Designation: E2454 05

Standard Guide for

Sensory Evaluation Methods to Determine the Sensory
Shelf Life of Consumer Products1
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E2454; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon () indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.

1. Scope materials, or product formulations on the shelf life of products,

1.1 This guide provides appropriate sensory testing ap- and studies designed to identify the causes of changes in
proaches and possible decision criteria for establishing sensory product attributes over time. However, many of the research
shelf life of consumer products. It describes research consid- methods, experimental design considerations, and data analysis
erations including: product selection and handling, appropriate techniques discussed in this document can be applied to these
application of various sensory test methods, selection of test other types of shelf life-related research.
intervals, and data analysis techniques for the determination of 1.5 This guide is not intended to provide a detailed descrip-
a products shelf life end-point. As such, this document covers tion of how to conduct reliable sensory testing. It assumes
shelf life studies designed to identify the sensory end-point of knowledge of basic sensory and statistical analysis techniques,
a products life to manage business risk and meet business focusing instead on special considerations for the specific
needs. This guide will focus on the practical considerations and application of sensory testing method to shelf life determina-
approaches, risks, and criteria that must be considered in tion.
designing, executing, and interpreting shelf life results. 2. Referenced Documents
1.2 Sensory shelf life is the time period during which the
products sensory characteristics and performance are as in- 2.1 ASTM Standards:2
tended by the manufacturer. The product is consumable or E253 Terminology Relating to Sensory Evaluation of Ma-
usable during this period, providing the end-user with the terials and Products
intended sensory characteristics, performance, and benefits. 2.2 ASTM Manuals:3
After this period, however, the product has characteristics or MNL 13 Descriptive Analysis Testing
attributes that are not as intended, or it does not perform the MNL 26 Sensory Testing Methods
same functions as fresh products or those selected before the MNL 30 Relating Consumer, Descriptive, and Laboratory
end of shelf life. Data to Better Understand Consumer Responses
1.3 The goal of all shelf life determination is to estimate the 3. Terminology
time at which a consumer product is no longer usable, unfit for
consumption, or no longer has the intended sensory character- 3.1 Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard:
istics. The determination of a sensory end-point is a function of 3.1.1 accelerated storage/agingsubjecting a product to
the criteria selected, the test method used, and sampling risk. extreme or stressed conditions, such as elevated temperatures
The three following test methods are most commonly used: (1) or humidity, to create changes in product characteristics that
discrimination, (2) descriptive, and (3) affective. Researchers are assumed to be related to aging the product.
have to select criteria and methods that best suit the business 3.1.2 control parameters for sensory shelf life determination
risks associated with the selection of a final shelf life end point. (known as control)specific product or data set (based on
1.4 Research techniques designed to identify the causes of previous sensory research) designated as the one to which the
sensory shelf life changes or to develop predictive models of data from stored products are to be compared (see Section 6).
shelf life are beyond the scope of this document. These include 3.1.3 controlled conditionsset of environmental param-
the application of regression analysis to develop statistical eters (temperature, humidity, light, oxygen, and so forth) that
models designed to predict sensory shelf life, studies that are maintained and monitored so that changes in product
assess the impact of various storage conditions, packaging attributes can be evaluated relative to these parameters. For

2
For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or
1
This guide is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E18 on Sensory contact ASTM Customer Service at [email protected]. For Annual Book of ASTM
Evaluation of Materials and Products and is the direct responsibility of Subcom- Standards volume information, refer to the standards Document Summary page on
mittee E18.05 on Sensory ApplicationsGeneral. the ASTM website.
3
Current edition approved Nov. 15, 2005. Published November 2005. DOI: Available from ASTM International Headquarters, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO
10.1520/E2454-05. Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 194282959.

