1. science
2. mathematics
3. statistics

Fall 2013 ● Issue 16 (3)
IN THIS ISSUE

Technical Report
How to Diagnose the Need for
3D Unfolding
...an extra dimension is sometimes needed to
capture relevant information... (pages 3-4)
President's Message...................................1
Recent Papers & Reports ...........................1
September Webinar ....................................2
Supporting Count-Based Sensory
Advertising Claims
Courses Planned for 2014 ..........................2
2013 Fall Courses ...............................5, 6, 7
November 4 - 8, 2013
at The Greenbrier, White Sulphur Springs, WV
Internal Sensory Testing:
Tetrad Test, Power and Consumer Relevance
Drivers of Liking ®: Principles and Applications
Meet the Instructors and
Invited Speakers ........................................7
Sometimes, you just need another “D”... (pgs. 3 & 4 )
NEWS & EVENTS
Fall 2013
President's Message
Issue 16(3)
PAGE #
Thank You!

News & Events ................ 1, 2
We are now accepting applications for The Institute for Perception 2013 Student Award
until January 18, 2014. I encourage all those bright young research students to submit
their entries. Application information can be found on our website at www.ifpress.com/
student-award/. This award will be presented at one of our upcoming courses in 2014.

2014 Courses ...................... 2

September Webinar ........... 2

Technical Report ............. 3, 4
Speaking of awards, I would like to thank everyone whose kind words and nominations
contributed to the awards that John Ennis and I have been honored with this year. The
award committees of IFT and ASTM chose me for the 2013 IFT Achievement Award
in Sensory and Consumer Science, and for the David R. Peryam Award, respectively.
John also extends his appreciation for being chosen as the recipient of the 2013 Food
Quality and Preference Award for “Contributions by a Young Researcher” which he will
receive at the Pangborn Conference in Rio de Janeiro. Our sincere gratitude goes to the
following people who nominated or wrote support letters for us:

2013 Fall Courses .... 5, 6, 7

Instructor Bios ..................... 7
TECHNICAL REPORTS:
2013
Soo-Yeun Lee, Donna Immel, Harry Lawless, Per Brockhoff,
Benoît Rousseau, Chris Findlay, Karen Garcia, Howard Moskowitz, Michael Nestrud,
Michael O’Mahony, Dulce Paredes, Frank Rossi, Herb Meiselman, Jian Bi, Ann Goldman,
Michael Meyners, Tom Carr, Richard Popper, Chris VanDongen, Mona Wolf, Bill Raynor,
Joe Herskovic, Rob Baker, John Castura, Virginie Jesionka, Suzanne Pecore, Rune Haubo
Bojesen Christensen, Dennis Passe, Carolyn Corbett, Bethia Margoshes, Joey Lu,
Tom Rosholt, Thierry Worch, Aurea “Tina” Gupton, and Donya Germain.
16(3) How to Diagnose the Need for
3D Unfolding
16(2) Transitioning from Proportion of
Discriminators to Thurstonian δ
16(1) When Are Two Products
Close Enough to be Equivalent?
Best regards,
Daniel M. Ennis
President, The Institute for Perception
2012
15(4) Proper Task Instructions and
the Two-out-of-Five Test
W H AT W E D O :
15(3) Efficient Representation of
Pairwise Sensory Information
Client Services: Provide full-service product and concept testing for product
development, market research and legal objectives
15(2) Deciphering the
Language of Emotions to
Develop an Emotion Lexicon
Education: Conduct internal training, external courses, and online webinars
on product testing, sensory science, and advertising claims support
15(1) Reducing Costs with Tetrad Testing
IFPrograms™: License proprietary software to provide access to new modeling tools
2011
Research: Conduct and publish basic research on human perception in the areas of
methodology, measurement and modeling
14(4) Interpreting Applicability Scores
14(3) Illuminating Product
Interactions
Demographic
14(2) From Many to Few:
A Graph Theoretic Screening Tool
for Product Developers
To download previously published
technical reports and papers from our
website, become a colleague
at www.ifpress.com
COURSE CALENDAR:
November 4 - 8, 2013
The Greenbrier - White Sulphur Springs, WV
Internal Sensory Testing: Tetrad Test, Power and Consumer Relevance
Course 2 (2.5 DAyS): Drivers of Liking ®: Principles and Applications
Course 1 (2 DAyS):
(See page 2 for 2014 course dates and locations.)
