Table 6.

Overview of key findings across measurement approaches and taste sensations.

Variable	Methods	Tastes	Groups	Gender Effects
Sensitivity	DT positively correlates to RT DT and RT negatively correlate to taste responsiveness (r = −0.14/DT, r = −0.11/RT, p < 0.01) PROP responsiveness positively correlates to taste responsiveness (r = 0.13, p < 0.01)	Caffeine sensitivity correlates moderately to quinine sensitivity for DT, RT, and responsiveness, respectively (r = 0.38, r = 0.36, r = 0.47, p < 0.01) Caffeine and quinine sensitivities (DT, RT, responsiveness) do not correlate with PROP responsiveness Responsiveness to salty and umami, respectively (r = 0.26, r = 0.24, p < 0.05) have positive correlation with PROP responsiveness Responsiveness to quinine is most subject to individual variations Sweetness and bitterness from caffeine easiest tastes to name correctly Saltiness and umami hardest tastes to name correctly	PROP phenotype: 13% nontasters, 51% medium-tasters, 36% supertasters Fat sensitivity: 42.5% fat-sensitive and 52.5% nonsensitive	Boys are marginally less sensitive than girls towards sweetness and bitterness according to DT (p = 0.08)
Taste liking	Taste liking does not correlate with taste sensitivity	Fat-sensitive children prefer low-fat milk samples Non-fat-sensitive children prefer high-fat milk samples and state higher liking of fatty foods (p = 0.04)	NA	Marginally higher liking score for sweet and bitter tastes (p < 0.1) in boys compared to girls
Food liking	Food liking poorly correlates to basic taste sensitivity measures except for Umami sensitivity (DT)	Positively driven by sweetness and fattiness characteristics Negatively driven by bitterness and umami characteristics	Fat-sweet likers (40%), sour likers (28%), bitter-umami likers (32%)	No gender effect observed for food liking

DT = Detection threshold, RT = Recognition threshold, NA = Not applicable.