Comparison of central location and home-use tests for meat - and plant-based canned ham products under blind and informed conditions.

Traditional central location tests (CLTs) remain the standard method for consumer sensory evaluation but are constrained by logistical and geographical limitations. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of a home-use test (HUT) by comparing it with a CLT under blind and informed conditions. Six commercial canned ham samples, including four meat-based and two plant-based products, were evaluated for liking, familiarity, and sensory attributes. A total of 212 participants completed two evaluation sessions under either the CLT or HUT method. Sample significantly affected all liking attributes and familiarity, whereas test location (CLT vs. HUT) showed no significant main effect. However, significant sample × test location interactions indicated that the magnitude and direction of CLT-HUT differences varied among samples. Several meat-based samples tended to receive higher ratings in HUT, whereas plant-based samples showed lower ratings or relatively little change. Nevertheless, post hoc comparisons showed broadly comparable sample discrimination patterns between the two methods. Test condition (blind vs. informed) significantly affected only appearance liking and familiarity, and most within-sample blind-informed comparisons were not significant. Multiple factor analysis showed highly similar configurations across test locations and conditions, with RV coefficients greater than 0.97 for liking and familiarity. Sensory profiling by rate-all-that-apply also consistently differentiated the samples, with RV coefficients greater than 0.96 across the four evaluation settings. These findings supported that HUT can be a practical alternative to CLT for relative product discrimination and sensory profiling when implemented with modern courier services and digital technologies.