1. How Changing the Peanut Butter in Cookies Effects Mouth Feel, Color,
Taste, Volume, and Cell Size
A Research Paper
Submitted to Jodie Seybold, MS, RD, LDN
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for
FDNT 362 Experimental Foods
Sara Mastrine
Indiana University of Pennsylvania
December 5, 2011
4. Abstract
Sensory and objective characteristics of peanut butter cookies prepared using cashew
butter, soy butter, or Nutella hazelnut spread in place of the peanut butter were evaluated in this
study. Peanut butter cookies were prepared in order to make them acceptable for those with
peanut protein sensitivity to consume. Individuals with peanut allergies could benefit from
information obtained in this study due to the fact that possible peanut butter protein substitutions
were found. Cashew butter (p=0.917) was similar to peanut butter in regards to mouth feel of the
cookies. Nutella hazelnut spread (p=0.025) showed a significant difference in mouth feel
compared to peanut butter. Soy butter (p=0.992) was comparable in color to the peanut butter
cookies. Nutella hazelnut spread (p=0.000), again, showed a significant difference compared to
the peanut butter cookies in regards to color. None of the variables were alike in taste compared
to the peanut butter control due to the fact that all variables had p-values less than 0.05. All of
the cookie variables had similar volumes and cell sizes when evaluated using volumeter and ink
blot tests.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Mrs. Jodie Seybold for assisting me with any questions or concerns
I encountered during this study. Mrs. Seybold’s graduate assistants deserve thanks for providing
all ingredients and materials each week. I would also like to thank my sensory panel testers for
being truthful with their evaluations and providing me with accurate data. Thanks also go out to
all of my classmates who all helped each other successfully complete this experiment.
1
5. Introduction
Peanut allergy can cause severe or deadly consequences to sensitive individuals if they
consume even trace amounts of peanut protein. Peanut products are found in many different
types of foods and they can be very difficult to avoid. Accidental consumption of the protein
found in peanuts by sensitive individuals may lead to anaphylaxis, which is characterized by
difficulty breathing, lack of consciousness, and paleness. The inability to tolerate peanut protein
means that sensitive individuals will miss out on being able to consume baked goods such as
peanut butter cookies. There are a number of products that could be used to replace the peanut
butter in a peanut butter cookie recipe, and this study sought to determine the effect that
changing the peanut butter protein will have on sensory and objective characteristics of the
cookies. Cashew butter, soy nut butter, and Nutella hazelnut spread were each used in separate
batches of cookies to determine the changes in mouth feel, color, taste, volume, and cell size
compared to the peanut butter control recipe. It was hypothesized that the cookies’ mouthfeel,
color, and taste will be significantly different when the type of nut protein is changed. It was
also hypothesized that changing the type of nut protein in peanut butter cookies will significantly
change the volume of the cookies. The purpose of this study is to determine the effect that using
different types of nut protein in place of the peanut butter in peanut butter cookies will have on
the sensory and objective characteristics of the cookies.
2
6. Review of Literature
Disease
Food allergies such as peanut, tree nuts, and fruit are becoming increasingly widespread,
affecting 2.4 to 3.7 percent of the population (Le, 2008, pg. 910). Among these types of
allergies, peanut allergy is known to produce the most severe reactions in sensitive patients (Le,
2008, pg. 914). In contrast with other common food allergies, an allergy to peanuts is
unrelenting throughout life and is seldom outgrown (Lehmann, 2006, pg. 463). There is no
known cure or treatment for peanut allergy, so avoiding the allergen is the only way to combat a
potentially life-threatening reaction (Lehmann, 2006, pg. 463). This type of reaction, known as
anaphylaxis is defined as “ a manifestation of a type 1 or acute allergic reaction in which the
offending allergen binds with pre-formed IgE antibodies attached to receptors on mast cell or
basophils,” (Dunbar, 2011, pg. 29). Anaphylaxis is also sometimes referred to as immediate
hypersensitivity, meaning that it occurs very suddenly after exposure to the allergen (Hitomi,
2010, pg. 601). This reaction can affect the skin, respiratory, gastrointestinal, cardiovascular,
and central nervous systems (Dunbar, 2011, pg. 30). Symptoms such as difficulty swallowing
and breathing, wheezing, paleness, and loss of consciousness can occur within the first few
minutes of an allergic attack (Dunbar, 2011, pg. 30). Antihistamines, adrenaline, inhaled beta2
agonists, oxygen, corticosteroids, and fluids are among the treatments for a patient experiencing
an allergic reaction as severe as anaphylaxis (Dunbar, 2011, pg. 31-32).
The protein in peanuts, Arachishypogaea, is what causes reactions in those with allergies.
The major allergens in peanuts are the seed storage proteins, named Ara h 1, Ara h 2, and Ara h
3 (Lauer, 2009, pg. 1437). There are also eight more allergens found in the peanut,
Ara h 4-11, which are less potent than Ara h 1-3 (Lauer, 2009, pg. 1427-1428).
3
7. Many studies have been conducted to determine possible cures or prevention methods for
peanut allergies. One study investigated the role of Allergin-1, which is an immunoglobulin-like
receptor, and its involvement in anaphylactic responses (Hitomi, 2010, pg.605). To perform this
study, experimenters focused on allergic responses of Allergin-1 deficient mice and found the
presence of this receptor decreases anaphylactic symptoms (Hitomi, 2010, pg. 605-606).
Another study aimed to determine the effect that peanut oral immunotherapy (OIT)
would have on peanut-allergic patients (Clark, 2009, pg. 1218). This was performed by
administering children with a peanut allergy and increasing dose of peanut flour each day (Clark,
2009, pg. 1218). While performing the experiment, several of the subjects experienced
reactions, including one case of anaphylaxis (Clark, 2009, pg. 1219). However, the study
ultimately concluded that there was a significant increase in the dose threshold for all
participants (Clark, 2009, pg. 1219). In fact, the dose threshold reached approximately ten
peanuts, which, as Clark states, is more than is probable for an accidental consumption (Clark,
2009, pg. 1218).
In still another study, George Du Toit and his team questioned the relevance of peanut
consumption early in life to whether one would develop and allergy (Du Toit, 2008, pg. 984).
They also suggested that differences in cooking methods of peanuts between cultures could have
an effect on the prevalence of peanut allergy, since roasting causes allergens to become
heightened (Du Toit, 2008, pg. 988).
Tests have been done to determine whether the major peanut allergen Ara h 2 can be
reduced with genetic engineering (Dodo, 2008, pg. 135). To perform this study, wild-type
control peanut seeds were compared with genetically modified transgenic peanuts seeds (Dodo,
4
8. 2008, pg. 135). The researchers tested the seeds for amount of the Ara h 2 protein and the
resulting allergenicity of the peanut seeds (Dodo, 2008, pg. 135). It was concluded that the
transgenic seed contained only 2.87- 6.24 percent Ara h2 compared to 27.73 percent in the
control wild-type peanut seeds, significantly decreasing the allergen potential (Dodo, 2008, pg.
139).
In addition to the science-based research of peanut allergy, several psychological studies
have been done to determine the effects this disease has on everyday life, not only of the
individual affected, but also their families (King, 2009, pg. 461). One study asked individuals
with peanut allergies and their family members (mothers, fathers, and siblings) to complete a
questionnaire to assess influence of peanut allergy on quality of life (King, 2009, pg. 461). They
found that this disease has a significant impact on stress and anxiety within the family (King,
2009, pg. 461).
Research has been done to find ways to enable peanut-allergic patients to enjoy some of
the came foods as everyone else without risking a potentially deadly allergic response. Peanut
butter is one of the most popular sources of peanut protein and is used in many types of baked
goods (Le, 2008, pg. 910). The use of alternate nut products in baked goods could provide these
individuals with the ability to consume these foods. Studies have shown that peanut allergy is
the most prevalent of food allergies, so variables such as cashew butter, soy nut butter, and
hazelnut spreads can be used to substitute for peanut butter in many cases (Le, 2008, pg. 910).
Variables
Peanuts
5
9. About 700 million pounds of peanut products are consumed in America each year and 50
percent of that is in the form of peanut butter (Jolly, 2005, pg. 88). One study sought to
determine reasons for contributing to consumers’ choice to purchase and eat peanut butter and
peanut butter products using a survey method of collecting data (Jolly, 2005, pg. 89).
Particularly of interest were the sensory attributes of the product, but the study also looked at
age, ethnicity, gender, income, allergies, and social events (Jolly, 2005, pg. 88). The study found
that taste was the most important quality contributing to consumers’ acceptability of the product,
followed by texture and nutritional qualities (Jolly, 2005, pg. 91). Crunchiness was the ideal
texture for peanut butter among subjects in the study and taste was rated as high due to the
content of fat (Jolly, 2005, pg. 92).
Another study evaluated the effect of roasting and storage time on sensory characteristics
of peanut butter (Tomlins, 2008, pg. 165). A semi-trained panel was used to evaluate the
following sensory attributes: oily appearance, spotty appearance, attractiveness, brown color,
viscosity, burnt taste, salty taste, roasted taste, sweetness, stale odor, smooth texture, and sticky
texture (Tomlins, 2008, pg. 167). Color, roasted taste, burnt taste, spotty appearance, sticky
texture, and smooth texture all had significant differences with increased roasting times, while
salty taste, viscosity, stale odor, and oily appearance did not show a significant difference
(Tomlins, 2008, pg. 168). In regards to increased storage times, the study concluded that all
sensory attributes were linear and showed no significant differences (Tomlins, 2008, pg. 175).
The effects of roasting time were evaluated in another study, which sought to determine
the relationship between color, flavor, and aroma (Pattee, 1991, pg. 519). They found that
increasing roasting times affects the intensity of the golden brown color of the peanut butter,
6
10. which is caused by sugar/ amino acid reactions and caramelization of sugars during heating
(Pattee, 1991, pg. 519).