WEBINAR CALENDAR:
September 19, 2013  Supporting Count-Based Sensory Advertising Claims
December 12, 2013  Developing Consumer Relevant Action Standards
for Sensory Difference Testing
March - 2014  Developments in Applicability and CATA Scoring
June - 2014  Precision of Measurement in Sensory Difference Testing
Detailed information and registration for all courses and webinars is available at www.ifpress.com
Mission Statement:
To develop, apply, and
communicate advanced research
tools for human perceptual
measurement.
R E C E N T LY P U B L I S H E D PA P E R S :
Rousseau, B., Ennis, D. M., and Rossi, F. (2012). Internal preference mapping and the
issue of satiety. Food Quality and Preference, 24(1), 67-74.
Worch, T. and Ennis, J. M. (2013) Investigating the single ideal assumption using
Ideal Profile Method. Food Quality and Preference, 29, 40-47.
Ennis, D. M. and Ennis, J. M. (2013) Analysis and Thurstonian scaling of applicability
scores. Journal of Sensory Studies, DOI: 10.1111/joss.12034
Ennis, D. M. and Ennis, J. M. (2013) A Thurstonian ranking model with rank-induced
dependencies. Journal of Classification, 30, 124-147.
To Contact Us...
 www.ifpress.com
 [email protected]
 804-675-2980
 804-675-2983
 7629 Hull Street Road
Richmond, VA 23235
PAGE
1
TRAINING EVENTS
SAVE THE DATES in APRIL 2014 - Plan now to attend our two-and-a-half-day CLE accredited course
to be held Monday - Wednesday, April 7 - 9, 2014 at The Greenbrier, White Sulphur Springs, WV
Topics will include:
| ASTM Guidelines for Test Protocols
How do you compete effectively in an increasingly challenging advertising environment? Drs. Daniel Ennis, John Ennis, and Benoît
Rousseau will discuss these issues and topics along with invited
speakers from diverse legal backgrounds.
Photo Courtesy of The Greenbrier
| Data & Methods
| Sensory Intensity & Preference
| Requirements for a Sound Methodology
| Choosing the Right Method, Venue & Participants
| Analysis – Interpretation & Communication
| Test Power & Consumer Relevance
| Testing for Equivalence
| Equivalence – Learning from Cases
| Ratio, Multiplicative, “Up-to” & Count-Based Claims
| Case Examples of Ratio & “Up-to” Claims
| What to Do with No Difference/Preference Responses
SAVE THE DATES in MAY 2014 - We will be offering two sensory courses in Ireland, May 19 - 23!
The courses will be held at The Ritz-Carlton Powerscourt, County Wicklow (south of Dublin).
The Institute for Perception will offer two courses in “The
Garden of Ireland”- Wicklow - in May 2014. These courses have
been developed for technical and supervisory personnel in sensory evaluation, market research, product development, process
development, quality assurance, marketing, legal, and general
management currently working in consumer product companies.
COURSE
1: MAY 19-20
Internal Sensory Testing:
Tetrad Test, Power, and Consumer Relevance
COURSE
2: MAY 21-23
Drivers of Liking : Principles and Applications
®
AVAILABLE OCTOBER 2013!
Quarterly
Webinar Series
The Institute for Perception now offers a quarterly webinar series.
These webinars are 75 minutes in length, including a 60-minute
talk and a 15-minute Q&A session. To review all topics and register
online, visit www.ifpress.com/webinars.
SEPTEMBER WEBINAR
TIME & DATE:
Thursday, September 19 at 2:00 PM EDT
Supporting Count-Based Sensory Advertising Claims
Taught by: Dr. John M. Ennis
In this webinar, we discuss the steps
needed for sensory professionals to
support count-based comparisons in
a defensible manner. Specifically, we
identify two different types of countbased comparisons – count-based proportional comparisons and count-based ratio comparisons – and
discuss how these two types of count-based comparisons can be
pursued without exposing business to unnecessary risk.
