13 Mar Highlights from the NZOZ Sensory Symposium 2026
The program was packed with thought-provoking presentations and discussions. Keynote speaker Professor Liesbeth Zandstra’s research explores new ways to make healthy and sustainable food choice the preferred choice.
key take outs:
-
Consumer acceptance will drop if a sense of reward is not preserved in reformulation.
-
Salt can be gradually reduced: Incremental salt reduction can work effectively, allowing taste preferences to adapt without compromising enjoyment.
-
Sugar needs compensation: Unlike salt, sugar reduction typically requires replacement strategies such as sweeteners or sugar alternatives to maintain appeal.
-
Use health claims carefully: “Reduced” labelling can unintentionally lower taste expectations and should be applied with caution.
-
Think beyond sugar, salt and fat: Healthier products are most successful when they deliver a strong sense of reward beyond just sugar, salt, or fat. This can be through sensory qualities, packaging, behavioural or physical benefits or the eating context.
Reformulation without compromising reward
Reward drives behaviour. People engage in behaviours that feel rewarding. In food, this reward can be immediate (e.g. taste, satiety, price) or delayed (e.g. long-term health benefits, weight management). While both can impact food choices, people are most often driven by immediate rewards.
When it comes to developing healthier food products this presents a challenge as when we reduce fat, sugar or salt we are removing rewarding ingredients. If nothing replaces this reward, consumers will notice and disengage.
Salt preferences can be shifted gradually. Gradual reductions in salt can shift the optimum preferred salt concentration downwards over time. By reducing salt in small, incremental steps, consumers’ taste preferences can adapt naturally without a noticeable loss of enjoyment (to a certain extent). However, a change in consumer behaviour is also required to ensure that reduced salt products are accepted by consumers, and they don’t add salt back into the products.
Sweet preferences are more resistant to change. Unlike salt, they are not easily shifted through gradual exposure. Reducing sugar also reduces energy, and biologically we are wired to seek energy for survival. As a result, sugar reduction needs to be approached differently. Rather than simply reducing sweetness, it typically requires compensation through alternatives such as artificial sweeteners or sugar replacers to maintain perceived reward.
Reward can be interchangeable. While there are limits to how much sugar, salt, and fat can be reduced, these rewards can, to some extent, be compensated for by other rewarding attributes. These may include appealing sensory characteristics, positive product cues or communication, behavioural rewards, physical benefits, or the context in which the product is consumed.
Interestingly, the way we communicate reformulation also matters. Products labelled as “reduced salt” can suffer can negatively influence taste expectations, the tasting experience, and perceived saltiness. In some cases, it may even prompt consumers to add more salt than they would to the standard product, undermining the intended health benefit.
Want to learn more?
If you’d like to discuss how we can assist you with product reformulation, please Contact Us.
