RHEOLOGICAL AND SKIN SENSORY PROPERTIES OF COSMETIC EMULSIONS 75 emulsions. The results showed that thickening agents play an important role in the sen- sory properties of the fi nal formulas. Cellulose derivative-based emulsions tend to have lower fi rmness, G′, G″, yield stress and viscosity, more gloss, easier spread as lotions, more hydration feel and less oil feel during rubbing in, and lower absorbency, whereas synthetic polymer-based emulsions have the opposite sensory impacts on skin, and better suspension and stability. These results could be used as a valuable reference point for formulators to optimize the skin sensory attributes of cosmetic emulsions with different thickening agents. REFERENCES (1) S. Ozkan, T. W. Gillec e, L. Senak, and D. J. Moore, Characterization of yield stress and slip behaviour of skin/hair care gels using steady fl ow and LAOS measurements and their correlation with sensorial attributes, Int. J. Cosmet. Sci., 34, 193–201 (2012). (2) M. Lukic, I. Jaksic, V . Krstonosic, N. Cekic, and S. Savic, A combined approach in characterization of an effective w/o hand cream: The infl uence of emollient on textural, sensorial and in vivo skin perfor- mance, Int. J. Cosmet. Sci., 34, 140–149 (2012). (3) S. Tamburic, Q. M. Cra ig, G. Vuleta, and J. Millic, An investigation into the use of thermorheology and texture analysis in the evaluation of W/O creams stabilized with a silicone emulsifi er, Pharm. Dev. Technol., 1, 299–306 (1996). (4) M. Bekker, G. V. Webbe r, and N. R. Louw, Relating rheological measurements to primary and second- ary skin feeling when mineral-based and Fischer-Tropsch wax-based cosmetic emulsions and jellies are applied to the skin, Int. J. Cosmet. Sci., 35, 354–361 (2013). (5) S. Wang, M. S. Kislali oglu, and M. Breuer, The effect of rheological properties of experimental moistur- izing creams/lotions on their effi cacy and perceptual attributes, Int. J. Cosmet. Sci., 21, 167–188 (1999). (6) G. Savary, M. Grisel, and C. Picard, Impact of emollients on the spreading properties of cosmetic prod- ucts: A combined sensory and instrumental characterization, Colloids Surf. B Biointerfaces, 102, 371–378 (2013). (7) L. Gilbert, C. Picard, G. Savary, and M. Grisel, Impact of polymers on texture properties of cosmetic emulsions: A methodological approach, J. Sens. Stud., 27, 392–402 (2012). (8) “Standard Practice for Descriptive SkinFeel Analysis of Creams and Lotions”, ASTM, E 1490-03 https://www.astm.org/DATABASE.CART/HISTORICAL/E1490-03.htm. (9) H. Fares, K. Deruddre, M. A. Gidel, T. Gillece, and R. L. Mcmullen, The versatility of hydrophobically modifi ed hydroxyethylcellulose in skin care formulations, SOFW J., 141, 2–8 (2015). (10) J. Martin, Yield stres s measurements for personal care, C & T, 130, 44–56 (2015). Tab le VI PCC among Rheological Parameters and Sensory Evaluation Attributesa Peak after pick up Firmness Spreadability Absorbency Viscosity at 0.1 s-1 0.83 0.88 -0.80 0.81 Viscosity at 1 s-1 0.83 0.87 -0.81 0.80 Viscosity at 10 s-1 0.90 0.94 -0.85 0.83 Viscosity at 100 s-1 0.93 0.97 -0.87 0.83 G′ 0.88 0.90 -0.80 0.81 G″ 0.91 0.92 -0.85 0.84 Yield stress 0.86 0.91 -0.85 0.81 a All have signifi cant correlation (p  0.05).