{"id":43119,"date":"2023-08-21T12:58:19","date_gmt":"2023-08-21T16:58:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.sisinternational.com\/?page_id=43119"},"modified":"2026-05-05T15:56:13","modified_gmt":"2026-05-05T19:56:13","slug":"etude-de-marche-sur-la-recherche-sensorielle-alimentaire","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.sisinternational.com\/fr\/solutions\/etude-de-marche-sur-lindustrie-des-boissons-alimentaires\/etude-de-marche-sur-la-recherche-sensorielle-alimentaire\/","title":{"rendered":"Food Sensory Research Market Research | SIS"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

\u00c9tude de march\u00e9 sensorielle sur les aliments et les boissons<\/a><\/h1>\n
\"\u00c9tudes<\/figure>\n<\/p>\n

Les \u00e9tudes de march\u00e9 sur l'analyse sensorielle des aliments et des boissons sont un outil essentiel pour les \u00e9tudes de march\u00e9, comblant le foss\u00e9 entre les attributs du produit et la perception du consommateur.<\/p>\n

Cette technique de recherche approfondit l'exp\u00e9rience sensorielle fournie par les produits alimentaires, en analysant des aspects tels que le go\u00fbt, l'ar\u00f4me, la texture et l'apparence. Avec une base de consommateurs en constante \u00e9volution et des changements rapides dans les pr\u00e9f\u00e9rences alimentaires, le recours aux \u00e9tudes de march\u00e9 sur les aliments et les boissons n\u2019a jamais \u00e9t\u00e9 aussi crucial.<\/p>\n

Nourriture et boisson \u00c9tude de march\u00e9 sensorielle<\/a> Aper\u00e7u<\/h2>\n

L'analyse sensorielle est la discipline scientifique qui \u00e9voque, mesure, analyse et interpr\u00e8te les r\u00e9ponses humaines aux caract\u00e9ristiques des aliments et des mat\u00e9riaux telles qu'elles sont per\u00e7ues par les sens de la vue, de l'odorat, du go\u00fbt, du toucher et de l'ou\u00efe. Son application est vaste, allant des \u00e9tapes de d\u00e9veloppement du produit aux \u00e9valuations post-lancement, garantissant que le produit alimentaire correspond aux attentes des consommateurs.<\/p>\n

Historiquement, les premiers signes d\u2019analyse sensorielle remontent aux civilisations anciennes, o\u00f9 la s\u00e9lection des aliments \u00e9tait principalement bas\u00e9e sur des attributs sensoriels. Il faudra cependant attendre le XXe si\u00e8cle pour que l\u2019analyse sensorielle commence \u00e0 prendre une forme structur\u00e9e. Avec l\u2019essor des biens de consommation et l\u2019industrialisation de l\u2019industrie alimentaire, il \u00e9tait absolument n\u00e9cessaire de comprendre et de quantifier les pr\u00e9f\u00e9rences des consommateurs afin de proposer des produits de plus en plus performants sur le march\u00e9.<\/p>\n

Currently, food and beverage market research<\/a> has become a highly sophisticated discipline \u2013 and as the global food market grows increasingly competitive, the spotlight on sensory analysis becomes brighter, marking its significance not just as a research tool, but as a vital component in a brand’s success strategy.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Food Sensory Research Market Research: How Leading Brands Win on Taste<\/h1>\n

Sensory science decides whether a product survives its second purchase. Food Sensory Research Market Research connects what trained panels detect to what consumers buy, and the brands that close that gap consistently outperform on launch velocity and shelf retention.<\/p>\n

The category has moved past hedonic scaling on a nine-point scale. Leading manufacturers now run integrated programs that combine descriptive analysis panels, central location tests, and home-use trials with neurometric and implicit response measures. The discipline is no longer a quality gate. It is a commercial weapon.<\/p>\n

Why Food Sensory Research Market Research Drives Launch Economics<\/h2>\n

Most launch failures trace to a single error: confusing liking with preference in context. A product can win a paired comparison test in a booth and lose to the incumbent in a refrigerator at home. The discrepancy is not random. It comes from forgetting that sensory perception is modulated by occasion, pairing, temperature drift, and prior exposure within the day.<\/p>\n

The firms that get this right separate three measurements. Trained QDA (quantitative descriptive analysis) panels deliver the objective sensory profile. CLTs with target consumers measure liking against benchmark. Extended home-use tests capture wear-out, occasion fit, and the penalty curve when a product is consumed three times in a week rather than once in a lab.<\/p>\n

According to SIS International Research, the strongest correlation between early-stage sensory data and twelve-month repeat purchase comes from pairing JAR (just-about-right) scale analysis with penalty analysis on the top three drivers of liking, rather than relying on overall acceptance scores alone.<\/span><\/span> The mechanism matters. JAR data tells the formulation team which attribute to move and by how much. Overall liking tells them only that something is wrong.<\/p>\n

The Methodology Stack That Separates Category Leaders<\/h2>\n

Sophisticated programs run a layered methodology stack rather than a single test. Each layer answers a different commercial question.<\/p>\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
M\u00e9thodologie<\/th>\nCommercial Question<\/th>\nStage<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Descriptive analysis panel (QDA)<\/td>\nWhat does the product actually taste like?<\/td>\nFormulation<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Triangle and duo-trio test<\/td>\nCan consumers detect a reformulation?<\/td>\nCost-out, clean label<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CATA (check-all-that-apply)<\/td>\nWhich attributes do consumers spontaneously associate?<\/td>\nConcept-product fit<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Sequential monadic CLT<\/td>\nHow does liking compare against the benchmark?<\/td>\nPre-launch<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Temporal dominance of sensations (TDS)<\/td>\nHow does the experience evolve across a bite or sip?<\/td>\nPremium positioning<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Accelerated shelf-life testing (ASLT)<\/td>\nWhen does sensory quality break down?<\/td>\nDistribution planning<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/figure>\n

