A Comparison of Free‐Linking and Projective‐Mapping Tasks on Biltong, a Seasoned Meat Product

ABSTRACT Meat palatability strongly influences consumers' purchasing decisions, yet its sensory complexity limits traditional evaluations to about four samples per session. Rapid profiling methods such as projective mapping (PM) and free linking (FL) allows semi‐ or un‐trained panelists to profile more samples by grouping similar products and optionally describing them. Previously successful with complex products like wine and chocolate, the current study investigates and compares the PM and FL methods on seasoned meat product. Seventy‐one untrained panelists performed PM ( n PM = 36) or FL ( n FL = 35) with eight (five unique, three duplicated) samples of biltong. Results were analyzed using multiple factor analysis and DISTATIS, and free comments were projected into the resulting spaces to explain the consensus configurations. The methods were compared for discrimination/description, reliability, and task difficulty. Results suggest both methods may be effective tools to increase efficiency in meat sensory evaluation, with some advantages for FL over PM.