Copyright. (C) ASTM International. 100 Barr Harbour Drive PO box C-700 West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania 19428-2959, United States

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Fri Apr 22 22:50:12 EDT 2011
1
Downloaded/printed by
Universidade de Sao Paulo pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 E2454 05
example, controlled ambient refers to maintaining a tempera- 4.4.3 Consumers consider the product no longer acceptable.
ture of 21 to 24C in storing the product. NOTE 1Selection of end-point criteria depends on the extent to which
3.1.4 end pointpoint at which a product no longer meets the sensory attributes of the target product are required to remain
predetermined criteria as defined by test data (for example, unvarying and the extent to which maintaining consumer acceptance is
discrimination, descriptive, or affective, or a combination deemed critical to the business.
thereof). 4.5 Select Sensory Test MethodDiscrimination, descrip-
3.1.5 pull out date(s)predetermined point(s) in time at tive, or affective methods can be used to determine the shelf
which the product is removed from storage for evaluation. life of a product. Selection of the method depends on chosen
3.1.6 sensory characteristicsany attributes of the prod- end-point criteria. For example, affective testing is required if
ucts that are assessed using the sensory methods that measure a given consumer acceptance is the chosen end-point criterion.
the human response to that product. 4.6 Define Representative AssessorsIf discrimination or
3.1.7 shelf lifetime period that a product may be stored descriptive test methods are selected, the assessors used are
before reaching its end point. typically trained panelists. If consumer test methods are
3.1.8 shelf life testingmethod(s) to determine the effects selected, then a sample of consumers must be drawn to
of aging or storage conditions, or both, on product(s) charac- represent the population of potential consumers.
teristics for purposes of determining a products shelf life. This 4.7 Select Representative ProductsProducts selected for
testing is designed to manage distribution system risk. shelf life testing must be from representative production
3.1.9 uncontrolled ambientalso known as room tempera- batches and production dates and appropriately processed and
ture, uncontrolled conditions (that is, temperature of storage packaged. In some situations, products should be subjected to
location or environmental factors, or both) which fluctuate with typical distribution conditions (that is, vibration, temperature
changes in weather, time of day, location, and so forth (see elevation/reduction, temperature cycling, and so forth). If
3.1.3). testing an experimental product (for example, changes in
3.1.10 zero time pointtime when the shelf life testing ingredients, formulation, processing, or packaging), samples
begins. It can be when the product is manufactured, when the should be representative of production batches of the experi-
ingredients equilibrate, when the product is put into storage mental product. The amount of product required from each
conditions, or when the consumer is first likely to see it. production batch is dependent on the estimated length of
4. Summary of Guide storage, number of storage conditions, methods of evaluation,
and frequency of testing.
4.1 This guide is intended to cover the basic issues and
4.8 Determine the End-PointThe end-point is selected
practical requirements of conducting a shelf life study designed
based on the chosen end-point criteria, the type of product
to identify end points in a products shelf life.
tested, the test method selected, previous knowledge of product
4.2 Define Research ObjectiveThe purpose of a shelf life
changes over time, and the companys business needs.
project should be clearly stated before the study is imple-
mented. Common objectives are as follows: determine the
5. Significance and Use
amount of elapsed time a product remains acceptable to
consumers, or determine specific use-by dates, or under- 5.1 Measuring product changes over time serves as a
stand the amount of time elapsed before a sensory defect is practical basis for establishing the shelf life of a product. This
detectable. information can also be used to assess the effects of new
4.3 Identify Decision RiskDecision risk is defined as the technology, processing, ingredients, packaging, and so forth,
balance of positive and negative outcomes associated with the on the products shelf life.
selection of a specific end-point. Positive outcomes can be 5.2 This guide provides a summary of the criteria to be
defined as correctly estimating the time a product remains considered and appropriate test methods for determining a
within its intended sensory criteria. Negative outcomes can be products sensory shelf life.
defined as leaving a product on the shelf after it is acceptable, 5.3 Previous sensory research with similar products, mar-
thus increasing the chances that end-users will be dissatisfied keting research, product technology, manufacturing consider-
and no longer purchase the product in the future. Another type ations, marketing objectives, and other business criteria can all
of negative outcome is to identify a too-early end-point, thus play a part in determining sensory end point criteria.
requiring shelf removal of product that is still usable to the 5.4 The decision risk, end-point determination criteria, and
consumer. Before the researcher embarks on a shelf life study, shelf life procedure should be reviewed and agreed to by those
the risk to the consumer franchise must be balanced with the involved with the project, that is: R&D, Marketing, Sales,
use of testing resources, as a properly designed shelf life study Manufacturing, Quality Assurance, Quality Control, Sensory
can use a lot of resources. Evaluation, and so forth.
4.4 Select Criteria to Determine the End-PointProducts
do change over time. End-point criteria can be one of the 6. Procedures
following sensory analytical or consumer criteria, or both: 6.1 Select Criteria to Determine the End-PointDetermine
4.4.1 The products overall sensory profile has changed. the specific type of shelf life end point that will be used. There
4.4.2 A products attribute(s) (including off-notes) that is are three types of end points: (1) the products overall sensory
(are) known or suspected to be key to the consumers percep- profile has changed; (2) a product attribute(s) that is known or
tion of the product has changed. suspected to be key to the consumers perception of the product