PAGE
2
Tools and Applications
of Sensory and
Consumer Science
48 Technical Report Scenarios
Based on Real-life Problems
Professionals in claims support, consumer research, and product testing will easily relate to the issues and the corresponding resolutions
that are discussed in this collection of concise, two-page scenarios. Drs.
Daniel M. Ennis, Benoît Rousseau and John M. Ennis use their combined expertise to guide readers through problems in difference tests,
rating and ranking methods, claims support, portfolio optimization and
more. The technical content behind each scenario has been kept to a
minimum so that tools can be put into practice immediately, but there
is plenty of opportunity to pursue each account in more detail. In addition, 27 tables for Product Testing Methods have been included so the
reader can find answers to significance tests for traditional discrimination methodologies as well as estimate values and their variances.
Order this book online for $95 and receive a $100 credit toward any
course registration.
Available at www.ifpress.com/books, www.amazon.com, or by calling
(804)-675-2980.
TECHNICAL
2013
REPORT
How to Diagnose the Need for 3D Unfolding
Issue 16(3)
Benoît Rousseau
Background: Multivariate mapping techniques are frequently and commonly used to visualize the large amount
of data generated in sensory and consumer testing experiments1,2. Since it is desirable to summarize data using as
simple a model as possible, multidimensional solutions that
capture the relevant information with fewer dimensions
are usually prioritized. Moreover, it is less challenging
to communicate results in two dimensions. Thus, many
analyses are conducted and summarized in two dimensions
and this approach is often appropriate. However, using
only two dimensions can ignore important and relevant information contained in higher dimensions. In this report,
we illustrate how an extra dimension is sometimes needed
to capture relevant information when the multidimensional
unfolding method, Landscape Segmentation Analysis®
(LSA), is applied, so that the proper dimensionality is used
to uncover the drivers of liking space.
Scenario: Your company produces several natural orange
juice products. While the fruits generally come from
Florida, you are investigating other sources from South
America, including Brazil, to complement your current
sources and potentially reduce costs. There is a need to
compare the juices derived from these various oranges
to confirm suitability. Your management requests that
you recommend the best South American option from a
sensory perspective. To do so, you set up a series of analytical investigations, including standard instrumental
and internal sensory measurements. In order to capture
the consumer’s opinion on the products, you also conduct
a category appraisal in three locations with a combined
number of 300 users who consume orange juice at least
weekly. The set of ten products you select contain six
products that are representative of your local market as well
as four samples from different potential South American
suppliers. Once the data becomes available (two days of
testing per consumer, five samples per day), you analyze it
using LSA. The map that you obtain in two dimensions is
shown in Figure 1. The average consumer liking rating for
each of the products is also provided.
Mean
Product Liking
8.08
US 2
7.68
SA 4
7.67
US 1
7.45
US 6
7.26
US 5
7.06
SA 3
6.52
US 4
6.44
SA 1
5.50
SA 2
5.33
Figure 1. 2D LSA map of the orange juice data showing
product positions and consumer individual ideal points
with average liking ratings per product on a 9-point hedonic scale. The white dots represent consumer ideals and the
products are labeled according to their source (US and SA).
are not found as drivers of liking. In the presence of
apparently conflicting evidence (average liking ratings vs.
map locations), you are having difficulty making clear
recommendations on which South American product to
consider for potential future development.
Perceptual Standard Deviations and Dimensionality:
LSA can theoretically be conducted in as many dimensions as the amount of data available permits. However,
as mentioned previously, limiting the solution to a few
dimensions allows a more understandable visual representation of the data. The question is then whether a twodimensional representation is a suitable summary of the
data. Model fitting provides various statistical diagnostics,
such as the variance explained in the product means and
individual ratings data, but these statistics may not be
enough to provide guidance on the best choice of a solution 2.
scale
Label
On the LSA map, products more centrally located within
the cloud of ideal points should be liked to a greater extent
because they tend to receive the lowest numbers of low
liking scores (the distance between an ideal point and a
product is inversely related to liking 3,4).
