の香りの評価と判定する判定手段と、
｜第３の評価結果−第１の評価結果｜／Ｎ＜Ｔｔｈ
を有する香りの評価装置。 As a result of the first evaluation in which the subject sniffed the first scent of the first evaluation object and evaluated in N stages, at least one first scent different from the first scent after the same subject sniffed the first scent. 2. At least one second evaluation result evaluated in the N stage by smelling the second scent of each of the evaluation objects, and the first after the same subject smells the at least one second scent. A recording means for recording the third evaluation result evaluated in the N stages by smelling the scent of the third evaluation object which is the same as the first scent without being informed that the scent is the same as the scent of 1.
When the threshold value as a reference for evaluation is Tth and the first and third evaluation results recorded in the recording means satisfy the following inequality, at least one second item recorded in the recording means. A determination means for determining the evaluation result as the evaluation of the second scent of each of the at least one second evaluation object, and
| Third evaluation result-First evaluation result | / N < Th
A scent evaluation device with.
請求項７の評価装置。 The at least one second, which was evaluated by a plurality of subjects including other subjects and determined to be the evaluation of each of the at least one second scent based on the first to third evaluation results recorded in the recording means. It further has a calculation means for calculating the representative value of each of the evaluation results of the above and outputting the representative value as the evaluation of each of the at least one second scent.
The evaluation device according to claim 7.
前記記録手段は、被験者が前記複数の互いに異なる香りをそれぞれ嗅いで評価した複数の評価結果を前記少なくとも１つの第２の評価結果として記録し、
前記判定手段は、前記記録手段に記録した前記第１および第３の評価結果が前記不等式を満たす場合に、前記記録手段に記録した前記少なくとも１つの第２の評価結果を前記複数の互いに異なる香りそれぞれの評価と判定する、
請求項７の評価装置。 The at least one second scent comprises a plurality of different scents.
The recording means records a plurality of evaluation results in which the subject sniffs and evaluates the plurality of different scents as the at least one second evaluation result.
When the first and third evaluation results recorded in the recording means satisfy the inequality, the determination means obtains the at least one second evaluation result recorded in the recording means with a plurality of different scents. Judging as each evaluation,
The evaluation device according to claim 7.
請求項７乃至請求項９のいずれか１項に記載した評価装置。 The first to third evaluation results recorded by the recording means include an evaluation regarding scent preference.
The evaluation device according to any one of claims 7 to 9.
請求項７乃至請求項１０のいずれか１項に記載した評価装置。 The first to third evaluation results recorded by the recording means include an evaluation regarding the intensity of the scent.
The evaluation device according to any one of claims 7 to 10.
評価の基準となるしきい値をＴｔｈとし、前記記録手段に記録した前記第１および第３の評価結果が下の不等式を満たす場合に、前記記録手段に記録した前記少なくとも１つの第２の評価結果を前記少なくとも１つの第２の評価対象物それぞれの前記第２の香りの評価と判定するとともに、前記記録手段に記録した前記第１の評価結果を前記第１の香りの評価と判定する判定手段と、
｜第３の評価結果−第１の評価結果｜／Ｎ＜Ｔｔｈ
を有する香りの評価装置。 As a result of the first evaluation in which the subject sniffed the first scent of the first evaluation object and evaluated in N stages, at least one first scent different from the first scent after the same subject sniffed the first scent. At least one second evaluation result evaluated in the N stages by smelling the second scent of each of the two evaluation objects, and the first scent after the same subject smelled the at least one second scent. A recording means for recording the third evaluation result evaluated in the N stage by smelling the scent of the third evaluation object same as the first scent without being informed that the scent is the same as the first scent.
When the first and third evaluation results recorded in the recording means satisfy the following inequality, the threshold value as a reference for evaluation is Tth , and the at least one second item recorded in the recording means. The evaluation result is determined to be the evaluation of the second scent of each of the at least one second evaluation object, and the first evaluation result recorded in the recording means is determined to be the evaluation of the first scent. Judgment means and
| Third evaluation result-First evaluation result | / N < Th
A scent evaluation device with.