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Fri Apr 22 22:50:12 EDT 2011
2
Downloaded/printed by
Universidade de Sao Paulo pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 E2454 05
has changed; and (3) the acceptability of the product is too low. ture, humidity, light, atmosphere, air pressure, and environ-
Company policy/objectives, marketplace conditions, business mental cycling (freeze/thaw, elevated temperature conditions,
considerations, and risks all contribute to determining the type and so forth).
of shelf life end-point. 6.7.2 Extreme Storage ConditionsEstimates of environ-
6.2 Identify the Test Method to be UsedThis is done on the mental extremes and time spent in the various stages of
basis of the chosen type of shelf life end-point criteria. distribution can help determine appropriate conditions. Verifi-
Discrimination testing, descriptive, or affective testing methods cation of test storage conditions through the use of sensors or
are the three major test method options. monitors is suggested, especially if ambient storage conditions
6.3 Clearly Determine the End PointThe end point is are selected.
established as either a significant overall difference from the 6.7.3 Accelerated Storage ConditionsAccelerated tests
control or a significant change in the intensity of one or more attempt to achieve changes in product characteristics in a short
critical product attribute(s) or a significant decrease in accept- period of time. Such tests can be valuable time savers if
ability to a predetermined level of acceptance The statistical appropriately selected. However, these tests are only approxi-
criteria for measuring significance should also be included in mations of how a product may behave under normal storage
the end point definition (that is, a, b, and the effect size) along conditions. During accelerated storage, product changes may
with the number of panelists needed at each testing interval. take place, or characteristics may develop that would not be
6.4 Select ControlChoose the type of control product that typical otherwise. Elevated temperatures or exposure to humid-
will be used for the study: ity or light sources may cause different enzymatic reactions (or
6.4.1 Option 1Stable ControlThis is a typical product similar reactions but to very different degrees) than would
that is held under conditions that minimize changes over time, ordinarily occur under normal storage conditions. Uses of
such as frozen or refrigerated storage or modified atmosphere. accelerated conditions are often based on untested rules of
If no storage condition is known to keep changes to a thumb or beliefs rather than empirical data. Use of accelerated
minimum, this type of control cannot be used. If discrimination conditions is thus recommended only when solid research has
testing is the chosen method, this type of control is required shown what changes do in fact occur. Before determining shelf
because it is needed to conduct the test at each pull out date. life based on accelerated conditions, establish the sensory,
6.4.2 Option 2Statistical ControlThis is a set of nu- chemical, and mathematical relationships between accelerated
merical values obtained from sensory testing at zero time. conditions and typical storage conditions to ensure a high
Sensory data can be either descriptive analysis attribute ratings degree of reliability and validity in predicting shelf life (see
or acceptance scores, depending on the chosen testing method. ASTM MNL 30).
If discrimination testing is the chosen method, this type of 6.8 Determine Sampling Plan and Evaluation Points:
control cannot be used. 6.8.1 Determine Baseline PointThe first step in develop-
6.4.3 Option 3Fresh ControlIf none of the above con- ing a sampling plan is to establish a baseline or zero time
trols are feasible, a fresh control may be obtained at each pull point. Choice of an appropriate baseline is determined by the
out date. However, this type of control can only be used if the nature of the product(s) and by the research objective. Ex-
difference between separate batches is demonstrated to be amples of baseline time points include:
minimal prior to the study. 6.8.1.1 The date the product is manufactured,
6.5 Select Test ProductChoose the test product(s) for the 6.8.1.2 The date the product reaches the retail shelf (the
study. The product used for the study should be representative youngest product consumers would purchase),
of intended product. If a control product is used, the test 6.8.1.3 The date the product is typically purchased, and
products should be obtained from the same batch as the control 6.8.1.4 The date the product ingredients reach equilibrium.
product. If this is not feasible, various batches can be used with 6.8.2 Determine End-PointThe second step is to develop
the added risk of variability that may obscure the differences the expected end point of the products shelf life using one or
between the control and test product. However, the test and more of the following criteria:
control products should be as close in production as possible 6.8.2.1 Historical data from current or similar products,
(that is, same production date, same product location, and so 6.8.2.2 The declared shelf life of competitive products,
forth). Furthermore, at the start of the storage period, an initial 6.8.2.3 Advertising or label declaration requirements,
sensory test should be conducted to ensure that the test and 6.8.2.4 Marketing or distribution requirements, or both,
control products are in fact not different in either overall 6.8.2.5 Expected effects of packaging or ingredients, or
profile, specific descriptive attributes, or acceptance, depend- both, and
ing on the chosen testing method. 6.8.2.6 Expected shelf life based on predicted stability of
6.6 Determine Product Amount Needed to Conduct the Test the formulation.
for each Evaluation PointCalculate the amount of product 6.8.3 Minimum Evaluation PointsConsidering the base-
needed for each test. line and end points as defined above, to be 100 % of the shelf
6.7 Select Storage Conditions: life period, choose appropriate time points for evaluations. A
6.7.1 Typical Storage ConditionsProducts selected to be minimum of four evaluation points is recommended, for
representative of the products in general should be stored under example, 0 % (baseline), 50 %, 100 % (end point), and one or
environmental conditions that represent the typical product more time points a percentage beyond the endpoint, that is,
distribution channel, and may include variations in tempera- 125 %. Evaluation points beyond the end point are included in