Cashews
Some studies have shown that cashew nut can cause allergic reactions comparable to that
of peanuts (Clark, 2007, pg. 913). The cashew, Annacardiumoccidentale, contains three protein
allergens named Ana o1, Ana o 2, and Ana o 3 (Willison, 2008, pg.1229). Cashew nuts are
obtained from the fruit of a certain type of evergreen tree (Adeyeye, 2007, pg. 242). This pearshaped fruit is called a cashew apple and contains the kidney-shaped cashew nut at its base
(Adeyeye, 2007, pg. 242). They are usually eaten after roasting as a snack or used in baked
goods.
The way in which the cashew is processed can have a significant effect on the physical
properties of the processed cashew (Mohod, 2010, pg. 125). The cashew can be processed using
the roasting process or the steam cooking process (Mohod, 2010, pg. 126). Before beginning
either method, the moisture content of the freshly harvested cashews is reduced by sun drying for
a few days (Mohod, 2010, pg. 126). The roasting process can be done using drum roasting or oil
roasting (Mohod, 2010, pg. 126). Drum roasting involves passing the cashew nuts through a
heated drum, while oil roasting involves passing the cashews though a hot oil bath (Mohod,
2010, pg. 126).
Steam cooking is the most widely used method of preparing cashew nuts, in which the
cashews are steam boiled (Mohod, 2010, pg. 127). After both processes are completed, roasted
nuts are shelled using a wooden mallet and steamed nuts are cut using blades to remove shells
7
11. (Mohod, 2010, pg. 127). The kernels are then dried, graded, and packaged before being made
available to consumers (Mohod, 2010, pg. 127). The grading process is important because, as
one study showed, different grades of kernel produce different sensory characteristics of cashew
nut butter (Lima, 2012, pg. 180). This study evaluated differences in appearance (color,
shininess, graininess, thickness), aroma (nutty, roasted, rancid), flavor (nutty, sweet, salty,
roasted, rancid), and texture (consistency and graininess), and found that there were significant
differences among these attributes (Lima, 2012, pg. 180).
Roasting the cashew can cause textural changes and therefore change instrumental and
sensory aspects of the nut (Wanlapa, 2007, pg. 263). One study investigated the changes in shear
force of the cashews using the Kramer test and determined that with an increase in temperature
and roasting time, the shear force significantly decreased (Wanlapa, 2007, pg. 266). A crunchier
texture also developed with the increases time and temperature (Wanlapa, 2007, pg. 266). Using
a reflectance spectrometer, the color lightness index and total color difference were measured
(Wanlapa, 2007, pg. 265).
This same study examined sensory changes using a trained panel that tested the cashew’s
appearance, taste, and overall acceptability after roasting using a nine-point hedonic scale
(Wanlapa, 2007, pg. 266). This sensory panel showed that the ideal cashew was roasted at
moderate temperatures of 140-160 degrees Celsius (Wanlapa, 2007, pg. 270).
Soy
Soy foods are becoming increasingly popular as a substitution for foods such as animal
proteins (tofu) and nut butters (soy nut butter) in order to avoid allergic reactions to these
products (Lokuruka, 2010, pg. 2440). The protein in soybeans, Glycine max L., is referred to as
8
12. P34 or Gly m BD 30K (Wilson, 2008, pg. 106). It is known for its high level of nutritional
benefits due to the fact that its protein is complete, meaning it includes all essential amino acids
(Lokuruka, 2010, pg. 2443). Incorporating soy proteins into baked products to may be a good
option for those with allergies because it has been suggested that by hydrolyzing soy proteins can
reduce or eliminate its allergenic properties (Wilson, 2008, pg. 113).
One study showed the effects of soy proteins on the sensory characteristics of meal
replacement bars (Childs, 2007, pg. 425). This was done by providing a trained sensory panel
with bars made with soy proteins and having them rate the flavor and textural qualities (Childs,
2007, pg. 425). The panelists described the soy protein bars as containing nutty, cereal, and hay
flavors, (Childs, 2007, pg. 429). The texture of the soy bars was described as hard and
fracturable, which lowered the acceptability of the bars (Childs, 2007, pg. 433).
Another study examined the influence of soy flour on sugar-snap cookies in regard to
texture and found that it had a negative effect on the baked product (Ryan, 2006, pg. 442). The
cookies were also rated on appearance, such as color, surface cracking, fracture force, and spread
ratio (Ryan, 2006, pg. 449). The data showed that soy cookies were thicker, perhaps due to the
ability of soy to absorb water (Ryan, 2006, pg. 451). The use of soy also made the cookies
harder in texture and produced a darker, more yellow color (Ryan, 2006, pg. 452-454). Soy
cookies showed less cracking on the surface and a more puffy appearance than the control (Ryan,
2006, pg. 454-455). This study concluded that soy has a significant influence on the outcome of
baked goods (Ryan, 2006, pg. 455).
One experiment used soy protein in place of wheat flour in order study the changes it
would have on wheat cookies (Mohsen, 2009, pg. 1705). They evaluated sensory properties such
9
13. as color, aroma, taste, crispiness, and acceptability of the cookies (Mohsen, 2009, pg. 17051706). This study concluded that sensory qualities improved with the use of soy protein
(Mohsen, 2009, pg. 1705)
Chemical composition, including moisture, protein, carbohydrate, and fat content of the
cookies was also examined (Mohsen, 2009, pg. 1705). It was determined that the content of
protein and moisture was increased, while the content of carbohydrates and fat decreased on the
cookies with the incorporation of soy (Mohsen, 2009, pg. 1705).
Hazelnuts
Hazelnuts, along with cashews, are classified as tree nuts and have been shown to
be beneficial to overall health (O’Neil, 2010, pg. 142). In fact, a study was done to determine
how tree nut consumption in one’s diet can enhance nutritional quality (O’Neil, 2010, pg. 142).
Tree nuts are high in a number of nutrients including protein, unsaturated fats, fiber, vitamins E
and K, and potassium and contain little saturated fats or sodium (O’Neil, 2010, pg. 142). There
is evidence that tree nuts such as cashews and hazelnuts reduce the risk of hypertension, heart
disease, obesity, and diabetes (O’Neil, 2010, pg. 142). However, the hazelnut, Corylusavellana,
contains the protein Cor a 9, which can be allergenic (Dooper, 2008, pg. 229).
The investigators in this study used a survey to obtain their data and found that those
participants who consumed tree nuts had diets higher in unsaturated fatty acids, fiber, fruits,
vegetables, milk, and a number of vitamins and minerals than those who did not consume tree
nuts (O’Neil, 2010, pg. 144). Diets high in tree nut intake also showed lower levels of
carbohydrates, alcohol, and sodium (O’Neil, 2010, pg. 144). However, the study concluded that
even with significant benefits, tree nut and tree nut butter consumption in the United States was
10
14. low ( O’Neil, 2010, pg. 148). The researchers suggest adding a separate nut category to the food
guide pyramid (O’Neil, 2010, pg. 148).
One popular way to include more hazelnuts into the diet is the use of hazelnut spreads
such as Nutella®. Hazelnuts are also incorporated into foods such as chocolate, cookies, cakes,
and breakfast cereals (Roder, 2009, pg. 106). Textural properties of various types of hazelnut
spreads have been tested using sensory evaluations and instrumental tests (Di Monaco,2008, pg.
460). Texture is defined as “the sensory and functional manifestation of the structural,
mechanical, and surface properties of food detected through the senses of vision, hearing, touch,
and kinesthetic,” (Di Monaco, 2008, pg. 461). The texture of a food is an important feature
contributing to the overall appeal of a food (Di Monaco, 2008, pg. 461). This study sought to
examine textural properties such as spreadability and meltability using both sensory and
instrumental data (Di Monaco, 2008, pg. 461). Sensory evaluations were performed using a
panel of eight trained testers (Di Monaco, 2008, pg. 462). Using a rating scale of one to ten, the
evaluators judged the following properties: brightness, graininess, adhesiveness to spoon,
fluidness, spreadability, sweetness, hazelnut flavor, cocoa flavor, rancidity, meltability,
adhesiveness to mouth, flouriness, and oiliness (Di Monaco, 2008, pg. 464).
Strain sweep tests, frequency sweep tests, and stress-relaxation tests were performed with
the use of a Dynamic Analyzer ARES-LS (Di Monaco, 2008, pg. 465). A differential scanning
calorimeter was used to obtain thermal measurements and a scanning electron microscope was
used to study the samples’ microstructures (Di Monaco, 2008, pg. 465). The data acquired with
the instrumental and sensory tests were analyzed with ANOVA software and showed that there
are significant differences in characteristics of all samples, so incorporating these hazelnut
spreads into baked goods can produce a considerably unique result (Di Monaco, 2008, pg. 466).
11
15. Methods and Materials
Peanut butter cookies were prepared following the recipe on page 408 in The Good
Housekeeping Illustrated Cookbook (Sterling Publishing, 1989). The recipe was halved and
converted into metric units of measure. This was done using the USDA Handbook 8 (Appendix
A). To obtain information from USDA Handbook 8, the amount of each ingredient in the recipe
was entered into the website and a metric conversion was given. Also provided by the USDA
Handbook 8 were the nutrient values for the recipe including calories, protein, fats,
carbohydrates, fiber, sugar, and vitamins and minerals. This was done four times using the
different variables in each recipe. The cookies were prepared four ways using different variables
to replace the peanut butter protein. Creamy peanut butter was used to prepare the control batch,
followed by cashew butter, soy nut butter, and Nutella hazelnut spread as the substituted
variables in the next three batches. The cookies were then evaluated using sensory evaluations
and objective tests. Sensory evaluations tested for mouth feel, color, and taste of the cookies.
The volumeter and ink blot test were used to obtain the objective data.
Cookie preparation
After performing a trial test, oven temperature was reduced from 350 degrees Fahrenheit
to 325 degrees Fahrenheit and cooking time was adjusted according to the variables. For the
control recipe, all ingredients were weighed in grams using a small kitchen scale, model AWS
SC-501 (Figure 2). Two hours prior to mixing and baking, all ingredients were weighed out,
with the exception of the egg. Before weighing out each ingredient, the scale had to be tarred.
