Visualizing the Impact of Emulsifiers on Emulsion Perception

Jan 13, 2014 | Contact Author | By: Chris Dederen, Jennifer Donahue and Cornelis Verboom; Croda, Edison, NJ, USA
Your message has been sent.
(click to close)
Contact the Author
Save
This item has been saved to your library.
View My Library
(click to close)
Save to My Library
Title: Visualizing the Impact of Emulsifiers on Emulsion Perception
sensoryx emulsifiersx mappingx mathematical modelx principal component analysisx
  • Article
  • Media
  • Keywords/Abstract
  • Related Material

Keywords: sensory | emulsifiers | mapping | mathematical model | principal component analysis

Abstract: This paper describes an approach to systematically investigate the intrinsic effects of emulsifiers, quantify them and translate them into consumer preferences. These are processed mathematically and displayed in a simplified, two-dimensional map to assist formulation work.

View citation for this article

C Dederen, J Donahue and C Verboom, Visualizing the impact of emulsifiers on emulsion perception, Cosm & Toil 128(12) 884-891 (Dec 2013)

Excerpt Only This is a shortened version or summary of the article you requested. To view the complete article, please log in or create an account. Registration is Free!

When formulating skin care emulsions, ingredient suppliers and formulators often focus on the technical requirements for the shelf-life stability of the end product. However, consumers consider it a given that the product will remain stable for months, even under harsh conditions. The sensory perception of the product and belief that the product delivers on its promise are far more important. Even performance claims supported by objective clinical evidence are strongly influenced by the aesthetic properties of the product both on the shelf and especially during use. Thus, the tactile sensory properties of a cosmetic product intended for application to the skin—the largest and most sensitive organ—are crucial to the product’s commercial success.

It is not easy for formulators to get a product’s aesthetics right. Usually the relationship between sensory perception and formulation acceptance by consumers is far from straightforward and depends on many uncontrollable parameters. Detailed and systematic consumer research is necessary to understand the sensory preferences of target market segments. Further, in trying to express their preferences, consumers often use unclear definitions and product descriptors.

However, if the sample size is large enough, one can group these descriptors and look for a relationship with the chemistry and physics of the formulation. Many such attempts have been made in the past 40 or more years and can be found in literature, but there remains a need for a bridge between qualitative consumer language and clearly defined sensory attributes based on the chemistry and physics of a formulation. Understanding the quantitative or even qualitative impact of ingredients is a complex task, especially given the complexity of formulations and enormous choice of ingredients.

Navigating regulatory and brand-specific restrictions, formulators tend to choose emulsifiers conservatively because they are viewed mainly as technical ingredients to keep oils and aqueous solutions together for a given length of time. The amounts of other ingredients, especially emollient oils, are considered less risky to adjust in a formula when fine-tuning it for skin feel. Here, the authors describe an approach to investigate the intrinsic effects of emulsifiers and quantify them before attempting to translate them into regional consumer sensory preferences.

Excerpt Only This is a shortened version or summary of the article you requested. To view the complete article, please log in or create an account. Registration is Free!

 

Close

Figure 1. Loading plot of the sensory attribute data for 300 samples

Figure 1. Loading plot of the sensory attribute data for 300 samples

Loading plot of the sensory attribute data for the approx. 300 samples tested; the PCA plot compares and correlates quantified properties, in this case sensory attributes, between many different samples

Figure 2. Score plot of tested simple and complex commercial formulations

Figure 2. Score plot of tested simple and complex commercial formulations

Score plot of tested simple and complex commercial formulations; a score plot uses the same PCA-generated data but now the individual emulsions that were taken into the PCA calculation to generate the 2D map are put onto the 2D map.

Figure 3. Biopolymer stabilized emulsions on the sensory PCA map

Figure 3. Biopolymer stabilized emulsions on the sensory PCA map

In the first example, biopolymer stabilized emulsions made with 1% emulsion stabilizer and 10% emollient were mapped and appeared in a cluster.

Figure 4. PCA analysis of the emulsions in Figure 3

Figure 4. PCA analysis of the emulsions in Figure 3

PCA analysis of the emulsions in Figure 3 split by the attributes: a) initial appearance, pick-up and rub-out; and b) after feel, immediate and 20-min

Figure 5. PCA analysis on hydrosome-stabilized emulsions

Figure 5. PCA analysis on hydrosome-stabilized emulsions

PCA analysis on hydrosome-stabilized emulsions split over the attributes: a) the initial appearance, pick-up and rub-out; and b) after feel, immediate and 20-min

Figure 6. Simple w/o emulsions based on 2% waxy polymeric emulsifier and 20% oil

Figure 6. Simple w/o emulsions based on 2% waxy polymeric emulsifier and 20% oil

The results of a polymeric w/o emulsifier used at 2% with 20% emollient; here, the map is spread out across the PCA plot. Increasing oil viscosity moves the sample data points from the left to the right in the diagram, confirming that the impact of emollient choice is more important in w/o systems than in o/w systems.

Figure 7. Sensory map of emulsions containing PPG-3 benzyl ether myristate as an emollient

Figure 7. Sensory map of emulsions containing PPG-3 benzyl ether myristate as an emollient

Sensory map of emulsions containing PPG-3 benzyl ether myristate as an emollient; note that this emollient was chosen in part due to its “silicone-like” sensory claim

Figure 8. Patterns in the PCA sensory map:

Figure 8. Patterns in the PCA sensory map:

Patterns in the PCA sensory map: a) connect sample positions to qualitative descriptions, and b) are divided into market language quadrants.

Footnotes [Dederen 128(12)]

a The Sensification model,
b Versaflex V-150 (INCI: Steareth-2 (and) Steareth-100 (and) Xanthan Gum (and) Mannan Gum),
c Aracel LC (INCI: Sorbitan Stearate (and) Sorbityl Laurate),
d Cithrol DPHS (INCI: PEG-30 Dipolyhydroxystearate),
e Crodamol STS (INCI: PPG-3 Benzyl Ether Myristate), and
f The Sensory Selector Grid are products of, and part of the Sensification kit provided by, Croda Inc., www.crodausa.com.

Next image >