JOURNAL OF COSMETIC SCIENCE 532 As shown in Table IV, consumers’ liking scores were also signifi cantly affected by emul- sion formulation. Consumers showed a higher liking for samples formulated with emul- sion B (Table V), which indicates that consumers’ liking of refreshing creams increased as the freshness sensation increased. Consumers in Buenos Aires and Montevideo showed highly signifi cant differences in the degree of preference for the evaluated refreshing creams, which could be related to the fact that they perceived their freshness differently. This stresses the importance of per- forming cross-cultural studies when developing cosmetics for different markets. CONCLUSIONS Results from the present work showed that emulsion formulation has a great effect on freshness perception. This suggests that when evaluating refreshing agents or developing refreshing products, different formulations should be considered in order to obtain accurate results and assure the products’ success in the market. Although dementholated peppermint oil had a lower concentration of menthol than common peppermint oil, it contained several other components that cause the freshness sensation in the fi rst minutes after application. This oil could be used to formulate cheaper refreshing creams with re- spect to common peppermint oil because of the lower price of the former product. Consumers’ freshness evaluation was similar to that of trained assessors, indicating the validity of gathering information about the sensory characteristics of cosmetic products from consumers. Consumers from different cities evaluated their preference of refreshing creams in signifi cantly different ways, showing the importance of performing cross-cultural studies when developing cosmetic products aimed at different markets. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors are indebted to Aromática S.A. (Buenos Aires, Argentina) for providing the samples of peppermint oil evaluated in the present study. REFERENCES (1) S. C. Sweetman, Martindale: The Complete Drug Reference (Kathleen Parfi t, USA), pp. 1600–1602. (2) P. P. Gerbino, Remington: The Science and Practice of Pharmacy., Vol. II (Mack Publishing Company, USA, 1995), pp. 875. (3) E. Carretero, Terpenos: Aceites esenciales, Panorama Actual Med., 24, 297–303 (2000). (4) P. Ody, Las Plantas Medicinales. The Herb Society (Javier Vergara S.A., Spain, 1993), pp. 79. (5) Cosmetic Bench Reference (Allured Publishing Corporation, Carol Stream, IL, 1998). (6) I. S. Ale, J. J. Hostynek, and H. I. Maibach, Menthol: A review of its sensitization potential, Exog. Dermatol., 1, 74–78 (2002). (7) M. B. Erman, Cooling agents and skin care applications, Cosmet. Toiletr., 120, 109–110 (2005). (8) M. Rieger, “Factors Affecting Sorption of Topical Applied Substances,” in Skin Permeation: Fundamentals and Application, J. Zatz, Ed. (Allured Publishing Corporation, Carol Stream, IL, 1993). (9) H. Stone and J. L. Siedel. Sensory Evaluation Practices (Academic Press, UK, 1985). (10) M. Meilgaard, G. V. Civille, and B. T. Carr. Sensory Evaluation Techniques (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1999).

FRESHNESS EVALUATION OF REFRESHING CREAMS 533 (11) G. V. Civille and C. A. Dus, Evaluating tactile properties of skincare products: A descriptive analysis technique, Cosmet. Toiletr., 106, 83–88 (1991). (12) V. A. L. Wortel and J. W. Wiechers, Skin sensory performance of individual personal care ingredients and marketed personal care products, Food Qual. Pref., 11, 121–127 (2000). (13) M. E. Parente, A. Gámbaro, and G. Solana, Study of sensory properties of emollients used in cosmetics and their correlation with physicochemical properties, J. Cosmet. Sci., 56, 175–182 (2005). (14) I. F. Almeida, A. R. Gaio, and M. F. Bahia, Hedonic and descriptive skinfeel analysis of two oleogels: Comparison with other topical formulations, J. Sensory Stud., 23, 92–113 (2008). (15) M. E. Parente, A. Gámbaro, and G. Ares, Sensory characterization of emollients, J. Sensory Stud., 23, 149–161 (2008). (16) W. Eisfeld, F. Schaefer, W. Boucsein, and C. Stolz, Tracking intersensory properties of cosmetic products via pshyco-physiological assessment, IFSCC Mag., 8, 25–30 (2005). (17) J. Jacobs and W. Johncock, Some like it cool, Cosmet. Toiletr., 4, 26–31 (1999). (18) J. Close, The concept of sensory quality, J. Soc. Cosmet. Chem., 45, 95–107 (1994). (19) H. Stone and J. Sidel, Sensory evaluation for skin care products, Cosmet. Toiletr., 101, 45 (1986). (20) J. Wiechers and V. Wortel, Creating effective claim support packages, Cosmet. Toiletr., 114, 51 (1999). (21) J. Wiechers and V. Wortel, Making sense of sensory data, Cosmet. Toiletr., 115, 37 (2000). (22) F. Husson, S. Le Dien, and J. Pagès, Which value can be granted to sensory profi les given by consumers? Methodology and results, Food Qual. Pref., 12, 291–296 (2001). (23) T. Worch, S. Le, and P. Punter, How reliable are the consumers? Comparison of sensory profi les from consumers and experts, Food Qual. Pref., 21, 309–318 (2010). (24) ISO 8589, Sensory analysis: General guidance for the design of test rooms (International Standards Organization (ISO), Switzerland, 1988). (25) V. Zague, D. De Oliveira, D. De Almeida, A. Rolim, J. Herman, M. Kaneko, and M. V. Robles, Infl u- ence of storage temperature on cooling intensity of topical emulsions containing encapsulated menthol, J. Sensory Stud., 23, 26–34 (2008).