To do this, the scale was turned on, and a clear plastic weighing boat was placed on the scale
(Figure 3). The TARE button was pushed in order to zero the scale and allow for a measurement
12
16. that did not include the weight of the weighing tray. Then, all-purpose flour was placed into the
tray until the weight reached 140.63 grams (Figure 4). The flour was then removed from the
scale and placed into a plastic Ziploc bag. The all-purpose flour was weighed this way three
more times, tarring the scale each time, to be used for the other three recipes. Next, 111.87 grams
of honey was weighed out four times and covered in plastic wrap before setting aside (Figure 5).
Then, 50 grams of sugar was measured out four times using the same weighing procedure as the
flour (Figure 6). The sugar was placed into four separate Ziploc bags and set aside. Butter was
softened using a General Electric Sensor microwave set on high for 30 seconds, and weighed to
56.75 grams four times (Figure 7). The four bowls of softened butter were each covered in
plastic wrap and allowed to set out. Next, 1.15 grams of double-acting baking powder was
weighed out four times and placed into plastic Ziploc bags (Figure 8). Finally, 129 grams of
creamy peanut butter was weighed and covered with plastic wrap (Figure 9). Then, 123 grams of
cashew butter, 128 grams of soy nut butter, or 148 grams of Nutella hazelnut spread were
measured out the same way as the peanut butter and set aside, also covered in plastic wrap
(Figures 10, 11, 12). Two hours after pre-measuring, the mixing and baking process was started.
Egg was weighed to 50 grams for each of the four recipes and the General Electric oven was
preheated to 325 degrees Fahrenheit (Figure 13). Using a large mixing bowl, the control recipe
was prepared by combining all ingredients together and mixing with a medium wooden spoon
for fifty strokes. A rubber spatula was also used periodically during mixing to scrape the sides of
the bowl. After ingredients were slightly blended, a Kitchen Aid household electric stand mixer,
model K45 set to medium speed was used for one minute to beat ingredients into a well blended
dough. With a metal teaspoon and hands, dough was formed into balls and dropped onto a
Farberware non-stick baking sheet in four rows of five, totaling twenty cookies per batch. A fork
13
17. dipped in flour was used to press down the top of each cookie prior to baking (Figure 14). They
were then placed into the oven and baked for ten minutes. When done, cookies were removed
from the oven and transferred to wire cooling rack using a metal turner. After ten minutes, when
completely cool, cookies from each batch were prepared for the sensory evaluations and
objective tests.
Cashew Butter
To prepare the cashew butter variable cookies, the same steps as the control recipe were
taken. However, the cashew butter had to be stirred prior to measuring due to oil separation.
Soy Butter
The soy butter variable cookies were prepared using the same procedure as the control
recipe. No changes had to be made during the baking process.
Nutella hazelnut spread
The Nutella variable required slight adjustments to the baking procedure. Since the
dough was runnier than the other variables, they did not need to be pressed down with a fork
before baking. The baking time was also adjusted to 15 minutes.
Sensory Evaluations
Sensory evaluations were performed using trained panelists to determine the differences
in mouth feel, color, and taste of each batch of cookies. Each batch was assigned a random
three-digit number. Panelists were not aware which cookie contained which variable. The five
panelists were presented with a sample from each batch on a paper plate divided into fourths and
14
18. marked with the three-digit number (Figure 15). Prior to the experiment testers were trained on
how to properly evaluate the characteristic of a food product. Each panelist learned how to use
the rating scale on the sensory scorecard and how to rinse their mouth with water between
tastings of each product. They were also instructed to leave each sample in their mouth for at
least twenty seconds in order to get an accurate rating. At the time of testing, each panelist filled
out a chart on the scorecard using a rating scale of one to five (Figure 1). For mouth feel,
cookies were rated crispy, moderate, or chewy, with one being crispy and five being chewy.
Color was rated on a scale of light brown to dark brown, starting with one as light brown and
increasing to five as dark brown. Taste was rated using the descriptions: strong nut flavor, light
nut flavor, and no nut flavor. A rating of one meant a strong nut flavor and a rating of five meant
no nut flavor was detected.
Figure 1
Sensory Scorecard
Peanut Butter Cookies
Scorecard:
Characteristic
158
309
472
748
Mouth feel a
Color b
Taste c
a
Mouth feel
1________
Crispy
2_______ __3_____ ____4________ _5
Moderate Chewy
b
Color
1________
c
Light brown
Taste
1________
Strong nut flavor
2_______ __3_____ ____4________ _5
Medium brown
Dark brown
2_______ __3_____ ____4________ _5
Light nut flavor
No nut flavor
Note: This figure shows an example of the sensory scorecard used by the judges to evaluate dependent variables.
Figure 1 Sensory Scorecard
15
19. Objective Tests
Objective tests were performed on the cookies using the volumeter to test for changes in
volume between the batches and the ink blot test to test of differences in cell size (Figure 16, 17).
One cookie from each batch was selected for the volumeter test and wrapped in plastic wrap
(Seybold, 2011). Next, each sample was weighed in grams using the kitchen scale and weight
was recorded to the nearest hundredths place (Seybold, 2011). The locks on the top and the base
reservoirs were checked to be sure they were securely locked (Seybold, 2011). The metal
column slide was released and the rape seeds were allowed to fall (Seybold, 2011). The
calibration reading was taken by recording where the seeds fell in the column, with each line
meaning five centimeters-cubed (Seybold, 2011). Placing one hand on each reservoir, the
volumeter was inverted 180 degrees and the rape seeds were again allowed to fall, this time into
the top reservoir (Seybold, 2011). After the rape seed stopped falling, the metal column slide
was pushed shut and the column was rotated back to its initial position (Seybold, 2011). The
bottom reservoir was then opened and the first sample was placed inside (Seybold, 2011). After
closing and securely locking the bottom reservoir, the metal column slide was released again and
the rape seeds were able to fall (Seybold, 2011). When the rape seeds stopped falling, the new
reading was recorded (Seybold, 2011). The volumeter was again rotated 180 degrees while
holding the top and bottom reservoirs, and the rape seeds were able to fall into the top reservoir
(Seybold, 2011). The metal column slide was then shut and the column was rotated back up
(Seybold, 2011). The bottom reservoir was opened and the sample was removed (Seybold,
2011). This test was performed three more times using a sample form each batch of cookies. To
16
20. find the volume of each cookie, the calibration reading was subtracted from the sample reading
for each sample.
The ink blot test was performed on a sample from each of the four batches. To conduct
this test, a large sheet of white paper was divided into four equal sections. The bottom of the
first sample cookie was lightly painted using a sponge brush and black acrylic paint. The cookie
was then placed straight down on the paper and pressed firmly for ten seconds. The cookie was
then lifted straight off the paper to produce a print of the cells. This process was repeated for the
next three samples. After the prints were allowed to dry, three cells from each print were
selected and measured in centimeters using Vernier Calipers, or V-calipers in order to obtain a
four-digit decimal number. Each cell was measured top to bottom and left to right. To get the
measurement from the V-calipers, the arms were moved together so that each side touched the
paint edge of the cell. The V-calipers were read by looking at which two numbers the zero fell
between on the centimeter scale, which is the main body of the calipers, and using the lowest
one. This was the number for the first digit, before the decimal place. The next digit, to the right
of the decimal place, came from looking at which two millimeter marks the zero fell between,
and again using the lowest. To obtain the last two digits on the reading, the movable part of the
V-calipers was examined to find which mark lined up the best with the marks on the main body.
SPSS instructions
After all sensory and objective tests were performed and all data was collected, the data
was entered into SPSS to determine whether there were significant differences between the
variables. To enter the data, the following steps were taken, as given by Seybold (2011):
17
21. Open document “FDNT 362 Template”. Click on VARIABLES VIEW in the
bottom left-hand corner. In the VALUES column, click in the right-hand corner
of the 2nd (FACTOR) row. A box will appear titled VALUE LABELS. Change
the values to match your experiment. Keep 1 = CONTROL the same; change 2, 3
& 4 to match your variables. In the VALUE BOX, type “2”. In the LABEL box,
type (blank). Click the ADD button. The message will ask if you want to replace,
click OK. Continue for variables 3 & 4. Under the LABELS column, rows 4 –
14, change the labels to match your experiment. Please keep WEEK 1; WEEK 2;
WEEK 3 the same. In the lower left-hand corner, click on DATA VIEW. Leave
the columns JUDGE; FACTOR; AND WEEK alone. No data will be entered in
these columns. Begin entering data collected for WEEK ONE. Separate your
scorecards out by judge (for WEEK ONE). Also, you will need to know which
data is for your control; variation one; variation two; and variation 3. Enter in
your data for judge #1, week #1; then judge #2, week #1; then judge #3, week #1;
etc. Continue for week #2 & week #3. When you are completely finished
entering in sensory data, you may enter objective data. Begin entering data for
objective #1 in row 21, column OBJECTIVE 1. Separate your objective data as
follows: Control data for weeks 1, 2, 3; Variation #1 data for weeks 1, 2, 3; etc.
Continue for objective #2 data. Once all data has been entered, you will need to
compute the averages for your sensory data. Open document “FDNSyntax
Template2”. With your cursor, highlight lines 30-33 (beginning with
COMPUTE, and ending with EXECUTE). In the toolbar, click on RUN and
SELECTION.Bring up your data template. You should see the averages for your
sensory variables in the far right-hand column (Seybold, 2011).
The first test that was run was the One-Way ANOVA test to determine if there were
discrepancies among the judges. This was done by performing the following steps, as given by
Seybold (2011):
Click on ANALYZE – COMPARE MEANS – ONE-WAY
ANOVA.DEPENDENT LIST: Select SENSORY1AVE from left-hand column,
18
22. click on arrow button to add. Repeat for SENSORY2AVE AND
SENSORY3AVE.FACTOR: add JUDGE from left-hand column.Click
POSTHOC button; click TUKEY – CONTINUE - OK.Review the ANOVA box.
In the “Sig.” column if any values are less than .05, there were discrepancies with
your judging. If not, your judges were consistent in their evaluation of sensory
characteristics (Seybold, 2011).