Reviewing Figure 1, you notice something surprising
when comparing the average liking ratings to the products’
location on the map: While the best liked product (US3,
market leader) is fairly central within the cloud of ideal
points, illustrating its higher overall liking rating, two
South American products, SA2 and SA4, are placed very
close to it and could be worth investigating. However,
while SA4 received a high average liking rating, SA2
did not; in fact, SA2 was the least liked option. Thus
you question the meaningfulness of the solution. Adding
sensory descriptive information, as shown in Figure 2,
to explain the drivers of liking space does not explain the
anomaly. Attributes hypothesized to drive lower likings
US 3
Correlation
Sweetness 0.99
Figure 2. 2D LSA map with drivers of liking. Also shown is a table summarizing
the correlation between the product projections onto the sensory directions and the
original trained panel sensory information.
Pulpiness
0.99
Orange
flavor
0.99
Aftertaste
0.99
Color
0.99
Bitterness
0.99
Astringency
0.98
Orange
aroma
0.98
Sourness
0.94
Off taste
0.14
Oxidation
0.06
PAGE
3
TECHNICAL
REPORT
Issue 16(3)
2013
Figure 4.
Two views of the
3D LSA output:
XY axes (a) and
ZY axes (b).
Another piece of information available in conducting an
LSA is the products’ estimated perceptual standard deviations. Product perceptual standard deviations are linked to
the fact that, according to the model, product perceptions
vary from moment to moment and across individuals. A
relatively large value for a given product will indicate that
higher variability is associated with it.
In some instances, a product’s estimated perceptual standard deviation can be markedly large compared to those
of the other mapped products, and its location may be
somewhat counterintuitive based on overall performance
(e.g., the product is placed centrally or next to products that
perform much better in terms of consumer acceptability).
This relatively larger standard deviation could simply be
due to relatively greater sensory variability in the product.
But it is also possible that this larger deviation indicates that
LSA had difficulty fitting the product in two dimensions.
Refitting the data by taking into account an additional
dimension sometimes results in a lower standard deviation
for the product and a more intuitive solution that fits better
with other information about the products as well.
3D versus 2D: Thinking that the SA 2 placement might
be driven by a third relevant dimension, you look into the
products’ estimated perceptual standard deviation. You indeed find that this product’s estimated standard deviation
is much larger than those of the other products (Figure 3).
You then re-run LSA in three dimensions and confirm your
intuition5 (Figure 4). While the product’s R2 value stays
about the same and very high (~1), the subject R2 increases
from 0.91 to 0.97. More important, you find that the SA2
product exists in a third dimension explained by the “Off
taste” and “Oxidation” attributes, while the other test products are located mainly in a single plane represented in
Figures 1 and 2. In fact, the space shown in Figure 4a projects in two dimensions onto a plane very similar to that
shown in Figures 1 and 2. You conclude that the original
2D solution was not an accurate representation of the consumer data and that the 3D solution offers a more meaningful interpretation. According to this interpretation, SA2’s
perceptual standard deviation is more similar to those of
the other products, SA2 is positioned away from the main
cloud of ideal points, and the high scores for SA2 on the
two additional drivers of liking variables - “Off taste” and
“Oxidation” - underscore its inherent weaknesses. Therefore, you conclude that SA2 is not a suitable option and feel
confident recommending SA4 for future development.
Conclusion: With Landscape Segmentation Analysis®,
as with any multivariate mapping technique, the question
arises as to how many dimensions should be used to best
describe the data, without rendering the visual solution
difficult to comprehend. While standard model fitting
statistics, such as the variance explained by the model,
provide insights on the quality of the solution, they may
not be enough to lead to optimal interpretation. The products’ perceptual standard deviations can also be useful
and sometimes suggest the need for additional mapping
dimensions. Analyses such as those described in this report may provide valuable information on the best way to
analyze and summarize data on consumer hedonics.
References and Notes
1. Meullenet, J., Xiong, R. and Findlay, C. (2007). Multivariate
and Probabilistic Analyses of Sensory Science Problems.
New York, NY: Wiley-Blackwell.