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| JP2019078693A JP7171502B2 (en) | 2019-04-17 | 2019-04-17 | Fragrance evaluation method and evaluation device |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| JP2019078693A JP7171502B2 (en) | 2019-04-17 | 2019-04-17 | Fragrance evaluation method and evaluation device |
Publications (2)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| JP2020176897A true JP2020176897A (en) | 2020-10-29 |
| JP7171502B2 JP7171502B2 (en) | 2022-11-15 |
Family
ID=72935530
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| JP2019078693A Active JP7171502B2 (en) | 2019-04-17 | 2019-04-17 | Fragrance evaluation method and evaluation device |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| JP (1) | JP7171502B2 (en) |
Citations (9)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JPS58501520A (en) * | 1981-09-09 | 1983-09-08 | スラグテリエルネス フオルスクニングシンステイツツト | Method for detecting a swine-like odor in an individual animal body, preferably a carcass or a part thereof |
| JP2013060439A (en) * | 2011-09-09 | 2013-04-04 | Lvmh Recherche | Method for masking bitterness of uv blocker |
| JP2013060440A (en) * | 2011-09-09 | 2013-04-04 | Lvmh Recherche | Cosmetic composition comprising bitter compound, fragrance, stevia extract and salt |
| JP5501524B1 (en) * | 2012-12-26 | 2014-05-21 | 花王株式会社 | Nitrile compounds |
| WO2014156735A1 (en) * | 2013-03-29 | 2014-10-02 | アサヒビール株式会社 | Method for manufacturing effervescent beverage |
| US20160362629A1 (en) * | 2015-06-12 | 2016-12-15 | The Procter & Gamble Company | Fragrance Compositions and Uses Thereof |
| JP2017002251A (en) * | 2015-06-15 | 2017-01-05 | Ｓｉｓ株式会社 | Scent-lingering silk and method for producing thereof, method for detecting fragrance component in scent-lingering silk, and method for producing scent-lingering silk membrane |
| JP2020173156A (en) * | 2019-04-10 | 2020-10-22 | エステー株式会社 | Method for evaluating smell and device for evaluating smell |
| JP2020176898A (en) * | 2019-04-17 | 2020-10-29 | エステー株式会社 | Fragrance evaluation method and evaluation device |
-
2019
- 2019-04-17 JP JP2019078693A patent/JP7171502B2/en active Active
Patent Citations (9)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JPS58501520A (en) * | 1981-09-09 | 1983-09-08 | スラグテリエルネス フオルスクニングシンステイツツト | Method for detecting a swine-like odor in an individual animal body, preferably a carcass or a part thereof |
| JP2013060439A (en) * | 2011-09-09 | 2013-04-04 | Lvmh Recherche | Method for masking bitterness of uv blocker |
| JP2013060440A (en) * | 2011-09-09 | 2013-04-04 | Lvmh Recherche | Cosmetic composition comprising bitter compound, fragrance, stevia extract and salt |
| JP5501524B1 (en) * | 2012-12-26 | 2014-05-21 | 花王株式会社 | Nitrile compounds |
| WO2014156735A1 (en) * | 2013-03-29 | 2014-10-02 | アサヒビール株式会社 | Method for manufacturing effervescent beverage |
| US20160362629A1 (en) * | 2015-06-12 | 2016-12-15 | The Procter & Gamble Company | Fragrance Compositions and Uses Thereof |
| JP2017002251A (en) * | 2015-06-15 | 2017-01-05 | Ｓｉｓ株式会社 | Scent-lingering silk and method for producing thereof, method for detecting fragrance component in scent-lingering silk, and method for producing scent-lingering silk membrane |
| JP2020173156A (en) * | 2019-04-10 | 2020-10-22 | エステー株式会社 | Method for evaluating smell and device for evaluating smell |
| JP2020176898A (en) * | 2019-04-17 | 2020-10-29 | エステー株式会社 | Fragrance evaluation method and evaluation device |
Non-Patent Citations (1)
| Title |
|---|
| 岡安祥夫: "食品工業における官能評価のシステム化・自動化", 計測と制御, vol. 23, no. 3, JPN6022041144, 1984, pages 301 - 305, ISSN: 0004887157 * |
Also Published As
| Publication number | Publication date |
|---|---|
| JP7171502B2 (en) | 2022-11-15 |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| US11428678B2 (en) | System and method for scent perception measurements and for construction of a scent database | |
| Distel et al. | Perception of everyday odors—correlation between intensity, familiarity and strength of hedonic judgement | |
| Greenman et al. | Study on the organoleptic intensity scale for measuring oral malodor | |
| Williams et al. | Simple pain rating scales hide complex idiosyncratic meanings | |
| Fisher | Female intrasexual competition decreases female facial attractiveness | |
| Rierdan et al. | Weight, weight-related aspects of body image, and depression in early adolescent girls | |
| Wrzesniewski et al. | Odor and affect: individual differences in the impact of odor on liking for places, things and people | |
| Shahyad et al. | The relation of attachment and perceived social support with life satisfaction: structural equation model | |
| Fingeret et al. | On the methodology of body image assessment: the use of figural rating scales to evaluate body dissatisfaction and the ideal body standards of women | |
| Pereira et al. | Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the DAFS-R in a sample of Brazilian older adults | |
| Schloss et al. | What's that smell? An ecological approach to understanding preferences for familiar odors | |
| Mahmut et al. | Do women love their partner's smell? Exploring women's preferences for and identification of male partner and non-partner body odor | |
| Kobel et al. | Intervention effects of a kindergarten-based health promotion programme on motor abilities in early childhood | |
| JP2020176898A (en) | Fragrance evaluation method and evaluation device | |
| JP2020176897A (en) | Fragrance evaluation method and evaluation device | |
| Hanschmann et al. | Preliminary results of a computer-assisted vocal load test with 10-min test duration | |
| JP7171499B2 (en) | Fragrance evaluation method and evaluation device | |
| JP2005000289A (en) | Olfactory sense examination device | |
| Craig Roberts et al. | Repeatability of odour preferences across time | |
| JP5032097B2 (en) | Comfort evaluation system | |
| Gomes et al. | Predicting exercise behavior: Testing personal, athletic, and psychological variables | |
| Kim | The impact of perceived oral health status and self-efficacy on fear of intimacy among university of students. | |
| DĐNCER | The influence of affect and cognition on impulse buying behavior." | |
| Sironi et al. | Methodology for assessing the performance of urine absorbing aids in controlling malodour release | |
| JP2021186271A (en) | Olfactory capacity derivation device and program |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| A621 | Written request for application examination |
Free format text: JAPANESE INTERMEDIATE CODE: A621 Effective date: 20211122 |
|
| TRDD | Decision of grant or rejection written | ||
| A977 | Report on retrieval |
Free format text: JAPANESE INTERMEDIATE CODE: A971007 Effective date: 20220930 |
|
| A01 | Written decision to grant a patent or to grant a registration (utility model) |
Free format text: JAPANESE INTERMEDIATE CODE: A01 Effective date: 20221004 |
|
| A61 | First payment of annual fees (during grant procedure) |
Free format text: JAPANESE INTERMEDIATE CODE: A61 Effective date: 20221102 |
|
| R150 | Certificate of patent or registration of utility model |
Ref document number: 7171502 Country of ref document: JP Free format text: JAPANESE INTERMEDIATE CODE: R150 |