Source: SIS International Research<\/em><\/p>\n

The discrimination tests deserve closer attention. A triangle test determines whether a reformulated product is detectably different from the original. This matters for cost-out programs, sodium reduction, sugar reduction, and supplier substitutions, where the commercial goal is parity rather than improvement. Brands that skip discrimination testing and go straight to consumer liking studies routinely miss small but cumulative shifts that erode loyalty over six to nine months.<\/p>\n

What Plant-Based, Clean Label, and Functional Categories Reveal<\/h2>\n

The plant-based protein category is the clearest case study in sensory gap economics. The first wave of products won distribution on novelty and ethical positioning. The second wave is being decided on texture, off-note suppression, and cooking behavior. Beyond Meat, Impossible Foods, and private label entrants from Kroger and Aldi are competing on attributes that descriptive panels measure precisely: bite resistance, juiciness retention, and the absence of pea protein bitterness.<\/p>\n

Clean label faces the same physics. Removing emulsifiers, stabilizers, and modified starches changes mouthfeel before it changes flavor. Consumers cannot name the difference, but penalty analysis on JAR creaminess and thickness scales captures it immediately. The brands moving fastest in this space test reformulations against the original product using triangle protocols before they ever reach a CLT.<\/p>\n

Functional ingredients add a third dimension. Adaptogens, nootropics, prebiotic fibers, and protein fortification all carry sensory liabilities. Olipop and Poppi succeeded in prebiotic soda not because they masked fiber better, but because they reframed the flavor expectation. Sensory research that tests in the wrong frame produces misleading liking scores.<\/p>\n

Building an Internal Sensory Capability That Scales<\/h2>\n

The question for Fortune 500 manufacturers is rarely whether to do sensory research. It is where to place the capability. SIS International’s work building internal sensory panels for multinational food and beverage manufacturers across Latin America and North America points to a clear pattern: companies that invest in trained internal panels for screening and rely on external CLTs for validation move from concept to launch roughly thirty percent faster than peers that outsource both stages.<\/span><\/p>\n

The internal panel handles iteration. Formulators can run a triangle test on a Tuesday and have actionable data by Thursday. The external program handles validation, where independent recruiting, blind benchmarking, and statistical rigor protect the launch decision. The four-phase build for an internal panel runs through recruitment, screening for sensory acuity, calibration training on reference standards, and deployment with ongoing performance monitoring. Skipping the screening phase is the most common failure point. Roughly one in three candidates lacks the discrimination ability for a trained panel, regardless of interest.<\/p>\n

The SIS Sensory Decision Matrix<\/h2>\n
\"\u00c9tudes<\/figure>\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Decision Stage<\/th>\nPrimary Method<\/th>\nTaille de l'\u00e9chantillon<\/th>\nSortir<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Early formulation<\/td>\nInternal trained panel + QDA<\/td>\n10-12 trained<\/td>\nSensory profile map<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Reformulation parity<\/td>\nTriangle \/ duo-trio test<\/td>\n50-100 consumers<\/td>\nDetectability threshold<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Concept-product fit<\/td>\nCLT with CATA + JAR<\/td>\n150-300 target<\/td>\nAttribute drivers<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Pre-launch validation<\/td>\nSequential monadic CLT vs benchmark<\/td>\n200-400 target<\/td>\nWin rate, penalty curve<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Commercial readiness<\/td>\nHome-use test + ASLT<\/td>\n150-250 households<\/td>\nRepeat intent, shelf-life<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/figure>\n

Source: SIS International Research<\/em><\/p>\n

Where Sensory Research Is Going Next<\/h2>\n
\"\u00c9tudes<\/figure>\n

Three shifts deserve VP-level attention. First, implicit response measurement is moving from academic curiosity to commercial use. Eye tracking, facial coding, and reaction-time tasks reveal preferences that consumers cannot articulate, particularly for premium and indulgent categories where social desirability bias inflates stated liking. Second, AI-assisted descriptive analysis is reducing panel calibration time. Predictive models trained on prior QDA data shorten the cycle between formulation and screening. Third, projective mapping and napping methods are gaining ground in early-stage innovation because they generate competitive landscape maps from consumer perception rather than expert opinion.<\/p>\n

SIS International’s proprietary research across beverage and packaged food categories indicates that brands integrating implicit measures with traditional CLT data identify winning concepts at roughly twice the rate of brands using stated preference alone, particularly in indulgent and premium segments.<\/span><\/p>\n

Food Sensory Research Market Research is no longer a function inside R&D. It is a discipline that connects formulation, marketing, and finance. The brands treating it that way are the ones taking share.<\/p>\n

\u00c0 propos de SIS International<\/h2>\n

SIS International<\/a> propose des recherches quantitatives, qualitatives et strat\u00e9giques. Nous fournissons des donn\u00e9es, des outils, des strat\u00e9gies, des rapports et des informations pour la prise de d\u00e9cision. Nous menons \u00e9galement des entretiens, des enqu\u00eates, des groupes de discussion et d\u2019autres m\u00e9thodes et approches d\u2019\u00e9tudes de march\u00e9. Contactez nous<\/a> pour votre prochain projet d'\u00e9tude de march\u00e9.<\/p>\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<\/p>\n

\n

Related SIS Resources<\/h3>\n