COVID 19 Alternative Sensory Testing of Liquid Foundation. Analyzing the Impact of Variable Evaluation Conditions at Home
17
Presented by: Nina Poccia
COVID 19 Alternative Sensory Testing of Liquid Foundation. Analyzing the Impact of Variable Evaluation Conditions at Home
N. Poccia1, V. Mauro1, A.Cavanaugh2, K. Zuccarello2, J. Carey2
L’OREAL Research & Innovation, Clark, USA
Due to the COVID 19 pandemic, sensory panel testing in standardized booth conditions was put on hold. To better move projects along during this time, a descriptive sensory panel began testing at home. The panelists testing products at home was an interim option for the labs to continue understanding the performance of their products in an agile way.
Our descriptive sensory panel is trained following International Standard ISO 11132 (2012). To create an environment to test products at home, the sensory team developed methodologies and provided tools to simulate the booth conditions as much as possible. Such methodologies include: development of self-dispensing techniques, creation of semi-standardized lighting conditions, introduction of virtual training sessions and online data capturing. The panelists continued to leverage the universal profile method and the half-face liquid foundation application protocol established prior in the booths. The panel was validated at home following the main criteria of discriminability, homogeneity and repeatability to confirm the performance of the panel is within good quality standards.
To better understand the impact of testing conditions on sensory performance, our sensory team conducted a study on liquid foundation. A subset of 10 top performing liquid foundations were tested onsite (pre-pandemic) and at home for application and up to 12 hours of wear. The makeup result after application showed the most differences across all the products compared at home vs on site, while few attributes consistently showed differences across the wear period. Both of which could be attributed to the lighting conditions and self-dispensing during at home testing. The sensory mapping (MFA) of products tested on site vs at home produces a different picture of what sensory space the 10 products span. The mappings showed that some products shift positionally and in their clustering based off the testing location.
The controlled testing conditions in the sensory panel booths produced a higher level of discrimination than the panelist’s home conditions, which introduces more variability. These findings were pivotal in de-coding the sensory signature of the products based off evaluation location. While at home testing was a viable option temporarily, testing in the booths leads to produces a more robust evaluation of liquid foundations.
N. Poccia1, V. Mauro1, A.Cavanaugh2, K. Zuccarello2, J. Carey2
L’OREAL Research & Innovation, Clark, USA
Due to the COVID 19 pandemic, sensory panel testing in standardized booth conditions was put on hold. To better move projects along during this time, a descriptive sensory panel began testing at home. The panelists testing products at home was an interim option for the labs to continue understanding the performance of their products in an agile way.
Our descriptive sensory panel is trained following International Standard ISO 11132 (2012). To create an environment to test products at home, the sensory team developed methodologies and provided tools to simulate the booth conditions as much as possible. Such methodologies include: development of self-dispensing techniques, creation of semi-standardized lighting conditions, introduction of virtual training sessions and online data capturing. The panelists continued to leverage the universal profile method and the half-face liquid foundation application protocol established prior in the booths. The panel was validated at home following the main criteria of discriminability, homogeneity and repeatability to confirm the performance of the panel is within good quality standards.
To better understand the impact of testing conditions on sensory performance, our sensory team conducted a study on liquid foundation. A subset of 10 top performing liquid foundations were tested onsite (pre-pandemic) and at home for application and up to 12 hours of wear. The makeup result after application showed the most differences across all the products compared at home vs on site, while few attributes consistently showed differences across the wear period. Both of which could be attributed to the lighting conditions and self-dispensing during at home testing. The sensory mapping (MFA) of products tested on site vs at home produces a different picture of what sensory space the 10 products span. The mappings showed that some products shift positionally and in their clustering based off the testing location.
The controlled testing conditions in the sensory panel booths produced a higher level of discrimination than the panelist’s home conditions, which introduces more variability. These findings were pivotal in de-coding the sensory signature of the products based off evaluation location. While at home testing was a viable option temporarily, testing in the booths leads to produces a more robust evaluation of liquid foundations.