2. Ennis, D. M. and Ennis, J. M. (In press). Mapping hedonic
data: A process perspective. Journal of Sensory Studies.
3. Ennis, D. (2001). Drivers of liking for multiple segments.
IFPress, 4(1), 2–3.
Figure 3. 2D LSA map with products’ perceptual
standard deviations.
PAGE
4
4. Ennis, D. and Anderson, J. (2003). Identifying latent segments.
IFPress, 6(1), 2–3.
5. All analyses were conducted using IFPrograms™ Professional.
2013 FALL COURSE
W HE N
course 1: n ov . 4 - 5
course 2: n ov . 6 - 8
WH E RE
The Greenbrier in
White sulphur springs, WV
Consumer
panel
A
B
Paired Preference
W HO S HOUL D ATT E N D
These courses have been developed for
technical and supervisory personnel in sensory evaluation,
market research, product development, process development, quality
assurance, marketing, legal, and general management currently
working in consumer product companies. As a result of new research,
our courses continually evolve to include new material, so previous
attendees will also benefit from participation.
Internal
panel
Difference
Testing
A x
B y
NP z
pc
d΄
% expressed
preference
Action standard
course 1 : nov 4 - 5
Internal Sensory Testing:
Tetrad Test, Power and Consumer Relevance
In this course you will learn the five concepts critical to any successful sensory discrimination testing program, including
statistical power and consumer relevance. Through the use of a common framework, you will discover why the tetrad
test is a better alternative to the commonly used triangle and duo-trio methodologies and how you can successfully make
the switch for internal and consumer-based testing purposes. In particular, you will:
● Discover how to establish the size of sensory difference
● Learn how to choose a sensory discrimination
relevant to your consumers, thus greatly reducing your
method objectively based on its strengths and the
chance of releasing an inferior product into the market
objectives of your project, resulting in significant
time, expense and human resources savings
● Identify approaches to assess and manage risks in
product testing decisions, ensuring the use of suitable
● Understand why the tetrad test is fast becoming the
sample sizes based on your project objectives
method of choice in the food and beverage industry
and how you can investigate if it is a suitable option
● Expand these concepts to other types of measurements,
for your sensory discrimination program
including rating and ranking data
MONDAY
( NOV. 4, 8am - 4pm )
Topics _____________________________
Difference testing methods: m-AFC, triangle, duo-trio
Estimating a measure of sensory difference, dꞌ,
from discrimination tests
Power and sample sizes for discrimination methods
Proportion of discriminators in the population
Replicated testing: Beta-binomial models
The tetrad test: A cost saving alternative to the
triangle test
Cases _____________________________
Product differences using m-AFC tests
Ingredient supplier change: Texture using 2-AFC,
duo-trio, and triangle
Superiority claim: 2-AFC vs. duo-trio
Triangle or tetrad test? Investigation with multiple
food and beverage products
TUESDAY
( NOV. 5, 8am - 4pm )
Topics _____________________________
Statistical basis for management decisions
Establishing consumer relevance
Setting sample sizes to maximize decision accuracy
When to switch from the triangle to the tetrad protocol
Relating discrimination test and rating results to
maximize learning
Cases _____________________________
Optimizing the predictive power of a sensory
discrimination program
Memory and sequence effects
Improving discrimination by allowing retasting
Relating trained panel and consumer sensitivities
- Effect of training
Generating a dose response relationship using
ranking and rating
HOW T HE CO U RS E S ARE TAU G H T
During two decades of teaching short courses in Sensory and Consumer Science we have gained an appreciation for engaging
our audiences so that technical material can be absorbed easily for effective future use. Rather than relying on the standard
but often ineffective theory-application approach, we instead interweave an unfolding story with the theoretical and applied
material to provide our participants with a sense of discovery and relevance regarding the various tools they encounter. This
dual teaching approach has shown itself to be extremely effective at providing participants with a thorough and long-lasting
understanding of the course material.
