Pieter Punter

1.1k total citations
21 papers, 629 citations indexed

About

Pieter Punter is a scholar working on Food Science, Biomedical Engineering and Social Psychology. According to data from OpenAlex, Pieter Punter has authored 21 papers receiving a total of 629 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 13 papers in Food Science, 7 papers in Biomedical Engineering and 6 papers in Social Psychology. Recurrent topics in Pieter Punter's work include Sensory Analysis and Statistical Methods (13 papers), Advanced Chemical Sensor Technologies (7 papers) and Biochemical Analysis and Sensing Techniques (6 papers). Pieter Punter is often cited by papers focused on Sensory Analysis and Statistical Methods (13 papers), Advanced Chemical Sensor Technologies (7 papers) and Biochemical Analysis and Sensing Techniques (6 papers). Pieter Punter collaborates with scholars based in Netherlands, France and Germany. Pieter Punter's co-authors include Thierry Worch, Sébastien Lê, Garmt Dijksterhuis, J.C.M. van Trijp, Évelyne Vigneau, El Mostafa Qannari, Wendy V. Wismer, Dawn Homer, A. J. Kempster and M. Bonneau and has published in prestigious journals such as Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, Behavioural Brain Research and Meat Science.

In The Last Decade

Pieter Punter

21 papers receiving 582 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late) cites · hero ref

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
Pieter Punter Netherlands 16 373 209 199 139 125 21 629
John Lawlor Ireland 16 425 1.1× 230 1.1× 297 1.5× 99 0.7× 34 0.3× 31 708
KWANG‐OK KIM South Korea 15 537 1.4× 294 1.4× 124 0.6× 84 0.6× 36 0.3× 22 627
F. M. Sawyer United States 10 334 0.9× 161 0.8× 173 0.9× 113 0.8× 47 0.4× 15 556
Alejandra M. Muñoz United States 11 391 1.0× 183 0.9× 191 1.0× 31 0.2× 54 0.4× 17 553
Zoltán Kókai Hungary 17 354 0.9× 217 1.0× 89 0.4× 76 0.5× 203 1.6× 61 882
Irene A. Baxter United Kingdom 10 600 1.6× 301 1.4× 235 1.2× 53 0.4× 75 0.6× 14 813
M.R. McDaniel United States 19 550 1.5× 255 1.2× 244 1.2× 101 0.7× 108 0.9× 39 745
Klaus Dürrschmid Austria 10 286 0.8× 226 1.1× 52 0.3× 96 0.7× 42 0.3× 14 479
Maximo C. Gacula United States 12 322 0.9× 145 0.7× 131 0.7× 41 0.3× 64 0.5× 28 641

Countries citing papers authored by Pieter Punter

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Pieter Punter's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Pieter Punter with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Pieter Punter more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Pieter Punter

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Pieter Punter. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Pieter Punter. The network helps show where Pieter Punter may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Pieter Punter

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Pieter Punter. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Pieter Punter based on the total number of citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together. Node borders signify the number of papers an author published with Pieter Punter. Pieter Punter is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown
1.
Krüsemann, Erna J Z, Marlou Lasschuijt, Cees de Graaf, et al.. (2018). Sensory analysis of characterising flavours: evaluating tobacco product odours using an expert panel. Tobacco Control. 28(2). 152–160. 16 indexed citations
2.
Krüsemann, Erna J Z, et al.. (2016). The Sensory Difference Threshold of Menthol Odor in Flavored Tobacco Determined by Combining Sensory and Chemical Analysis. Chemical Senses. 42(3). bjw123–bjw123. 12 indexed citations
3.
Worch, Thierry, et al.. (2012). Construction of an Ideal Map (IdMap) based on the ideal profiles obtained directly from consumers. Food Quality and Preference. 26(1). 93–104. 16 indexed citations
4.
Worch, Thierry, Sébastien Lê, Pieter Punter, & Jérôme Pagès. (2012). Extension of the consistency of the data obtained with the Ideal Profile Method: Would the ideal products be more liked than the tested products?. Food Quality and Preference. 26(1). 74–80. 19 indexed citations
5.
Worch, Thierry, et al.. (2012). Ideal Profile Method (IPM): The ins and outs. Food Quality and Preference. 28(1). 45–59. 28 indexed citations
6.
Worch, Thierry, et al.. (2011). Assessment of the consistency of ideal profiles according to non-ideal data for IPM. Food Quality and Preference. 24(1). 99–110. 23 indexed citations
7.
Punter, Pieter, et al.. (2010). Perceptual attributes of poultry and other meat products: A repertory grid application. Meat Science. 87(4). 349–355. 25 indexed citations
8.
Worch, Thierry, Lauren Dooley, Jean‐François Meullenet, & Pieter Punter. (2010). Comparison of PLS dummy variables and Fishbone method to determine optimal product characteristics from ideal profiles. Food Quality and Preference. 21(8). 1077–1087. 19 indexed citations
9.
Punter, Pieter & Thierry Worch. (2009). THE IDEAL PROFILE METHOD: COMBINING CLASSICAL PROFILING WITH JAR METHODOLOGY. 2 indexed citations
10.
Worch, Thierry, Sébastien Lê, & Pieter Punter. (2009). How reliable are the consumers? Comparison of sensory profiles from consumers and experts. Food Quality and Preference. 21(3). 309–318. 108 indexed citations
11.
Trijp, J.C.M. van, et al.. (2007). The quest for the ideal product: Comparing different methods and approaches. Food Quality and Preference. 18(5). 729–740. 51 indexed citations
12.
Vigneau, Évelyne, et al.. (2001). Segmentation of a panel of consumers using clustering of variables around latent directions of preference. Food Quality and Preference. 12(5-7). 359–363. 34 indexed citations
13.
Matthews, K.R., Dawn Homer, Pieter Punter, et al.. (2000). An international study on the importance of androstenone and skatole for boar taint: III. Consumer survey in seven European countries. Meat Science. 54(3). 271–283. 77 indexed citations
14.
Dijksterhuis, Garmt, et al.. (1994). Principal component analysis of TI-curves: Three methods compared. Food Quality and Preference. 5(1-2). 121–127. 28 indexed citations
15.
Dijksterhuis, Garmt & Pieter Punter. (1990). Interpreting generalized procrustes analysis ‘analysis of variance’ tables. Food Quality and Preference. 2(4). 255–265. 45 indexed citations
16.
Punter, Pieter, et al.. (1989). Sensory evidence for olfactory receptors with opposite chiral selectivity. Behavioural Brain Research. 31(3). 199–206. 23 indexed citations
17.
Köster, E.P., et al.. (1985). Direct scaling of odour annoyance by population panels. TNO Repository. 561. 299–312. 3 indexed citations
18.
Punter, Pieter. (1983). Measurement of human olfactory thresholds for several groups of structurally related compounds. Chemical Senses. 7(3-4). 215–235. 66 indexed citations
19.
Menco, Bert Ph. M., et al.. (1980). Determination of odour affinities based on the dose-response relationships of the frog's electro-olfactogram. Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences. 36(2). 213–215. 20 indexed citations
20.
Punter, Pieter, et al.. (1979). Experimental assessment of human olfactory thresholds in air for some thiols and alkanes. Chemical Senses. 4(4). 351–354. 3 indexed citations

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact

Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by John Lawlor Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by KWANG‐OK KIM Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by F. M. Sawyer Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Alejandra M. Muñoz Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Zoltán Kókai Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Irene A. Baxter Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by M.R. McDaniel Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Klaus Dürrschmid Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Maximo C. Gacula
Rankless by CCL
2026