1、Designation:E195819Standard Guide forSensory Claim Substantiation1This standard is issued under the fixed designation E1958;the number immediately following the designation indicates the year oforiginal adoption or,in the case of revision,the year of last revision.A number in parentheses indicates t
2、he year of last reapproval.Asuperscript epsilon()indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.INTRODUCTIONFormats or standards for testing related to sensory claim substantiation cannot be consideredwithout a frame of reference of where that format or standard would fit within
3、 the legal frameworkthat surrounds the topic.Product sensory claims tests are performed for three basic reasons:(1)Comparison of ProductsDetermines how one product compares to another,usually a competitor orearlier version of itself.(2)Substantiation of ClaimsEnables marketing personnel to use posit
4、ivereferences through advertising or packaging,or both,in the presentation of the product to theconsumer.(3)Test PerformanceAscertains and establishes the tested product performance withinthe scope of its intended use.The risk associated with each claim is assessed when considering claims substantia
5、tion.Compellingand aggressive claims are sure to be scrutinized closely by competitive firms,and if inconsistenciesare found through competitive test data,the claims could be challenged in one or more of thefollowing venues:(1)National Advertising Division(NAD)of the Advertising Self-RegulatoryCounc
6、il(ASRC),(2)one or more media,such as print,broadcast,or electronic media,(3)ConsumerAdvocacy Organizations,and(4)Civil or Federal courts.No single test design or standard test willprevent challenges.The criteria used by each of the potential forums are not identical and areconstantly evolving.With
7、the introduction of new technologies coupled with changing consumerdemands,testing processes and protocols that were sufficient five or ten years ago may not hold upunder todays criteria and scrutiny.Testing requirements of the future can only be a matter forspeculation.The one constant is that,as a
8、dvocates of their clientspositions,attorneys will defend theirclients testing processes and protocol while questioning with great detail every aspect of theircompetitors protocol in the attempt to sway the arbiter to agree that their clients are in the right.Legalcounsel should be part of any team d
9、eveloping claim substantiation.This guide demonstrates what a group of professionals who are skilled in the science of testingconsider appropriate from a scientific and technical standpoint,and represents an effective method forboth defendant and challenger to determine the viability of a sensory cl
10、aim.The key word is“appropriate.”If a particular aspect of a test,or method,is not appropriate for a specific application,it should not be used.Care should be taken to clearly define the reasons and data supporting adeviation from the standard,as any departure invites scrutiny.Since departures are i
11、nevitable,theword“should”is used in this guide to indicate when other techniques may have applications in certainunusual circumstances.Whenever a test protocol has been completed,it should be critiqued forweaknesses,including whether experts in the relevant field would consider the research objectiv
12、elydesigned,conducted,and analyzed,using procedures that give accurate and reliable results.Ifweaknesses are found,corrective action should be taken,since the competition may point out anyweakness or discrepancy and challenge the study.While the scientific and technical community identifies the appr
13、opriateness of a research methodused to support a sensory claim,the legal community evaluates substantiation for legal claims using“reasonableness”as the criterion.With the importance of having a legal“reasonable basis”for a claim,the question remains,“What is reasonable?”Unfortunately,there is no s
14、pecific answer to that legalquestion,as it will depend on the type of claim,product application and use,applicable regulationswhere the product is sold,and other factors.These considerations,market pressures(such as timing),and testing budgets can influence and impact the protocols to support a spec
15、ific claim.This guideprovides principles and considerations that need to be addressed for good sensory and consumertesting practices.Copyright ASTM International,100 Barr Harbor Drive,PO Box C700,West Conshohocken,PA 19428-2959.United StatesThis international standard was developed in accordance wit
16、h internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for theDevelopment of International Standards,Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade(TBT)Committee.1 1.Scope1.1 This guide covers reasonable practices for designing andimplementing sensory tests that validate claims pertaining onlyto the sensory or perceptual attributes,or both,of a product.This guide was developed for use in the United State