Register for courses online at www.ifpress.com/short-courses
PAGE
5
2013 FALL COURSE
course 2 : nov 6 - 8
Drivers of Liking®: Principles and Applications
Learn to “see” the market from your consumers’ perspective as
you develop an understanding of similarity, Drivers of Liking,®
and Landscape Segmentation Analysis.® This course will focus on
the planning of consumer hedonic investigations and the analysis
of data collected in typical category appraisal projects. You will
be introduced to recently developed novel combinatorial tools
that can be used effectively for optimal product selection. In this
course, you will:
● Compare commonly used product optimization techniques and
understand why they might not always reach the same conclusions
● Learn how to use combinatoric tools to select the most relevant
product set for your investigation
● Construct maps with products and consumer ideal points and
identify population segmentation
● Uncover the category’s drivers of liking using descriptive and
analytical data
● Use mapping results to improve existing products
● Conduct product portfolio optimization using advanced
combinatorial tools
● Expand these concepts to visualize emotion spaces to more
completely understand your consumers’ experiences
WEDNESDAY
( NOV. 6, 8am - 4pm )
Topics ________________________________
Introduction to sensory and Drivers of Liking spaces
Just-about-right (JAR) and ideal point models
Mapping hedonic data
Introduction to combinatoric tools and their applications
®
Factor analysis, external preference mapping
Introduction to Landscape Segmentation Analysis® (LSA)
How to identify Drivers of Liking®
Cases ________________________________
Selection of optimal collection of food products for a
category appraisal
Factor analysis on category appraisal data
External preference mapping on consumer hedonics of
low fat cookies
Landscape Segmentation Analysis® on 25 beverages
Identifying the Drivers of Liking® from a category appraisal
of chocolate chip cookies
THURSDAY ( NOV. 7,
8am - 4pm )
Topics ________________________
Dimensionality of LSA: 2-D vs. 3-D
Segmentation and demographic map ellipses
LSA and internal preference mapping (IPM):
the issue of satiety
Portfolio optimization
Predicting product success from LSA results
Blind vs. branded data, benefits
Motivations for product consumption
Drivers of perception
Cases ________________________
Determining a product’s optimal sensory
profile using a market appraisal study
LSA and IPM of 27 category appraisals
Product portfolio optimization for a population with three distinct segments
Blind-branded
LSA on Chardonnay wines
Moisturizing properties of soap bar images
Multi-country LSAs of personal care products
FRIDAY
( NOV. 8, 8am - noon )
Topics ________________________
Usage occasions, product and concept fits
Beyond liking to other emotional states
Deciphering the language of emotions and
development of an emotion lexicon
LSA maps of emotion terms and states
Graph Theoretic Analysis (GTA) to develop
an emotion lexicon
Cases ________________________
LSAs on various beer category appraisal data
Food preferences of adults and children
Usage occasions of snack bars
Analyzing emotion descriptors for spray
deodorant; Developing an emotion lexicon
H ANDS - ON ANALYSIS
Throughout the week, you will use the IFPrograms™ software to
perform the analyses demonstrated in the course. You
will be introduced to its capabilities and, upon comple
completion of the course, you will receive a complimentary
trial version (valued at $1,250) accessible through
the internet.
For a detailed listing of the capabilities of
IFPrograms
IFPrograms, please visit www.ifpress.com/software.
PAGE
6
For more information, visit www.ifpress.com
INSTRUCTOR
BIOS
Meet the Instructors
Dr. Daniel M. ennis is the President of The Institute for Perception. Danny has more than 35 years of experience working on
product testing theory and applications for consumer products. He has doctorates in food science and mathematical & statistical
psychology. He has published extensively on mathematical models for human decision-making and was the first to show that humans
possess a transducer in the chemical senses. Danny is the 2013 recipient of the Sensory and Consumer Sciences Achievement Award
from IFT and also the ASTM 2013 David R. Peryam Award in recognition of “outstanding contributions to the field of basic and
applied sensory science.” Danny consults globally and has served as an expert witness in a wide variety of false advertising cases.
Dr. Benoît rousseau is Senior Vice President at The Institute for Perception. Benoît received his food engineering degree from
AgroParisTech in Paris, France and holds a PhD in sensory science and psychophysics from the University of California, Davis.
He has conducted extensive experimental research on probabilistic models and has published numerous journal articles as well as
several book chapters. Benoît regularly consults with and manages projects for clients in Asia, Latin America, Europe and the US.
