## 1 Introduction  
For the food industry, sensory evaluation is crucial in product development for the consumer market, as it seeks to comprehend how consumers perceive products [1]. Among the many sensory methods available, descriptive analysis is widely used when the purpose is to obtain a detailed description of the products under analysis [2; 3]. One of the most used methods of characterizing consumer sensory products is check-all-that-apply (CATA) [4]. In this method, consumers are presented with a list of terms, attributes, or phrases, and then, asked to mark as many options as necessary to describe the product under review [5; 6; 7]. One of the main advantages of the CATA method is the simplicity and speed with which the analyses are performed [8]. The terms presented in the CATA methodology derive from applying other qualitative methodologies, such as focus groups or the free-listing methodology. The latter involves prompting evaluators to list as many perceived attributes as possible related to a specific product [9; 10]. Described as \"a deceptively simple, yet powerful technique\" [11], free-listing stands out from other qualitative methods because it allows for more authentic consumer associations that are less constrained and more realistic [12; 13]. However, one of the key challenges for consumer sensory science is describing the product and providing processable knowledge to make specific changes in product formulations [14]. Several studies have highlighted the usefulness of integrating CATA questions with the \"ideal\" product description to bridge this gap. After evaluating samples using CATA, consumers use the same attributes to describe their \"ideal\" product. Such an approach sheds light on how sensory differences between actual and ideal products affect acceptance using penalty rewards [15; 16; 17; 18; 19] and facilitates the formulation of products that closely match the consumers' ideals [8]. Thus, the CATA method has also been used to identify ideal products, as it is a simple alternative capable of gathering information on the perception of the sensory qualities of consumers concerning products [15; 20]. [PERSON], [PERSON], and [PERSON] [21] employed an approach that considers the following scenarios regarding the attribute: whether it was verified in the ideal product but not in the sample; whether it was marked on the sample but not on the ideal product; whether it was marked on both; or whether it was not marked on either the ideal product or the sample. [PERSON] et al. [8] used the CATA method to discern how products deviated from the ideal as perceived by consumers. The questionnaire employed included terms with hedonic intensity connotations, which are used to characterize both the ideal and actual products. In studies that utilize the CATA method incorporating an \"ideal\" assessment, the query regarding the ideal product typically follows the evaluation of all actual samples [8; 16; 17; 21; 22; 23; 24]. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [15] recommended randomizing the order of attributes within a ballot format, grouping them by modality to reduce the influence of attribute sequence on the sensory characterization of the product. However, their study did not address the question of the ideal product. Additionally, no studies were found in the literature that specifically discuss the sequence in which the questions about the ideal product should be posed. In hedonic studies, there is an academic and scientific consensus that the question of global acceptance should be prioritized. When consumers encounter a product for the first time, they naturally tend to compare it holistically. If this is not the approach, their evaluation can become more analytical, making it challenging to obtain an authentic measure of preferences or rejections [25]. It is acknowledged that in hedonic studies, the sequence in which questions are presented affects consumer responses [25].