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Fri Apr 22 22:50:12 EDT 2011
3
Downloaded/printed by
Universidade de Sao Paulo pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 E2454 05
the event that the product achieves the expected shelf life and limit the time points that can be managed or the types of
there is the possibility that the shelf life could be extended. sensory methods that can be used. In addition, when using
6.8.4 Additional Evaluation PointsAdditional evaluation multi-point evaluations, there are limitations on comparing the
points over the shelf life period are recommended. These results of independent sensory tests conducted at different time
additional evaluations should be timed at points where signifi- points. Some of these limitations are addressed by using a
cant changes in the product are expected to occur. The single point evaluation plan.
following examples demonstrate three sampling plans that 6.10.2 Single-Point Evaluations:
could be used for specific product applications. These ex- 6.10.2.1 Single-point evaluations compare products of dif-
amples are designed to illustrate that sampling plans should be ferent ages in a single evaluation. See Fig. 2 for a flow chart
developed and customized based on the objectives and require- showing the steps and decision points needed for single point
ments of the study, as well as the resources available to conduct evaluations. Products representing the selected evaluation
the evaluations. points are accumulated over time by one of several methods.
6.8.4.1 For a product predicted to change most early in the The method selected depends upon the nature of the product
shelf life period, emphasis is placed on earlier evaluations: and the study objectives. The following are some examples:
0 %, 15 %, 30 %, 50 %, 100 %, and some percentage beyond. 6.10.2.2 Staged Entry of a Single Production LotA set of
6.8.4.2 For a product predicted to change later in the shelf samples from a single production lot is placed into a control
life period, emphasis is placed on later evaluations: 0 %, 50 %, storage condition selected for its ability to preserve product
65 %, 80 %, 100 %, and some percentage beyond. characteristics. Subsets of product are removed from the
6.8.4.3 For a new product with little, if any, prior shelf life control storage condition, and placed in the Test storage
history, more frequent evaluation points are recommended to condition(s) at specified time points over the shelf life. Product
assure that the time of significant changes in the product are held continuously under the control storage condition repre-
captured in evaluation. A minimum of 0 %, 25 %, 50 %, 75 %, sents the zero time point control product.
100 %, and one or more points beyond the expected shelf life 6.10.2.3 Staged Exit of a Single Production LotA set of
should be planned. samples from a single production lot is placed into the test
6.9 Determine Product Quantities: storage condition(s). At specified time points over the shelf life
6.9.1 To determine the total number of products needed to period, subsets of product are removed from the test storage
complete a shelf life study, one must take into consideration the condition(s) and placed into the control storage condition, to
sampling plan test intervals, the storage temperature conditions prevent any further changes in the product. Again, product held
desired, the experimental design, and the sensory test method- continuously under the control storage condition represents the
ologies best able to determine end-point criteria. Product zero time point control product.
quantities must be calculated to allow for all possible combi- 6.10.2.4 Staged Entry of Multiple Production Lots
nations of testing needs, including informal tastings. Product is collected on specified production dates and placed
6.9.2 It is often useful to include additional test product in into the test storage condition(s). Production lots may be plant
each storage condition in case, for example, the product is production, test batches each made from fresh ingredients, or
more stable than expected or unexpected changes occur that test batches each made from the same ingredients carefully
warrant more in-depth study. An overage of 20 to 50 % is stored. The last production lot collected represents the zero
common practice. time point control product.
6.10 Determine the Evaluation Plan: Multi-Point versus 6.10.2.5 At the evaluation point, products are pulled for a
Single-Point Evaluation PlansMulti-point and single-point single evaluation. Depending upon available resources, prod-
evaluation plans are two different evaluation plans. Neither one ucts representing all of the time points may be evaluated at
of these two plans is superior to the other. Each has its own once, or a stepwise approach of evaluating subsets may be
advantages and disadvantages. Either one of these plans may used. In the latter case, subsets clustered around the most likely
suit each specific situation. failure point may be evaluated first. If all members of this
6.10.1 Multi-Point EvaluationsMulti-point evaluation subset fail, then a younger subset may be evaluated, or, if all
plans involve tracking a single production lot over time. Test members of this subset pass, then an older subset may be
samples are pulled and tested at the predetermined evaluation evaluated. Alternatively, a drill-down (that is, a progressive
points. If control samples are used, control samples are pulled homing-in via testing the most separate products first on a
and tested at the same time. See Fig. 1 for a flow chart of the defined point) approach may be employed: widely separated
steps and decision points in a multi-point design. samples representing the whole storage period are evaluated
6.10.1.1 Advantages of Multi-Point Evaluation Plans first, allowing for a rough identification of the failure point. A
Multi-point evaluation plans have the advantages of tracking a narrower subset within the identified range is then tested to
single production lot over the shelf life period and providing an pinpoint the failure point.
early indication of product change. 6.10.2.6 Advantages of Single Point Evaluations:
6.10.1.2 Disadvantages of the Multi-Point Evaluation (1) Single-point evaluation plans minimize sources of
PlansOne disadvantage of the multi-point evaluation plans is variability due to time and panelists.
the large quantities of control and test products necessary for (2) Utilizing a stepwise or drill-down testing plan reduces
multiple evaluations. Another disadvantage is that multiple the demand on testing resources, and thus may increase the
evaluations are resource intensive. These disadvantages can feasibility of conducting more costly consumer testing.

