# Sensory Panel Performance Evaluation--Comprehensive Review of Practical Approaches
###### Abstract
\"Three of the main structural areas for panel performance systems are: time period (performance at one point in time versus monitoring trends over time), intra- or extra project work (as part of normal panel work versus specific performance test sessions) and target (for individual panelists versus the whole panel)\" [6]. Expert assessors have a considerable practical sensory testing experience in the related fields. It does not mean that their sensory acuity should not be measured or monitored, but the emphasis is on their product-specific knowledge, which makes them very effective in training product-specific sensory panels. The sensory analysis panel constitutes a true measuring instrument [3] in the sense that it utilizes human perceptions as instrumental measures to quantify the sensory features of products [8]. Many instrumental methods have been developed to determine the textural properties of food, for example, with emphasis on the method which imitates human perception (e.g., the Texture Profile Analysis) [10; 11]. However, only humans are able to deliver comprehensive sensory testing results, because of how they can combine sensory impressions in their brains and draw on past experiences [12]. Human sensory analysis can now be supported by technology-based chemical sensor arrays, these techniques are already proven in case of food and beverage production line testing system. There are generally accepted terms, techniques and organizations, which are specific to the given type of food or beverage in case of product-specific tests. The wine, beer, coffee, tea and spirit industries have strong traditions in creating schemes for selecting, training and monitoring the assessors. The structure of the training programs is often as follows: major elements of sensory perception, most important standardized test methods and finally a large number of product-specific tests in order to learn the diversity of the evaluated product and the descriptive terminology [8; 9; 13]. There are several requirements toward the performance indices of panelists. Specifically, assessors should use the scale correctly (location and range); score the same product consistently in different replicates (reliability/repeatability); agreement with the panel in attribute intensity evaluation (validity/consistency); discrimination among samples (sensitivity) [14]. In the present paper, we aimed for a comparison of the panel performance protocols, although the numbers of such frameworks are dynamically changing. In product competitions and quality evaluations in an industrial environment, the agreement among panelists is crucial. This parameter can be improved if assessors are regularly trained (refreshmentcourses) and evaluated, not only the day before the evaluation takes place. This way the panel manager will have an access to the trends, changes in the panel performance measures and will be able to provide individual help and support to the panelists. One should be aware of the fact that the individual differences in sensory perceptions will remain even after thorough training, since these are based on biological structures. Based on our literature review we provide some relevant insights and practical implications for the sensory oriented researchers. There is also a growing demand from the part of both researchers and practitioners to have an overview of the available methods, especially from the point of statistical issues and software relations. In the present paper, a complex and novel overview is provided, which might help the audience in selecting the protocol they apply during their studies.