Next, a One-Way ANOVA test was performed to determine if there were significant
differences in sensory evaluations between the control recipe and the variables. To do this, the
following steps were taken, as given by Seybold (2011):
Repeat steps 1 & 2. For FACTOR – ADD FACTOR. Click POSTHOC
button; click TUKEY – CONTINUE - OK. Review the ANOVA box. In the
“Sig.” column, are any of your values less than .05? If YES: There were
significant differences between your control recipe and your variations, in
terms of sensory characteristics evaluated. If NO: There were no significant
differences between your control recipe and variations in terms of sensory
characteristics evaluated. IF YES – REVIEW THE BOX MULTIPLE
COMPARISONS, “Sig.” column. Focus on the sensory variable average
where significance was identified. Any value(s) less than .05 indicates
significant differences for a particular sensory variable, between specific
recipe(s) (Seybold, 2011).
Finally, a One-Way ANOVA test was performed on the objective data. The following
procedure was performed, as given by Seybold (2011):
Click on ANALYZE – COMPARE MEANS – ONE-WAY
ANOVA.DEPENDENT LIST: Select Objective Name [Objective 1] from lefthand column – click on arrow button to add. Repeat for Objective Name
[Objective 2].FACTOR: add FACTOR from left-hand column.Click POSTHOC
button; click TUKEY – CONTINUE - OK. Review the ANOVA box. In the
“Sig.” column, are any of your values less than .05? If YES: there were
19
23. significant differences between your products – REVIEW THE BOX MULITPLE
COMPARISONS, “Sig.” column. What specific variables were significantly
different than the variable being compared? If NO: your data was not significant
for that objective test. This means that each variable was similar – which is a good
thing for ingredient substitutions. IF YES – REVIEW THE BOX MULTIPLE
COMPARISONS, “Sig.” column. Any value(s) less than .05 indicates
discrepancies between judges with the sensory characteristics (Seybold, 2011).
20
24. Results
ANOVA and multiple comparison tests were run on sensory and objective data using
SPSS. The first test showed how each judges’ evaluation compared to the other four judges’
evaluation of each sensory variable. The ANOVA test proved that there were no significant
differences between the judges because each p-value was greater than 0.05. This meant that the
judges were consistent in their evaluations each week. All judges gave similar scores when
rating each variable.
The second test that was run compared each factor to the control (see Table 2, Appendix
D). A p-value of less than 0.05 in this test meant that there were significant differences between
each recipe using the different variables. In the case of mouth feel, there was a significant
difference between the peanut butter control recipe and the Nutella hazelnut spread recipe
(p=0.025). The cashew butter variable (p=0.917) had aninsignificant difference in mouth feel
compared to the peanut butter control. Nutella hazelnut spread (p=0.000) had asignificant
difference in color compared to the control recipe. However, the soy butter variable (p=0.992)
was similar to the control in color with an insignificant difference. Also for color, the significant
differences between the other three variables when compared to each other were low. In fact,
Nutella (0.000) had a very significant difference when compared to all other variables. The
significant difference between cashew butter and soy butter was (0.059), which is very close to
being significantly different, even if it is greater than 0.05. Finally, this test showed that each of
the three variables were significantly different than the control in taste, each with p-values of less
than 0.05.
21
25. Using SPSS, tests were also run on the objective data obtained with the volumeter
(p=0.525) and ink blots (p=0.212). In both cases, there were insignificant differencesbetween all
of the variables when compared to the control using objective testing. This means that all had
similar volumes (densityand specific volume) and cell sizes(see Appendix F; bar graphs 1, 2, and
3).
Table 2
Table of Means for Dependent Variables: Sensory Evaluation
Dependent Variable
Mouthfeel
Condition
Mean
Standard Deviation
P-significance
Peanut Butter
Cashew Butter
.26667
.41500
.917
Soy Butter
.80000
.41500
.256
Nutella
1.33333
.41500
.025
Color
Peanut Butter
Cashew Butter
.60000
.24037
.099
Soy Butter
-.06667
.24037
.992
Nutella
-2.40000
.24037
.000
Taste
Peanut Butter
Cashew Butter
-1.40000
.33166
.003
Soy Butter
-1.20000
.33166
.011
Nutella
-1.3333
.33166
.005
Note: SPSS was used to create averages from three consecutive weeks of data for each sensory evaluation. A pvalue of <.05 represents discrepancies between judges.
Table 2 Table of Means for Dependent Variables: Sensory Evaluation
22
26. Discussion
SPSS Data- Judges
The SPSS data comparing the judges’ evaluations of the sensory variables showed that
there were no discrepancies between the five judges. All p-values were greater than 0.05,
meaning that each judge gave a similar rating for each of the sensory evaluations. The ANOVA
test showed thep-values for mouth feel (p=0.801), color (p=0.990), and taste (p=0.627). The fact
that all of the p-values were very high above 0.05 exhibits that all of the testers used in this
experiment were well trained to judge the product. The scores they gave for each variable were
well-thought out so that an accurate assessment of the cookies could be obtained. A p-value of
less than 0.05 would mean that each judge gave a different rating for the variables, so the data
would therefore be inaccurate. This data shows that the judges gave consistent rating for each
variable every week. In this case, however, many of the p-values reached (p=1.000). For
instance, for the mouth feel variable, judges one and two gave the exact same rating.
SPSS Data-Factor
The SPSS data comparing the differences in sensory characteristic of each variable
showed that there were significant differences between the control and each of the variables.
The ANOVA chart showed that the p-values for all variables were less than 0.05. In the
multiples comparison chart, a high p-value signifies that the variable would be an adequate
substitute for the control with an obvious difference in the sensory evaluation.
For mouth feel, there was aninsignificant difference of between the control and the
23
27. cashew butter variable (p=0.917). Therefore, cashew butter would be an acceptable substitute
for peanut butter in regards to mouthfeel. On the other hand, also for mouth feel, there was a
significant differencebetween the control and the Nutella hazelnut spread variable (p=0.025),
meaning that there was a noticeable difference in mouth feel. Therefore, Nutella would not be a
good alternative for peanut butter in this case.
For color, there was aninsignificant difference between the control and the soy nut
butter variable(p=0.992). The high p-value demonstrates that the soy nut cookies were similar in
color to the control cookies and that soy nut butter would be a suitable replacement for peanut
butter in respect to color. Alternatively, the Nutella hazelnut spread variable (p=0.000) had a
very significant difference when compared, not only to the control, but to all other variables.
This means that replacing the peanut butter with Nutella in the cookie recipe resulted in a very
different outcome in regard to color.
For taste, the SPSS data showed the cashew butter, soy nut butter, and Nutella hazelnut
spread variables were all similar to each other, but none of the variables were similar to the
control. There was avery significant difference between the control and the cashew butter
variable (p=0.003), soy butter variable (p=0.011), and Nutella hazelnut spread variable
(p=0.005). All of these p-values are less than 0.05, meaning that none of the variables would be
an acceptable substitute for the peanut butter in regards to taste. A clear difference would be
detected by using any of these variables as a replacement. However, when compared to each
other, all of the variables exhibited a high p-value, which means they were similar in taste to
each other, demonstrating that there was not a detectable difference in taste between the cashew
butter, soy nut butter, or Nutella hazelnut spread.
24
28. SPSS Data- Objective Tests
The SPSS result for the objective comparisons showed that there was not a significant
difference between any of the variables in regards to both the volumeter and ink blot testing. For
the volumeter test, there was an insignificant difference between groups (p=0.525), meaning that
all variables had a similar volume. Density and specific volume between the variables were also
similar (Bar Graphs 1 and 2).
The same was true for the ink blot testing. All variables were similar to the control in
regard to cell size (Bar Graph 3). The ANOVA test showed an insignificant difference between
groups (p=0.212).
This data demonstrates that by replacing the peanut butter with cashew butter, soy nut
butter, or Nutella hazelnut spread does not result in a significant change in the volume of the
cookies or the cell size of the cookies.
Connections to previous studies
Most of the studies done on peanuts deal with the effect that roasting times have on
sensory characteristics. While this differs slightly from the experiment performed here, it is
similar in that a rating scale is often used to evaluate the same characteristics as this experiment,
such as mouth feel (texture), color, and taste (Tomlins, 2008, pg.165-182). Previous studies
show that these qualities are affected by roasting times and this study shows that the same
qualities are affected by using different variables in the recipe (Pattee, 1991, pg. 519-523).
Studies on the properties of cashews show similar findings, also using trained sensory
panels to evaluate texture, color, and taste. Similar to this experiment, flavor has been rated in
25
29. regards to the amount of nut flavor in the baked goods. Previous studies on cashews show that
these characteristics are affected by the type of method used to process the cashews, such as
roasting or steam cooking (Mohod, 2010, pg. 125-132). This is different from this experiment
because the type of processing was not studied, but changes in sensory evaluations are
comparable between previous studies on cashews and this experiment.
Many studies have been done on the effects of soy products in baked goods, much like
this experiment. For example, a study on the use of soy in meal replacement bars showed similar
results to the findings of this experiment (Childs, 2007, pg. 425-434). Although the panel in this
study was evaluating a different type of baked product, similar flavor and textural qualities were
assessed. A study more closely related to this experiment involved the evaluation of sensory
characteristics on cookies containing soy (Ryan, 2006, pg. 442-457). The study found that the
cookies were thick, puffy, and had a yellowish color, very much like the soy nut cookies
produced in this experiment.
More studies have been done on the sensory characteristics of hazelnut spreads
themselves than there have been on how they affect the outcome when used to make baked
products. However, the same types of sensory variables were compared in one study, such as
differences in texture and nut flavor between different types of hazelnut spreads (Di Monaco,
2008, pg. 460-479). Another similarity between Di Monaco’s study and this experiment was that
the researchers in the previous study used ANOVA software to evaluate the data obtained during
their experiment.