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Fri Apr 22 22:50:12 EDT 2011
4
Downloaded/printed by
Universidade de Sao Paulo pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 E2454 05
5

FIG. 1 Multi-Point EvaluationsProcess Flow and Decision Making for Shelf Life Determination

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Fri Apr 22 22:50:12 EDT 2011
Downloaded/printed by
Universidade de Sao Paulo pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 E2454 05
6

FIG. 2 Single-Point EvaluationsProcess Flow and Decision Making for Shelf Life Determination

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Fri Apr 22 22:50:12 EDT 2011
Downloaded/printed by
Universidade de Sao Paulo pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 E2454 05
(3) Stepwise or drill-down plans reduce the likelihood of specific acceptability rating or as a significantly lower or less
missing the critical point by allowing for the collection of preferred rating from a standard. In the case where limited
many more time points than will ultimately need to be tested. resources are available, internal panels can be used with a
6.10.2.7 Disadvantages of Single-Point Evaluations: pass/fail test. In this case, criteria are set as a specific
(1) While single-point evaluations reduce certain sources percentage of fail ratings.
of testing variability, they may introduce sources of product 7.5 A combination of the above methods also may be
variability. For instance, if the selected control storage condi- appropriate. For example, if descriptive analysis indicates a
tion does not prevent or minimize changes in the product being significant difference between a control and test product on
studied, all products will age and differences between time one or more key attributes at six months, one may elect to
points may be minimized or lost. Alternatively, a control follow up with affective testing to determine the impact of
storage condition such as freezing may introduce changes in these changes on product acceptance. This would be appropri-
the physical properties of certain products. Multiple production ate if the end-point criteria were based on product changes that
lots may introduce variability due to inconsistencies in ingre- caused a decrease in acceptability.
dients or processing, or both. The experimenter must weigh
known sources of testing variability against product and 8. Data Analysis
ingredient stability issues in order to select the most appropri- 8.1 The type of data analysis chosen must be appropriate to
ate storage and testing design. the research objectives, the variables in the study, and the
(2) These approaches assume that the client can wait until specific sensory method chosen. Product age or storage condi-
the most aged product is collected before receiving results, and tion, or both, are the most commonly independent variables
that an early read is not required to predict or warn about a studied in shelf life research. Sensory characteristics or product
shorter shelf-life than expected. The experimenter may wish to acceptance, or both, are the most commonly studied dependent
conduct an intermediate test, perhaps halfway through the variables. The change in the product as a function of age or
storage period, to address this concern. storage conditions, or both, is the basic purpose of shelf life
(3) While single-point evaluations may reduce the load on testing. Refer to ASTM MNL 26 and MNL 30 for further
testing resources, they may increase the demands on resources discussion about appropriate statistical analysis to sensory
required to produce product or move product into the appro- data.
priate storage condition(s). 8.2 When either affective or descriptive analysis testing is
used, the change in the dependent variable as a function of age
7. Test Methods or storage condition, or both, can be graphed. The mean
7.1 Test methods should be selected based on previously acceptance or attribute ratings of the control sample and of the
determined criteria for end point (see 6.1). Three general test samples are graphed. If the end-point criterion is a specific
categories of sensory test methods include discrimination, acceptance or attribute value, the graph should also show this
descriptive, and affective testing. Refer to ASTM MNL 26 and point so that it will clearly demonstrate whether the product has
MNL 13 for a detailed description of test methods. or has not reached the end of its shelf life.
7.2 Discrimination testing may be appropriate if a percep- 8.3 Statistical analysis of the data is almost always done,
tible change in the product has been selected as the end-point regardless of whether or not the results are graphed. The
criteria. The researcher should be aware, however, that dis- statistical criteria included in the definition of the end point
crimination testing may not be appropriate for all types of should be used for this analysis (that is, the a and b levels). In
products, for example, discrimination testing cannot be used all cases, statistically significant results demonstrate that stor-
where differences are observed between two control products age or age has changed the product above and beyond other
from the same production batch. Examples of discrimination sources of product variability.
testing methods include Duo-Trio, Triangle, Degree of Differ- 8.3.1 Multi-Point DesignsAt each pull-out date, data are
ence, Difference from Control, and 2-Alternative-Forced- collected and analyzed. If discrimination testing is the chosen
Choice. test method, the chosen discrimination test comparing the
7.3 Descriptive analysis is appropriate when changes in one control sample to each test sample is implemented at each
or more key attributes define the end point. Examples of pull-out date. Refer to the appropriate standard test method for
descriptive analysis methods include Trademark Quantitative the analysis of the chosen discrimination test. If descriptive
Descriptive Analysis (QDA),4 Flavor Profile, Texture Profile, analysis or affective testing is the chosen test method, the data
and Trademark Spectrum.4 analysis method depends on whether the control is a physical
7.4 Affective testing is appropriate if a decrease in accept- sample available at each pull-out date (as in the case of 6.4.1
ability has been selected as the end-point criteria. Affective and 6.4.3) or a set of numerical values (as in the case of 6.4.2).
testing is conducted initially to establish a baseline and then If a physical control sample is available and the same assessors
repeated at specified intervals until predetermined end-point provide data for the control and test samples, use a matched
criteria are met. Consumer panels are most commonly used to pair sample t-test. If different assessors provide the data for the
conduct affective testing. In this case, criteria are set as a control and test samples, then a two sample t-test should be
used. If the control is a set of numerical values and there is only
one test sample, use a one-sample t-test to assess whether the
4
Trademarks Quantitative Descriptive Analysis (QDA) and Spectrum are observed acceptance or attribute mean rating is significantly
proprietary descriptive analysis techniques. different from the controls numerical value.

