.webp){kind=small}
Publications
After 2015
B. Rousseau
Sveriges Sensoriska Nätverk, 2025.
R. Ishii, K. Linden, J. Wijaya, D. Ennis, B. Rousseau
Pangborn Sensory Science Symposium, 2025.
Commentary on Meyners, Carr, and Hasted: “To replicate or not to replicate, or when did we start to ignore the concept of statistical power?”
B. Rousseau
Food Quality and Preference, 2020, 79.
Biases in paired preference tests: Cross-cultural comparisons of Japanese and American consumers.
Y. Hasegawa, R. Ishii, Y. Kyutoku, I. Dan, B. Rousseau
Journal of Sensory Studies, 2019, e12498.
B. Rousseau, M. O’Mahony, R. Ishii
Pangborn Sensory Science Symposium, 2017.
B. Rousseau, R. Ishii
SenseAsia, 2016.
M. O’Mahony, B. Rousseau
SenseAsia, 2016.
B. Rousseau, M. O’Mahony, R. Ishii
Pangborn Sensory Science Symposium, 2015.
Sensory discrimination testing and consumer relevance.
B. Rousseau
Food Quality and Preference, 2015, 43, 122–125.
A Thurstonian model for the degree of difference protocol.
D. Ennis, B. Rousseau
Food Quality and Preference, 2015, 41, 159–162.
2005 - 2014
Triangle and tetrad protocols: Small sensory differences, resampling and consumer relevance.
R. Ishii, M. O’Mahony, B. Rousseau
Food Quality and Preference, 2014, 31, 49-55.
Transitioning from proportion of discriminators to a more meaningful measure of sensory difference.
V. Jesionka, B. Rousseau, J. M. Ennis
Food Quality and Preference, 2014, 32, 77–82.
Importance of correct instructions in the tetrad test.
B. Rousseau, J. Ennis
Journal of Sensory Studies, 2013, 28, 264–269.
B. Rousseau, M. O’Mahony, R. Ishii
Pangborn Sensory Science Symposium, 2013.
Internal preference mapping and the issue of satiety.
B. Rousseau, D. M. Ennis, F. Rossi
Food Quality and Preference, 2012, 24, 67–74.
A comparison of serial monadic and attribute-by-attribute descriptive analysis protocols for trained judges.
R. Ishii, C. Stampanoni, M. O’Mahony
Food Quality and Preference, 2008, 19, 277-285.
Relating consumer and trained panels’ discriminative sensitivities using vanilla ice cream as a medium.
R. Ishii, H, Kawaguchi, M. O’Mahony, B. Rousseau
Food Quality and Preference, 2007, 18, 89-96.
Simultaneous estimations of multiple product similarities using a new discrimination protocol.
B. Rousseau
Journal of Sensory Studies, 2007, 22, 533–549.
1995 - 2004
Sensory difference testing: Thurstonian models.
H-S. Lee, M. O’Mahony
Food Science and Biotechnology, 2004, 13, 841-847.
Motivations for product consumption: Application of a probabilistic model to adolescent smoking.
D. M. Ennis, B. Rousseau
Journal of Sensory Studies, 2004, 19, 107–117.
Are three-sample tasks less sensitive than two-sample tasks? Memory effects in the testing of taste discrimination.
S. Lau, M. O’Mahony, B. Rousseau
Perception & Psychophysics, 2004, 66, 464–474.
Corroborating the 2-AFC and 2-AC Thurstonian models using both a model system and sparkling water.
V. Braun, M. Rogeaux, N. Schneid, M. O’Mahony, B. Rousseau
Food Quality and Preference, 2004, 15, 501–507.
Discrimination testing: A few ideas, old and new.
M. O’Mahony, B. Rousseau
Food Quality and Preference, 2003, 14, 157–164.
Sensory difference testing.
B. Rousseau
Encyclopedia of Food Sciences and Nutrition (2nd ed., pp. 5141–5147). St. Louis: Academic Press, 2003.
Investigating more powerful discrimination tests with consumers: Effects of memory and response bias.
B. Rousseau, S. Stroh, M. O’Mahony
Food Quality and Preference, 2002, 13, 39–45.
The multiple dual-pair method.
B. Rousseau, D. M. Ennis
Perception & Psychophysics, 2002, 64, 1008–1014.
Les biais de réponse dans le cadre d’analyses discriminatives.
B. Rousseau
In T. N. Urdapilleta & S. D. Huon de Kermadec (Eds.), Traité d’Évaluation Sensorielle: Aspects Cognitifs et Métrologiques des Perceptions. Paris: Dunod, 2001, pp. 7–27.
A Thurstonian model for the dual pair (4IAX) discrimination method.
B. Rousseau, D. M. Ennis
Perception & Psychophysics, 2001, 63, 1083–1090
The beta-strategy: An alternative and powerful cognitive strategy when performing sensory discrimination tests.
B. Rousseau
Journal of Sensory Studies, 2001, 16, 301–318.
Investigation of the effect of within-trial retasting and comparison of the dual-pair, same-different and triangle paradigms.
B. Rousseau, M. O’Mahony
Food Quality and Preference, 2000, 11, 457–464.
Comparison of d' values for the 2-AFC (paired comparison) and 3-AFC discrimination methods: Thurstonian models, Sequential Sensitivity Analysis and power.
​J-M. Dessirier, M. O’Mahony
Food Quality and Preference, 1999, 10, 51-58.
Mustard discrimination by same-different and triangle tests: Aspects of irritation, memory and tau criteria.
B. Rousseau, M. Rogeaux, M. O’Mahony
Food Quality and Preference, 1999, 10, 173–184.
Power and sensitivity of the same-different test: Comparison with triangle and duo-trio methods.
B. Rousseau, A. Meyer, M. O’Mahony
Journal of Sensory Studies, 1998, 13, 149–173.
A new approach to category scales of intensity II: Use of d’ values.
​K. Kim, D. M. Ennis, M. O’Mahony
Journal of Sensory Studies, 1998, 13, 251–267.
Thurstonian models for variants of the method of tetrads.
J. M. Ennis, D. M. Ennis, D. Yip, M. O’Mahony
British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 1998, 51, 205–215.
How to estimate and use the variance of d’ from difference tests.
J. Bi, D. M. Ennis, M. O’Mahony
Journal of Sensory Studies, 1997, 12, 87–104.
Sensory difference tests: Thurstonian and SSA predictions for vanilla flavored yogurts.
B. Rousseau, M. O’Mahony
Journal of Sensory Studies, 1997, 12, 127–146.
Probabilistic models for sequential taste effects in triadic choice.
D. M. Ennis, M. O’Mahony
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1995, 21, 1–10.
1995 and earlier
Triadic discrimination testing: Refinement of Thurstonian and sequential sensitivity analysis approaches.
S. Tedja, R. Nonaka, D. M. Ennis, M. O’Mahony.
Chemical Senses, 1994, 19, 279–301.
Sensory evaluation of food: statistical methods and procedures.
​M. O’Mahony
New York: Marcel Dekker, 1986.
Purity effects and distilled water taste.
M. O’Mahony
Nature, 1972, 240, 489.