Hypotheses
26
30. The hypothesis that changing the type of nut protein in peanut butter cookies will
significantly change the cookies’ taste and mouth feel was proven by the data shown in the
multiple comparison chart. Each variable showed a significant difference in taste when
compared to the control recipe because they all had p-values less than 0.05. Mouth feel was also
proven to be significantly different between the control and the Nutella hazelnut spread variable
(p=0.025). The mouth feel of the cashew butter (p=0.917), however, showed an insignificant
difference compared to the control so the hypothesis was disproven in this aspect.
The data proves the hypothesis that changing the type of nut protein in peanut butter
cookies will significantly change the color of the cookie, especially in regards to the Nutella
hazelnut spread variable(p=0.000), when compared to all other variables. However, the soy nut
butter protein (p=0.992) did not show a significant change in color compared to the control.
The data shown in the SPSS chart for objective measurements disproves the
hypothesis that changing the nut protein in peanut butter cookies will significantly change the
volumes of the cookie. Instead, the null hypothesis was proven due to the fact that the p-values
showed that there were no significant differences between any of the variables in regards to
volume.
Limitations
The results obtained during this experiment may have been affected by some of the
unavoidable limitations of the study. Time was one of the factors that may have affected the
outcomes. This experiment had to be performed within a time period of only three hours a week
for four weeks. During these three hours, all four batches of cookies had to be prepared and
sensory and objective tests had to be run. There was also a space limitation during
27
31. thisexperiment as each participant was only provided a limited amount of space to prepare their
products.
The ingredients used may also have had some effect on the outcome of the cookies. For
example, in this case, the brand of cashew butter used during the 3rd week was different than the
previous week, which may have produced a slightly different sensory or objective test result.
Another limitation of this experiment was the number of testers that were available for
sensory evaluations.
28
32. Conclusion
The type of protein found in nut butters is responsible for causing severe allergic
reactions in sensitive individuals. Baked goods can be modified in order to change the protein so
that allergic individuals can consume these products, as proven in previous studies. This study
found that changing the type of protein in a peanut butter cookie recipe by replacing the peanut
butter with cashew butter, soy nut butter, or Nutella hazelnut spread can lead to some noticeable
sensory differences in the cookies. However, it was also proven in the SPSS data that nut butters
such as cashew (p=0.917) can be used to replace the peanut butter in this recipe without causing
significant differences in the mouth feel of the cookies. The cashew butter replacement would
only change the color and taste of the cookies slightly. In fact, in regard to taste, all variables
caused a detectable difference in the nutty flavor of the cookies, so none of them would be
adequate substitutes in this case. The soy nut butter variable (p=0.992) was very similar in color
to the peanut butter control, making it a good replacement in regards to color. The Nutella
hazelnut spread cookies (p=0.000) were very different in appearance with a very dark brown
color, most likely caused by the chocolate flavor in the spread. The Nutella hazelnut spread
(p=0.025) also caused a noticeable difference in the mouth feel of the cookies, proving that this
particular variable would not be a suitable replacement for the peanut butter in this recipe in
regards to any of the sensory characteristics evaluated in this experiment.
The SPSS data disproved the hypothesis that changing the type of protein would
significantly change the volume of the cookies. After testing the data obtained from the
volumeter tests, no significant difference in volume between any of the variables was shown.
All of the cookie variables had close to the same volume, density, and specific volume. The
29
33. SPSS test performed on the data obtained from the ink blot tests also showed no significant
differences in the cell sizes between any of the variables.
From the information obtained as a result of this study, it would seem that more research
should be done on how to make these variables acceptable substitutes for peanut butter in baked
good recipes. The problem of peanut allergy is critical and many people affected with this would
benefit from more of this type of research. Peanut products are very popular among consumers
and it can difficult for peanut allergic individuals to avoid these products. Specifically, it seems
cashew butter would be the best alternative to devote more research to because this experiment
found the cookies made with cashew butter to have similar qualities to those made with peanut
butter. Having more options or substitutes available for peanut butter would increase quality of
life, decrease the risk of severe allergic responses or anaphylaxis, and could potentially save
many lives.
30
34. References
Adeyeye, E. I., Asaolu, S. S., &Aluko, A. O. (2007). Amino acid composition of two masticatory
nuts (Cola acuminata and Garcinia kola) and a snack nut (Anacardiumoccidentale).
International Journal of Food Sciences & Nutrition, 58(4), 241-249.
Childs, J. L., Yates, M. D., & Drake, M. A. (2007). Sensory Properties of Meal Replacement
Bars and Beverages Made from Whey and Soy Proteins. Journal of Food Science, 72(6),
S425-S434.
Clark, A. T., Anagnostou, K. K., & Ewan, P. W. (2007). Cashew nut causes more severe
reactions than peanut: case-matched comparison in 141 children. Allergy, 62(8), 913-916.
Clark, A. T., Islam, S. S., King, Y. Y., Deighton, J. J., Anagnostou, K. K., & Ewan, P. W.
(2009). Successful oral tolerance induction in severe peanut allergy.Allergy, 64(8), 12181220.
Di Monaco, R., Giancone, T., Cavella, S., &Masi, P. (2008). Predicting texture attributes from
microstructural, rheological, and thermal properties of hazelnut spreads. Journal of
Texture Studies, 39(5), 460-479.
Dodo, H. W., Konan, K. N., Chen, F. C., Egnin, M., &Viquez, O. M. (2008).Alleviating peanut
allergy using genetic engineering: the silencing of the immunodominant allergen Ara h 2
leads to its significant reduction and a decrease in peanut allergenicity.Plant
Biotechnology Journal, 6(2), 135-145.
31
35. Dooper, M. W., Plassen, C., Holden, L., Moen, L. H., Namork, E., &Egaas, E. (2008). Antibody
binding to hazelnut (Corylusavellana) proteins: the effects of extraction procedure and
hazelnut source. Food & Agricultural Immunology, 19(3), 229-240.
Dunbar, H., &Luyt, D. (2011).Triggers, clinical features and management of anaphylaxis in
children.Nursing Children & Young People, 23(5), 29-35.Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Du Toit, G. (2008). Early consumption of peanuts in infancy is associated with a low prevelence
of peanut allergy. J Allergy Clinical Immunology, 122(5), 984-991. Retrieved from
http://ddr.nal.usda.gov/bitstream/10113/42633/1/IND44389411.pdf
Hitomi, K., Tahara-Hanaoka, S., Someya, S., Fujiki, A., Tada, H., Sugiyama, T., & ... Shibuya,
A. (2010). An immunoglobulin-like receptor, Allergin-1, inhibits immunoglobulin E–
mediated immediate hypersensitivity reactions. Nature Immunology, 11(7), 601-607.
Jolly, C. M., Hinds, M. J., Lindo, P., Ligeon, C., & Weiss, H. (2005). Consumers acceptance of
peanut butter and products containing peanut butter in two southern states in the
u.s.Journal of International Food and Agribusiness Marketing, 17(2), 87-104. Retrieved
from http://www.haworthpress.com
King, R. M., Knibb, R. C., &Hourihane, J. B. (2009).Impact of peanut allergy on quality of life,
stress and anxiety in the family.Allergy, 64(3), 461-468.
Lauer, I. I., Dueringer, N. N., Pokoj, S. S., Rehm, S. S., Zoccatelli, G. G., Reese, G. G., & ...
Scheurer, S. S. (2009). The non-specific lipid transfer protein, Ara h 9, is an important
allergen in peanut. Clinical & Experimental Allergy, 39(9), 1427-1437.
32
36. Le, T. M., Lindner, T. M., Pasmans, S. G., Guikers, C. H., van Hoffen, E. E., BruijnzeelKoomen, C. M., &Knulst, A. C. (2008). Reported food allergy to peanut, tree nuts and
fruit: comparison of clinical manifestations, prescription of medication and impact on
daily life.Allergy, 63(7), 910-916.
Lehmann, K. (2006). Structure and stability of 2s albumin-type peanut allergens: implications for
the severity of peanut allergic reactions. Biochem J, 395, 463-472. Retrieved from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1462689/?report=abstract
Lima, J. R., Garruti, D. S., & Bruno, L. M. (2012). Physicochemical, microbiological and
sensory characteristics of cashew nut butter made from different kernel grades-quality.
LWT - Food Science & Technology, 45(2), 180-185.
Lokuruka, M. I. (2010). Soybean nutritional properties: the good and the bad about soy foods
consumption-a review. African Journal of Food, Agriculture, Nutrition & Development,
10(4), 2439-2459.Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Mohod, A., Khandetod, Y., &Sengar, S. (2010). Eco-friendly utilization of parabolic
concentrating solar cooker for extraction of cashew nut shell oil and household
cooking.International Journal Of Sustainable Energy, 29(3), 125-132.
Mohsen, S. M., Fadel, H. M., Bekhit, M. A., Edris, A. E., & Ahmed, M. S. (2009). Effect of
substitution of soy protein isolate on aroma volatiles, chemical composition and sensory
quality of wheat cookies. International Journal of Food Science & Technology, 44(9),
1705-1712.
33
37. O'Neil, C. E., Keast, D. R., Fulgoni III, V. L., &Nicklas, T. A. (2010). Tree nut consumption
improves nutrient intake and diet quality in US adults: an analysis of National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 1999-2004. Asia Pacific Journal of Clinical
Nutrition, 19(1), 142-150. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Pattee, H. E., Young, C. T., &Giesbrecht, F. G. (1991).Comparison of peanut butter color
determination by CIELAB L a b and Hunter color-difference methods and the
relationship of roasted peanut color to roasted peanut flavor response.Journal Of
Agricultural And Food Chemistry, 39(3), 519-523.
Röder, M., Vieths, S., &Holzhauser, T. (2009). Commercial lateral flow devices for rapid
detection of peanut ( Arachishypogaea) and hazelnut ( Corylusavellana) crosscontamination in the industrial production of cookies. Analytical &Bioanalytical
Chemistry, 395(1), 103-109.
Ryan, K. J., & Brewer, M. S. (2006). Physical properties of sugar-snap cookies using granule
surface deproteinated wheat starch. Journal of Texture Studies, 37(4), 442-457.