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Fri Apr 22 22:50:12 EDT 2011
7
Downloaded/printed by
Universidade de Sao Paulo pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 E2454 05
8.3.2 Single-Point DesignsIn the case of staged entry of sory attributes that are not present in products in typical
multiple production lots, the data analysis cannot segregate the distribution conditions. See 6.7.3.
storage variation from the production lot variation. Hence, this 8.5 Based on the definition of the end point and the results
method should be used only if production lot variation was from the data analysis, determine the shelf life of the product.
demonstrated, a priori, to be minimal. If discrimination testing 8.6 Decision matrices, which include test methods, results,
is the chosen testing method, the chosen discrimination test and end point criterion for discrimination, descriptive, and
comparing the control sample to each test sample is imple- affective testing are presented in Figs. 1 and 2.
mented at the given evaluation date. If descriptive analysis or 8.7 A detailed explanation of survival analysis or other
acceptance testing are the chosen testing methods, use a possible modeling techniques that could be applied to shelf life
repeated measures analysis of variance and pair-wise post-hoc data is beyond the scope of this document. Details of such
comparisons. modeling techniques can be found in other references (Hough
et al., 2003). Often, such studies explore the relationships
8.4 Interpretation of Typical, Extreme, and Accelerated between various storage conditions, packaging materials, or
Storage ConditionsThe data analyses described above are product formulations, to determine impact on the rate of
appropriate for any of these storage conditions. However, the change leading to shelf life end-point. The experimental design
results must be interpreted differently. If extreme-condition or considerations discussed in this document apply in studies
accelerated-storage samples fail, the relationship between the where shelf life end-points need to be determined in a
extreme/accelerated conditions to actual distribution must be descriptive and practical manner, rather than a study in which
considered. Rules of thumb such as each 10 above ambient variables are formally studied and a predictive model is the
temperature is equivalent to three months of storage time are ultimate objective.
often used to interpret shelf life data. These rules of thumb
should only be used when there are data showing the relation- 9. Keywords
ship between storage condition and aged product. It is possible 9.1 flavor stability testing; sensory changes during storage;
that extreme conditions or accelerated storage results in sen- sensory changes over time; shelf life testing

BIBLIOGRAPHY

(1) Berger, K. G., Practical Applications of Accelerated Stability Test (13) Hough. G., Langohr, K., Gomez., G., and Curia, A., Survival
to Rancidity Problems in Food Processing, Food Technology, Vol Analysis Applied to Sensory Shelf Life of Foods, Journal of