In his teaching, Benoît is well known for his effective and user-friendly approach to introducing new ideas.
Dr. John M. ennis is Vice President of Research Operations at The Institute for Perception. John received his PhD in mathematics
and also conducted post-doctoral research in cognitive neuroscience at the University of California, Santa Barbara. He is the winner
of the 2013 Food Quality and Preference Award for “Contributions by a Young Researcher.” John has published in statistics,
mathematics, psychology, and sensory science. He has a strong interest in the widespread adoption of best practices throughout
sensory science, serves on the editorial board of the Journal of Sensory Studies, and is chair of the ASTM subcommittee E18.04 “Fundamentals of Sensory.”
Invited Speakers
D r . Jean -M arc D essirier
is Global Science Leader for
t he Se n s at ion , Pe r c e pt ion &
Behaviour expertise at Unilever,
where he manages global scientific
capabilities and collaborations in the area of
perception. He holds a PhD in food science
and has performed experimental work in
psychophysics and neuroscience. During his
tenure at Unilever, Jean-Marc has championed
the development and application of probabilistic
models to the understanding of consumer needs
and motivations, leading to the development of
many successful global products.
a n t h o n y J. ( M a n n y )
Manuele is Director of Tech-
nical Insights and Product Development for MillerCoors where
he has responsibility for all
technical innovation related to products,
packaging, and dispense for MillerCoors, as
well as for technical competitive intelligence
and consumer science. Manny holds a
Bachelor of Science degree in pure science
and his graduate degrees include a Master
of Business Administration and a Master
of Science in organizational leadership and
quality.
F rank rossi is Associate
Director of Statistics at Kraft
Foods G roup in Glenview,
Illinois, where he leads Kraft’s
Statistics Center of Excellence.
He supports product development efforts
for Kraft’s divisions and consults internally
with the Operations, Quality and Marketing
Research organizations. Frank has authored
publications on the statistical aspects
of product testing. He obtained a BS in
mathematics and an MA in statistics from
The Pennsylvania State University.
ONLINE REGISTRATION and COURSE FEES
Internal Sensory Testing:
Tetrad Test, Power, and Consumer Relevance
November 4 - 5, 2013 (2 days) .............................$1150*
Drivers of Liking: Principles and Applications
®
November 6 - 8, 2013 (2.5 days) ..........................$1450*
Register for both courses and save $100 .................$2500*
_____________________________________________
* A 25% discount will be applied to each additional registration from
the same company, for the same course
* Academic discount available on request
Course fee includes:
● all course materials and a copy of our latest book,
“Short Stories in Sensory and Consumer Science”
● daily continental breakfast, lunch, and break refreshments
● one group dinner for each course
● three-month free trial of IFPrograms software
● complimentary attendance at a quarterly IFP webinar
™
Register online at www.ifpress.com/short-courses or call
804-675-2980. Limited enrollment, register early.
CANCELLATION POLICY: Registrants who have not
cancelled two working days prior to the course will be charged
the entire fee. Substitutions are allowed for any reason.
LOCATION: These courses will be held at The Greenbrier ® in
White Sulphur Springs, WV. Renowned for its standard of hospitality and service, this hotel is an ideal location for executive meetings and consistently receives a AAA 5-Diamond rating. Nearby
airports include the Greenbrier Valley Airport (LWB, 15 min.),
Roanoke, VA (ROA, 1 hr.15 min.), Beckley, WV (BKW, 1 hr.),
and Charleston, WV (CRW, 2 hrs.).
HOTEL RESERVATIONS: Lodging is not included
in the course fee and participants must make their own hotel
reservations. A block of rooms will be held at The Greenbrier
until 4 weeks before the program at a special rate of $195. To
make a reservation, please call 1-877-661-0839 and mention
you are attending the Institute for Perception courses (note:
the special rate is not available through online reservations.)
To learn more about The Greenbrier, visit their website at
www.greenbrier.com.
For more information and online registration for any of The Institute for Perception courses,
please visit www.ifpress.com/short-courses or contact us at [email protected]
PAGE
7