Seybold, J. (2011). Volumeter Operating Instructions. Experimental Foods Lab. Retrieved on
October 6, 2011 from https://moodle.iup.edu/course/view.php?id=40459.
The Good Housekeeping Illustrated Cookbook. (1989). Peanut-butter cookies.Pg.408. New
York: Sterling Publishing Co., Inc.
34
38. Tomlins, K., Rukuni, T., Mutungamira, A., Mandeya, S., &Swetman, A. (2008). Effect of
roasting time and storage time on sensory and consumer acceptability of peanut butters in
southernafrica. Tropical Science, 47(2), 165-182. Retrieved from
http://www.interscience.wiley.com
Wanlapa, A., & Jindal, V. K. (2006).Instrumental and sensory evaluation of textural changes
during roasting of cashew kernels.Journal of Texture Studies, 37(3), 263-275.
Willison, L. N., Tawde, P. P., Robotham, J. M., Penney, R. M., Teuber, S. S., Sathe, S. K., &
Roux, K. H. (2008). Pistachio vicilin, Pis v 3, is immunoglobulin E-reactive and crossreacts with the homologous cashew allergen, Ana o 1. Clinical & Experimental Allergy,
38(7), 1229-1238.
Wilson, S. S., Martinez-Villaluenga, C. C., & De Mejia, E. G. (2008).Purification, Thermal
Stability, and Antigenicity of the Immunodominant Soybean Allergen P34 in Soy
Cultivars, Ingredients, and Products.Journal of Food Science, 73(6), T106-T114.
35
39. Appendix A
Nutrient Analysis (USDA Handbook 8)
Peanut Butter Cookies-Control-(Peanut Butter)
AP flour
Amount needed
140.625
g
Energy (kcal)
512 kcal
Protein
Peanut
butter
129 g
Honey
Sugar
111.87
g
50 g
Butter or
margarine
56.75 g
14.53 g
759
kcal
32.37 g
340
kcal
0.34 g
Value per amount
194
407 kcal
kcal
0g
0.48 g
Total lipid
1.38 g
65.00 g
0g
0g
46.03 g
Saturated fat
0.218 g
0g
0g
29.151 g
Monounsaturate
d fat
Polyunsaturated
fat
CHO by
difference
Fiber
Sugars, total
0.122 g
0g
0g
11.929 g
0g
0g
1.727 g
107.31 g
13.558
g
31.239
g
18.268
g
25.23 g
7.7 g
11.89 g
Sucrose
0g
11.20 g
Glucose
0g
0.70 g
Fructose
0g
0g
0g
0g
Lactose
Maltose
Galactose
Starch
Calcium
0g
0g
0g
0g
21 mg
0g
0g
0g
6.18 g
55 mg
39.99
g
45.80
g
0g
1.61 g
3.47 g
0g
7 mg
49.99
g
0g
49.90
g
49.90
g
0g
0.03 g
3.8 g
0.39 g
92.18
g
0.2 g
91.87
g
1.00 g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0 mg
0g
0g
0g
0g
14 mg
Iron
6.53 mg
31 mg
0.47
mg
2 mg
0.03
mg
0 mg
0.01 mg
Magnesium
2.41
mg
199 mg
Phosphorus
152 mg
462 mg
4 mg
0 mg
14 mg
Potassium
150 mg
837 mg
58 mg
1 mg
14 mg
Sodium
3 mg
592 mg
4 mg
0 mg
405 mg
Zinc
0.98 mg
0.203
mg
0.682
mg
47.7
mcg
0 mg
0.25
mg
0.040
mg
0.089
mg
0.9
mcg
0.6 mg
0.01
mg
0.004
mg
0.002
mg
0.3
mcg
0 mg
0.05 mg
Copper
3.75
mg
0.610
mg
1.891
mg
7.2
mcg
0 mg
Manganese
Selenium
Vitamin C
36
0.581 g
0g
0.03 g
0g
0g
1 mg
0 mg
0 mg
0.6 mcg
0 mg
Egg
50 g
Baking
powder
1.15 g
72
kcal
6.28
g
4.75
g
1.56
3g
1.82
9g
0.95
6g
0.36
g
0g
0.18
g
0g
1 kcal
0.18
g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
28
mg
0.88
mg
6 mg
0g
0g
0g
0g
68 mg
99
mg
69
mg
71
mg
0.65
mg
0.03
6 mg
0.01
4 mg
15.3
mcg
0 mg
25 mg
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0.32 g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0.13 mg
0 mg
0 mg
122 mg
0 mg
0 mg
0 mg
0 mcg
0 mg
Total
Total/Serving
549.39
5g
30.522 g
2285
kcal
54 g
126.94 kcal
117.16
g
44.49
g
45.119
g
21.532
g
275.42
g
11.7 g
154.26
g
62.1 g
6.51 g
40.87
g
45.80
g
0g
1.16 g
3.47 g
6.18 g
193
mg
10.46
mg
239
mg
756
mg
1129
mg
1197
mg
5.69
mg
0.893
mg
2.678
mg
72
mcg
0.6 mg
2.27 g
3g
2.47 g
2.51 g
1.196 g
15.30 g
0.65 g
8.57 g
3.45 g
2.54 g
0g
0.06 g
0.19 g
0.34 g
10.72 mg
0.58 mg
13.27 mg
42 mg
62.72 mg
66.5 mg
0.32 mg
0.049 mg
0.149 mg
4 mcg
0.03 mg
40. Thiamin
0.094
mg
0.135
mg
17.290
mg
1.367
mg
0.700
mg
95 mcg
0 mg
0 mg
0.003 mg
0.043
mg
0.135
mg
0.076
mg
0.027
mg
2 mcg
0.009
mg
0 mg
0.019 mg
0 mg
0.062 mg
0 mg
0.002 mg
Folate, total
1.104
mg
0.695
mg
8.303
mg
0.616
mg
0.062
mg
257 mcg
0 mcg
2 mcg
Vitamin B-12
0 mcg
0 mcg
0 mcg
0 mcg
0.10 mcg
Vitamin A, IU
0 IU
0 IU
0 IU
0 IU
1418 IU
Vitamin E
(alphatocopherol)
Vitamin D
0.08 mg
11.60
mg
0 mg
0 mg
1.32 mg
0 IU
0 IU
0 IU
0 IU
34 IU
Vitamin K
0.4 mcg
0.8
mcg
0 mcg
0 mcg
4.0 mcg
Riboflavin
Niacin
Pantothenic acid
Vitamin B-6
0.024 mg
1.221
mg
1.13
mg
25.789
mg
2.887
mg
0.876
mg
380
mcg
0.55
mcg
1688
IU
13.53
mg
0.068 mg
0 IU
75 IU
4.17 IU
0 mcg
5.3
mcg
0.29 mcg
0.02
0 mg
0.22
9 mg
0.03
7 mg
0.76
6 mg
0.08
5 mg
24
mcg
0.45
mcg
270
IU
0.53
mg
0 mg
41
IU
0.1
mcg
0 mg
0 mg
0 mg
0 mg
0 mcg
0 mcg
0 IU
0 mg
0.06 mg
1.43 mg
0.160 mg
0.049 mg
21.11 mcg
0.03 mcg
93.78 IU
0.75 mg
Peanut Butter Cookies-Variable 1-(Cashew Butter)
AP flour
Cashew
butter
111.87
g
Sugar
Butter or
margarine
50 g
56.75 g
Egg
Baking
powder
Total
Total/Serving
1.15 g
533.39
5g
29.633 g
72
kcal
6.28
g
4.75
g
1.56
3g
1.82
9g
0.95
6g
0.36
g
0g
0.18
g
0g
1 kcal
2277
kcal
44.11
g
115.4
g
43.429
g
51.156
g
13.957
g
285.48
g
6.6 g
148.78
g
50.9 g
126.5 kcal
0g
0g
0g
0g
40.17
g
45.80
g
0g
2.23 g
0g
0.18
g
0g
Amount
needed
140.625g
Energy
(kcal)
Protein
512 kcal
751 kcal
340 kcal
14.53 g
22.48 g
0.34 g
Total lipid
1.38 g
63.24 g
0g
0g
46.03 g
Saturated
fat
Monounsat
urated fat
Polyunsatur
ated fat
CHO by
difference
Fiber
Sugars,
total
Sucrose
0.218 g
12.497 g
0g
0g
29.151 g
0.122 g
37.276 g
0g
0g
11.929 g
0.581 g
10.693 g
0g
0g
1.727 g
107.31 g
35.29 g
92.18 g
0.03 g
3.8 g
0.39 g
2.6 g
6.41 g
0.2 g
91.87 g
0g
0g
1.00 g
Glucose
0g
0g
39.99 g
49.99
g
0g
49.90
g
49.90
g
0g
Fructose
0g
0g
45.80 g
0g
Lactose
0g
0g
0g
0g
37
123 g
Honey
50
g
Value per amount
194
407 kcal
kcal
0g
0.48 g
0g
0.03 g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0.32 g
0g
0g
0g
0g
2.45 g
6.41 g
2.41 g
2.842 g
0.775 g
15.86 g
0.36 g
8.27 g
2.83 g
2.54 g
0g
41. Maltose
Galactose
Starch
Calcium
0g
0g
0g
21 mg
0g
0g
0g
55 mg
1.61 g
3.47 g
0g
7 mg
0g
0g
0g
0 mg
0g
0g
0g
14 mg
Iron
6.53 mg
6.44 mg
0.47 mg
0.01 mg
Magnesium
31 mg
330 mg
2 mg
0.03
mg
0 mg
Phosphorus
152 mg
585 mg
4 mg
0 mg
14 mg
Potassium
150 mg
699 mg
58 mg
1 mg
14 mg
Sodium
3 mg
786 mg
4 mg
0 mg
405 mg
Zinc
0.98 mg
6.60 mg
0.25 mg
0.05 mg
Copper
0.203 mg
2.803 mg
Manganese
0.682 mg
1.043 mg
Selenium
47.7 mcg
14.7 mcg
0.040
mg
0.089
mg
0.9 mcg
Vitamin C
Thiamin
0 mg
1.104 mg
0 mg
0.399 mg
0.6 mg
0 mg
0.01
mg
0.004
mg
0.002
mg
0.3
mcg
0 mg
0 mg
Riboflavin
0.695 mg
0.239 mg
8.303 mg
2.047 mg
0.009
mg
0 mg
0.019 mg
Niacin
Pantothenic
acid
Vitamin B-6
0.616 mg