6, No. 3, 1972. Sensory and Nutritive Qualities of Foods, Vol 68, No. 1, 2003, pp.
(2) Bishop, J. R., and White, C. H., Assessment of Dairy Product 359-362.
Quality and Potential Shelf LifeA Review, Journal of Food (14) Hough, G., Garitta, L., and Sanchez, R., Determination of Con-
Protection, Vol 49, No. 9, 1986, pp. 739-753. sumer Acceptance Limits to Sensory Defects Using Survival
Analysis Statistics, Paper presented at Fifth Pangborn Conference,
(3) Blandt-Jonhson, R. C., and Johnson, N. L., Survival Models and Boston, MA, July, 2003.
Data Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY, 1980. (15) Hearne, J. F., Long-Term Storage of Foods, Food Technology,
(4) Cecil, S. R., and Woodroof, J. G., The Stability of Canned Foods Vol 18, No. 3, 1964, p. 318.
in Long-term Storage, Food Technology, Vol 17, No. 5, 1963, p. (16) Harris, N. E., Wescott, D. E., and Henick, A. S., Rancidity in
131. Almonds: Shelf Life Studies, Journal of Food Science, Vol 37,
(5) Charalambous, G., The Shelf Life of Foods and Beverages, 1972, pp. 824-827.
Developments on Food Science, Vol 12, Elsevier Science Publi- (17) IFT, Shelf Life of Foods. Inst. of Food Technologists Expert Panel
cations Co. Inc., NY, 1986. on Food Safety and Nutrition, Journal of Food Science, Vol 39,
1974, p. 861.
(6) Cox, D. B., and Oaks, D., Analysis of Survival Data, Chapman,
(18) Jul, M., Quality and Stability of Frozen Meats, Quality and
London, 1984.
Stability of Frozen Food, W. B. Van Aradel, M. J. Copley, and R. L.
(7) Dethmers, A. E., and Rodriguez, N. C., Food Product Shelf Life: Olson, eds., Wiley Interscience, NY, 1969.
Sensory Panel Evaluations and the Open Dating Issue, Food (19) Kwoleck, W. F., and Bookwalter, G. N., Predicting Storage from
Product Dev., 1975, pp. 96-102. Time-Temperature Data, Food Technology, Vol 25, No. 10, 1971,
(8) Dethmers, A. E., Utilizing Sensory Evaluation to Determine pp. 51-63.
Product Shelf Life, Food Technology, September, 1979, pp. (20) Labuza, T. P., and Schmidl, M. K., Accelerated Shelf Life Testing
40-43. of Foods, Food Technology, Vol 39, No. 9, 1985, pp. 57-62, 64,
(9) Gacula, M. C., Jr., The Design of Experiments for Shelf Life 134.
Study, Journal of Food Science, Vol 40, 1975, p. 399. (21) Labuza, T. P., and Schmidl, M. K., Use of Sensory Data in the
Shelf Life Testing of Foods. Principles and Graphical Methods for
(10) Gacula, M. C., Jr., and Kubala, J. J., Statistical Models for Shelf
Evaluation, Cereal Foods World, Vol 33, No. 2, 1988, pp.
Life Failures, Journal of Food Science, Vol 40, 1975, p. 404.
193-206.
(11) Gacula, M. C., and Singh, J., Statistical Methods in Food and (22) Lawless, J. E., Statistical Models and Methods for Lifetime Data,
Consumer Research, Academic Press, Inc., Orlando, FL, 1984. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY, 1982.
(12) Griffiths, N., Sensory Analysis in Measuring Shelf Life, Food, (23) Maxcy, R. B., and Wallen, S. E., Heterogeneity of Samples as a
Flavours, Ingredients, Packag. Process, Vol 7, No. 9, 1985, pp. Problem in Shelf Life Prediction, Journal of Food Protect, Vol
47-48. 46, No. 6, 1983, pp. 542-544.

