download the full article here - E-International Scientific Research ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

E-International Scientific Research Journal ISSN: 2094-1749 Volume: 3 Issue: 2, 2011 d. Test and Evaluation 1. Sensory evaluation – The formulated bath soap was initially evaluated by 6 panelists who tried the product. Below is the rating scale used by the panelists. Table 2. Scale Used: 0 – 5 POINT VALUE RANGE DESCRIPTIVE RATING 5 4.20 – 5.00 Very High 4 3.40 – 4.19 High 3 2.60 – 3.39 Moderate High 2 1.8 – 2.59 Low 1 0 – 1.79 Very Low 2. Sampling tools and technique. The panelists, composed of faculty, staff and students of the University, used the modified hedonic rating scale to evaluate the products. The quality attributes or criteria for evaluation was adopted based on the recommendation of the Philippine Institute of Traditional and Alternative Health Care for bath soap product. 3. Data Analysis – Data on the sensory evaluation results were analyzed using the analysis of variance (ANOVA) Results and Discussion A. Acceptability of the seaweed bath soap. Sensory evaluation results by the panelists is reflected in Tables 3, 4 and 5. Five (5) quality attributes on physical evaluation and five (5) quality attributes on the effect of the seaweed bath soap were presented and served as basis for the acceptability test of the product. Table 3.a. Physical Evaluation. Mean response on the different quality attributes of the gracilaria formulated soap. Treatment Texture Color Odor Hardness Size Mean Descriptive Equivalent T 1 4.5 4.5 4.16 4.5 4.16 4.36 Very High T 2 4.16 4.83 4.16 4.16 4.5 4.36 Very High T 3 3.5 4.0 4.66 4.33 4.16 4.13 High T 4 4.35 4.25 4.26 4.26 4.15 4.26 Very High 93
E-International Scientific Research Journal ISSN: 2094-1749 Volume: 3 Issue: 2, 2011 Table3.b. Effect Evaluation. Mean response on the different quality attributes of the gracilaria formulated soap. Treatment Exfoliation Irritation Freshness Lather Allergynisity Mean Descriptive Equipvalent T 1 4.66 4.5 4.33 4.5 4.66 4.53 Very High T 2 4.66 4.33 4.0 4.66 4.33 4.39 Very High T 3 4.0 3.83 3.66 4.0 4.66 4.03 High T 4 4.1 4.15 4.0 4.15 4.25 4.13 High Table 4.a. Physical Evaluation. Mean response on the different quality attributes of the eucheuma formulated soap Treatment Texture Color Odor Hadness Size Mean D. E. T 1 4.83 4.83 4.0 4.66 4.66 4.59 VH T 2 4.0 4.33 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.36 VH T 3 4.33 4.66 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.39 VH T 4 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 VH Table 4.b. Effect evaluation. Mean response on the different quality attributes of the eucheuma formulated soap. Treatment Exfoliaation Irritation Freshness Lather Allergynisity Mean D.E. T 1 4.33 4.83 4.5 4.66 4.83 4.63 VH T 2 4.0 3.66 3.66 3.83 4.66 3.96 High T 3 4.66 4.16 4.16 4.66 4.33 4.39 VH T 4 4.16 4.25 4.33 4.25 4.25 4.25 VH Table 5.a. Physical evaluation. Mean response on the different quality attributes of the sargassum formulated soap. Treatment Texture Color Odor Hardness Size Mean D. E. T 1 4.83 4.83 4.0 4.66 4.66 4.59 VH T 2 4.0 4.33 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.36 VH T 3 4.33 4.66 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.39 VH T 4 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 VH 94
Page 1 and 2: Volume: 3, Issue: 2, 2011 April - J
Page 3 and 4: E-International Scientific Research
Page 25: E-International Scientific Research
Page 77 and 78:
E-International Scientific Research
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
show all

download the full article here - E-International Scientific Research ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?