1.537 mg
0 mg
0.062 mg
0.062 mg
0.323 mg
0 mg
0.002 mg
Folate, total
257 mcg
87 mcg
0.043
mg
0.135
mg
0.076
mg
0.027
mg
2 mcg
0 mcg
2 mcg
Vitamin B12
Vitamin A,
IU
Vitamin E
(alphatocopherol)
Vitamin D
0 mcg
0 mcg
0 mcg
0 mcg
0.10 mcg
0 IU
0 IU
0 IU
0 IU
1418 IU
0.08 mg
1.18 mg
0 mg
0 mg
1.32 mg
0 IU
0 IU
0 IU
0 IU
34 IU
Vitamin K
0.4 mcg
44.4 mcg
0 mcg
0 mcg
4.0 mcg
1 mg
0 mg
0 mg
0.6 mcg
0 mg
0.003 mg
0.024 mg
1.61 g
3.47 g
0g
193
mg
14.49
mg
370
mg
879
mg
991
mg
1391
mg
8.54
mg
3.086
mg
1.83
mg
79.5
mcg
0.6 mg
1.526
mg
1.234
mg
10.546
mg
3.057
mg
0.499
mg
372
mcg
0.55
mcg
1688
IU
3.11
mg
0.09 g
0.19 g
0g
10.72 mg
0 IU
75 IU
4.17 IU
0 mcg
48.9
mcg
2.72 mcg
0g
0g
0g
28
mg
0.88
mg
6 mg
0g
0g
0g
68 mg
99
mg
69
mg
71
mg
0.65
mg
0.03
6 mg
0.01
4 mg
15.3
mcg
0 mg
0.02
0 mg
0.22
9 mg
0.03
7 mg
0.76
6 mg
0.08
5 mg
24
mcg
0.45
mcg
270
IU
0.53
mg
25 mg
41
IU
0.1
mcg
0.13 mg
0 mg
0 mg
122 mg
0 mg
0 mg
0 mg
0 mcg
0 mg
0 mg
0 mg
0 mg
0 mg
0 mg
0 mcg
0 mcg
0 IU
0 mg
0.805 mg
20.56 mg
48.8 mg
55.05 mg
77.27 mg
0.47 mg
0.171 mg
0.10 mg
4.42 mcg
0.03 mg
0.083 mg
0.069 mg
0.586 mg
0.169 mg
0.028 mg
20.67 mcg
0.03 mcg
93.78 IU
0.17 mg
Peanut Butter Cookies-Variable 2-(Soy Butter)
AP
flour
Amount
needed
38
140.6
25g
Soy
butter
Honey
111.87
g
Butter or
margarine
Egg
50 g
128 g
Sugar
56.75 g
50 g
Baking
powder
1.15 g
Total
538.39
5g
Total/Serving
29.911 g
42. Energy
(kcal)
Protein
512
kcal
14.53
g
1.38 g
680
kcal
28 g
340
kcal
0.34 g
44 g
0g
Saturated
fat
Monounsat
urated fat
Polyunsatu
rated fat
CHO by
difference
Fiber
Sugars,
total
Sucrose
0.218
g
0.122
g
0.581
g
107.3
1g
3.8 g
0.39 g
6g
0g
23.04
g
28.4 g
0g
40 g
0g
0g
92.18
g
0.2 g
91.87
g
1.00 g
Glucose
0g
0g
Fructose
0g
0g
Lactose
Maltose
Galactose
Starch
Calcium
0g
0g
0g
0g
21 mg
Iron
6.53
mg
31 mg
0g
0g
0g
0g
240
mg
80 mg
Total lipid
Magnesiu
m
Phosphoru
s
Potassium
Sodium
Zinc
Copper
152
mg
150
mg
3 mg
0.98
mg
0.203
mg
12 g
12 g
0g
39.99
g
45.80
g
0g
1.61 g
3.47 g
0g
7 mg
Value per amount
407 kcal
72
kcal
0.48 g
6.28
g
0g
46.03 g
4.75
g
0g
29.151 g
1.56
3g
0g
11.929 g
1.82
9g
0g
1.727 g
0.95
6g
49.99
0.03 g
0.36
g
g
0g
0g
0g
49.90
0.03 g
0.18
g
g
49.90
0g
0g
g
0g
0g
0.18
g
0g
0g
0g
194
kcal
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0 mg
0g
0g
0g
0g
14 mg
0.03
mg
0 mg
0.01 mg
0 mg
0.47
mg
2 mg
0 mg
4 mg
0 mg
14 mg
0 mg
58 mg
1 mg
14 mg
560
mg
0 mg
4 mg
0 mg
405 mg
0.25
mg
0.040
mg
0.01
mg
0.004
mg
0.05 mg
0 mg
1 mg
0 mg
Manganes
e
0.682
mg
0 mg
0.089
mg
0.002
mg
0 mg
Selenium
47.7
mcg
0 mg
0 mcg
0.3
mcg
0 mg
0.6 mcg
0 mg
0.9
mcg
0.6 mg
Thiamin
1.104
mg
0 mg
0 mg
0 mg
0.003 mg
Riboflavin
0.695
mg
0 mg
0.043
mg
0.009
mg
0.019 mg
Niacin
8.303
mg
0 mg
0.135
mg
0 mg
0.024 mg
Vitamin C
39
0 mg
0g
0g
0g
0g
28
mg
0.88
mg
6
mg
99
mg
69
mg
71
mg
0.65
mg
0.03
6
mg
0.01
4
mg
15.3
mcg
0
mg
0.02
0
mg
0.22
9
mg
0.03
7
mg
2206
kcal
49.63
g
96.16
g
36.932
g
36.92
g
31.664
g
290.19
g
16 g
154.37
g
50.90
g
40.17
g
45.80
g
0g
1.61 g
3.47 g
0g
378
mg
88.05
mg
40 mg
122.56 kcal
294
mg
292
mg
1165
mg
1.94
mg
0.283
mg
16.33 mg
0 mg
0.787
mg
0.04 mg
0 mcg
64.8
mcg
0.6 mg
3.6 mcg
0 mg
1.127
mg
0.063 mg
0 mg
0.995
mg
0.055 mg
0 mg
8.499
mg
0.472 mg
1 kcal
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0.32 g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
68 mg
0.13 mg
0 mg
25 mg
0 mg
122 mg
0 mg
0 mg
0 mg
2.76 g
5.34 g
2.022 g
2.05 g
1.759 g
16.12 g
0.89 g
8.58 g
2.83 g
2.23 g
2.54 g
0g
0.09 g
0.19 g
0g
21 mg
4.89 mg
2.22 mg
16.22 mg
64.72 mg
0.11 mg
0.02 mg
0.03 mg
43. Pantotheni
c acid
0.616
mg
0 mg
0.076
mg
0 mg
0.062 mg
Vitamin B6
0.062
mg
0 mg
0.027
mg
0 mg
0.002 mg
Folate,
total
Vitamin B12
Vitamin A,
IU
Vitamin E
(alphatocopherol)
Vitamin D
257
mcg
0 mcg
0 mcg
2 mcg
0 mg
2 mcg
0 mg
0 mcg
0 mcg
0.10 mcg
0 IU
0 IU
0 IU
0 IU
1418 IU
0.08
mg
0 mg
0 mg
0 mg
1.32 mg
0 IU
0 IU
0 IU
0 IU
34 IU
Vitamin K
0.4
mcg
0 mcg
0 mcg
0 mcg
4.0 mcg
0.76
6
mg
0.08
5
mg
24
mcg
0.45
mcg
270
IU
0.53
mg
0 mg
1.52
mg
0.08 mg
0 mg
0.176
mg
0.009 mg
0 mcg
285
mcg
0.50
mcg
1688
IU
1.93
mg
15.83 mcg
41
IU
0.1
mcg
0 IU
75 IU
4.17 IU
0 mcg
4.5
mcg
0.25 mcg
0 mcg
0 IU
0 mg
0.03 mcg
93.78 IU
0.11 mg
Peanut Butter Cookies-Variable 3-(Nutella)
AP
flour
Amount
needed
Nutella
Honey
Sugar
148 g
111.87
g
50 g
Value per amount
194
407 kcal
kcal
0g
0.48 g
140.625
g
Butter or
margarine
56.75 g
Energy
(kcal)
Protein
512 kcal
801 kcal
14.53 g
8.01 g
340
kcal
0.34 g
Total
lipid
Saturate
d fat
Monoun
saturate
d fat
Polyuns
aturated
fat
CHO by
differenc
e
Fiber
Sugars,
total
Sucrose
1.38 g
44.00 g
0g
0g
46.03 g
0.218 g
42.066 g
0g
0g
29.151 g
0.122 g
0g
0g
0g
11.929 g
0.581 g
0g
0g
0g
107.31
g
92.00 g
92.18 g
3.8 g
0.39 g
8.0 g
79.99 g
0g
Glucose
Fructose
40
Egg
50 g
Baking
powder
1.15 g
Total
Total/Serving
513.3
95 g
28.52 g
2327
kcal
29.64
g
96.16
g
72.99
8g
13.88
g
129.28 kcal
72
kcal
6.28
g
4.75
g
1.56
3g
1.82
9g
1 kcal
1.727 g
0.95
6g
0g
3.264
g
0.181 g
49.99 g
0.03 g
0.36
g
0.32 g
342.1
9g
19.01 g
0.2 g
91.87 g
0g
49.90 g
0g
0.03 g
0g
0g
1.00 g
49.90 g
0g
0g
0g
39.99 g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
45.80 g
0g
0g
0.18
g
0g
12 g
222.3
6g
50.90
g
40.17
g
45.80
0.6 g
12.35 g
0g
0g
0.18
g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
1.65 g
5.34 g
4.055 g
0.77 g
2.83 g
2.23 g
2.54 g
44. Lactose
Maltose
Galactos
e
Starch
Calcium
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
1.61 g
3.47 g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
0g
21 mg
0g
160 mg
0g
7 mg
0g
0 mg
0g
14 mg
0g
68 mg
Iron
6.53 mg
6.48 mg
31 mg
95 mg
0.03
mg
0 mg
0.01 mg
Magnesi
um
Phospho
rus
Potassiu
m
Sodium
0.47
mg
2 mg
152 mg
225 mg
4 mg
0 mg
14 mg
150 mg
602 mg
58 mg
1 mg
14 mg
3 mg
61 mg
4 mg
0 mg
405 mg
Zinc
0.98 mg
1.57 mg
0.203
mg
0.694 mg
0.01
mg
0.004
mg
0.05 mg
Copper
0.25
mg
0.040
mg
Mangan
ese
0.682
mg
1.285 mg
0.089
mg
0.002
mg
0 mg
Seleniu
m
Vitamin
C
Thiamin
47.7
mcg
0 mg
5.3 mcg
0.3
mcg
0 mg
0.6 mcg
0 mg
0.9
mcg
0.6 mg
1.104
mg
0.126 mg
0 mg
0 mg
0.003 mg
Riboflavi
n
0.695
mg
0.252 mg
0.043
mg
0.009
mg
0.019 mg
Niacin
8.303
mg
0.632 mg
0.135
mg
0 mg
0.024 mg
Pantoth
enic acid
0.616
mg
0.528 mg
0.076
mg
0 mg
0.062 mg
Vitamin
B-6
0.062
mg
0.121 mg
0.027
mg
0 mg
0.002 mg
Folate,
total
Vitamin
B-12
Vitamin
A, IU
Vitamin
E
(alphatocopher
257 mcg
21 mcg
2 mcg
0 mg
2 mcg
0 mcg