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Fri Apr 22 22:50:12 EDT 2011
8
Downloaded/printed by
Universidade de Sao Paulo pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 E2454 05
(24) Meilgaard, M. C., Civille, G. V., and Carr, B. T., Sensory (28) Stone H., and Sidel, J. L., Sensory Evaluation Practices, 2nd
Evaluation Techniques, 2nd Ed., CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1991, edition, Academic Press, Orlando, FL, 1993.
pp. 198-199, 222-225. (29) Van Arsdel, W. B., The Time-Temperature Tolerance of Frozen
(25) Peryam, D. R., Consumer Preference Evaluation of the Storage Foods. IntroductionThe Problem and the Attack, Food Tech-
Stability of Foods, Food Technology, Vol 18, No. 9, 1964, pp. nology, Vol 2, No. 1, 1957, pp. 28-34.
214-217.
(26) Powers, J. J., Using General Statistical Programs to Evaluate (30) Walezko, P., and Labuza, T. P., Accelerated Shelf Life Testing of
Sensory Data, Food Technology, June, 1984, pp. 74-84. an Intermediate Moisture Food in Air and in Oxygen Free Atmo-
(27) Ragnarsson, J. O., and Labuza, T. P., Accelerated Shelf Life sphere, Journal of Food Science, Vol 41, No. 6, 1976, pp.
Testing for Oxidative Rancidity in FoodsA Review, Food 1338-1344.
Chemistry, Vol 2, No. 4, 1977, pp. 291-308.

ASTM International takes no position respecting the validity of any patent rights asserted in connection with any item mentioned
in this standard. Users of this standard are expressly advised that determination of the validity of any such patent rights, and the risk
of infringement of such rights, are entirely their own responsibility.

This standard is subject to revision at any time by the responsible technical committee and must be reviewed every five years and
if not revised, either reapproved or withdrawn. Your comments are invited either for revision of this standard or for additional standards
and should be addressed to ASTM International Headquarters. Your comments will receive careful consideration at a meeting of the
responsible technical committee, which you may attend. If you feel that your comments have not received a fair hearing you should
make your views known to the ASTM Committee on Standards, at the address shown below.

This standard is copyrighted by ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959,
United States. Individual reprints (single or multiple copies) of this standard may be obtained by contacting ASTM at the above
address or at 610-832-9585 (phone), 610-832-9555 (fax), or [email protected] (e-mail); or through the ASTM website
(www.astm.org).

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Fri Apr 22 22:50:12 EDT 2011
9
Downloaded/printed by
Universidade de Sao Paulo pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.