0.40 mcg
0 mcg
0 mcg
0.10 mcg
0 IU
4 IU
0 IU
0 IU
1418 IU
0.08 mg
7.34 mg
0 mg
0 mg
1.32 mg
0g
28
mg
0.88
mg
6
mg
99
mg
69
mg
71
mg
0.65
mg
0.03
6
mg
0.01
4
mg
15.3
mcg
0
mg
0.02
0
mg
0.22
9
mg
0.03
7
mg
0.76
6
mg
0.08
5
mg
24
mcg
0.45
mcg
270
IU
0.53
mg
41
1 mg
0 mg
0 mg
g
0g
1.61 g
3.47 g
0g
0.09 g
0.19 g
0g
298
mg
14.53
mg
135
mg
519
mg
894
mg
666
mg
3.51
mg
0.977
mg
0g
16.56 mg
0 mg
2.072
mg
0.115 mg
0 mcg
70.1
mcg
0.6
mg
1.253
mg
3.89 mcg
0 mg
1.247
mg
0.069 mg
0 mg
9.131
mg
0.507 mg
0 mg
2.048
mg
0.114 mg
0 mg
0.297
mg
0.0165 mg
0 mcg
306
mcg
0.95
mcg
1692
IU
9.27
mg
17 mcg
0.13 mg
0 mg
25 mg
0 mg
122 mg
0 mg
0 mg
0 mg
0 mg
0 mcg
0 IU
0 mg
0.81 mg
7.5 mg
28.83 mg
49.67 mg
37 mg
0.19 mg
0.054 mg
0.03 mg
0.069 mg
0.05 mcg
94 IU
0.515 mg
46. Appendix B
Original Recipe (The Good Housekeeping Illustrated Cookbook, 1989, pg.
408)
Table 1
U.S. measurements of ingredients converted to metric units
Ingredient
US measurement
Metric conversion
All-purpose flour
11/8 cups
140.63 grams
Creamy peanut butter
1
/2 cup
129 grams
Honey
1
/3 cup
111.87 grams
Sugar
1
/4 cup
50 grams
Butter or margarine, softened
1
/4 cup
56.75 grams
Egg
1 each
50 grams
Double-acting baking powder
1
1.15 grams
/4 teaspoon
Note: The original recipe was converted from English measurements to Metric measurements.
Table 1 U.S. measurements of ingredients converted to metric units
1) Preheat oven to 350 degrees Fahrenheit. Into large bowl, measure all ingredients. With
mixer at medium speed, beat until well mixed, occasionally scraping bowl.
2) With hands, shape dough into 1 1/2 inch balls; place 3 inches apart on cookie sheets.
3) Dip a fork into flour a press deeply across top of each cookie; repeat in opposite
direction. Bake in oven 15 minutes or just until cookies are lightly browned.
4) With pancake turner, immediately remove cookies to wire racks; allow to cool. Store in
tightly covered container.
43
47. Appendix C
Official Market Order
Recipe: Peanut Butter Cookies
Amount
Ingredient
140.63 g
All-purpose flour
129 g
Creamy peanut butter*
111.87 g
Honey
50 g
Sugar
56.75 g
Butter or margarine
50g
Eggs, whole
1.15 g
Double-actin baking powder
Variables (* = control ingredient)
123 g
Cashew butter
128 g
Soy butter
148 g
Nutella
Market Order Sheet
Ingredient
Produce
Meats/seafood
Creamy peanut butter
Cashew butter
Soy butter
Nutella
Cold/Frozen/Dairy/ Bread
Butter or margarine, salted
Eggs, large
Baking/Canned
All-purpose flour
Honey
Sugar
Double-acting baking powder
44
Amount Needed
387 g
369 g
384 g
444 g
681 g
600 g
1687.56 g
1342.44 g
600 g
13.8 g
48. Appendix D
SPSS output
ANOVA
Sum of Squares
Sensory1Ave
Mean Square
4
.297
10.944
15
12.133
4
.131
Within Groups
28.056
15
1.870
Total
28.578
19
Between Groups
1.644
4
.411
Within Groups
9.306
15
.620
10.950
Sig.
19
.522
F
.730
Total
Sensory3Ave
1.189
Within Groups
Sensory2Ave
Between Groups
df
19
Between Groups
Total
.407
.801
.070
.990
.663
.627
Multiple Comparisons
Tukey HSD
Mean
95% Confidence Interval
Difference (IDependent Variable (I) judge
(J) judge
Sensory1Ave
2
-.08333
.60400
3
-.16667
4
-1.9484
1.7818
.60400
.999
-2.0318
1.6984
.25000
.60400
.993
-1.6151
2.1151
-.50000
.60400
.918
-2.3651
1.3651
1
.08333
.60400
1.000
-1.7818
1.9484
-.08333
.60400
1.000
-1.9484
1.7818
.33333
.60400
.980
-1.5318
2.1984
5
-.41667
.60400
.956
-2.2818
1.4484
1
.16667
.60400
.999
-1.6984
2.0318
2
.08333
.60400
1.000
-1.7818
1.9484
4
.41667
.60400
.956
-1.4484
2.2818
5
45
1.000
4
3
Upper Bound
3
2
Lower Bound
5
1
J)
Std. Error
Sig.
-.33333
.60400
.980
-2.1984
1.5318
54. Appendix E
Photographs
Figure 2.This figure shows the scale that was used to weigh each
ingredient during cookie preparation.
Photograph 1
Figure 3: This figure shows the plastic boat used to weigh each
ingredient.
Photograph 3
51
55. Figure 4: This figure shows the amount of all-purpose flour used
in the recipes.
Photograph 4
Figure 5: This figure shows the amount of honey used in
each
recipe.
Photograph 5
52
56. Figure 6: This figure shows the amount of sugar used in the recipes.
Photograph 6
Figure 7: This figures shows the amount of butter used in the each
recipe after it was softened.
Photograph 7
53
57. Figure 8: This figure shows the amount of double-acting baking
powder used in each recipe.
Photograph 8
Figure 9: This figure shows the amount of creamy peanut butter
used in the control recipe.
Photograph 9
54
58. Figure 10: This figure shows the amount of cashew butter used in
place of peanut butter in the variable 1 recipe.
Photograph 10
Figure 11: This figure shows the amount of soy butter used in place
of peanut butter in the variable 2 recipe.
Photograph 11
55
59. Figure 12: This figure shows the amount of Nutella hazelnut spread
used in the variable 3 recipe.
Photograph 12
Figure 13: This figure shows the amount of egg used in each recipe.
Photograph 13
56
60. Figure 14: This figure shows how the baking sheet was prepared
prior to baking.
Photograph 14
Figure 15: This figure shows the plate that was presented to the judges
during sensory evaluations.
Photograph 15
57
61. Figure 16: This figure shows the volumeter used to determine
the volume of a cookie from each batch.
Photograph 16
Figure 17: This figure shows the ink blot tests used to determine cell
size in a cookie from each batch.
Photograph 17
58
62. Appendix F
Bar Graphs
Bar Graph 1
Density
0.7
grams/centimeters3
0.6
0.5
0.4
Control
Cashew butter
0.3
Soy butter
0.2
Nutella
0.1
0
Week 1
Week 2
Week 3
Week
Note: This graph depicts the density of each variable obtained from data collected using the
volumeter over three consecutive weeks.
Bar Graph 1 Density
59
63. Bar Graph 2
Specific Volume
3
centimeters3/grams
2.5
2
Control
1.5
Cashew butter
Soy butter
1
Nutella
0.5
0
Week 1
Week 2
Week 3
Week
Note: This graph depicts the specific volume of each variable obtained from data collected
using the volumeter over three consecutive weeks.
Bar Graph 2 Specific Volume
60
64. Bar Graph 3
Ink Blot-cell size
1.2
1
centimeters
0.8
Control
0.6
Cashew butter
Soy butter
0.4
Nutella
0.2
0
Week 1
Week 2
Week 3
Week
Note: This chart depicts cell size of each variable obtained from data collected using ink blot
tests over three consecutive weeks.
Bar Graph 3 Ink Blot-cell size
61
