Four practical signals for product, sensory and consumer teams following EuroSense, Oslo
At EuroSense 2026 in Oslo, one message came through clearly: the future of product success will depend on understanding not only what people say they like, but also how biology, context, emotion and everyday constraints shape what they actually choose.
For CPG and FMCG teams, that expands the role of sensory and consumer science. It is no longer simply a final check on taste or texture. Used well, it can help identify more relevant innovation spaces, guide reformulation without sacrificing enjoyment, design more inclusive products and create stronger experiences in the moments that matter.
Curion was represented by Keren Novack, Richard Heath, Kate Binner, Ellie Atack, Hannah Over, and Becky Coates.
Here are four themes from the conference that we believe deserve a place in brand, category and innovation conversations.
1. Move beyond stated liking, but keep new measures grounded
A striking area of discussion was the use of physiological measures to explore responses that consumers may not be able to articulate.
One presentation examined brain activation alongside pleasant and unpleasant taste experiences. The promise is significant: richer evidence could help explain why a product succeeds or fails when conventional ratings alone do not tell the whole story.
However, the chocolate example presented also showed inconsistent patterns across different preference groups. The implication for businesses is not to abandon these tools, but to treat them as complementary evidence.
Neuroscience, emotion measures and implicit techniques can deepen understanding when they are triangulated with robust sensory data, behavioral observation and the consumer’s own language.
Client takeaway: Build an evidence stack rather than relying on a single “next-generation” metric. The strongest decisions connect what consumers say, what they sense, what they feel and what they do.
2. Health-led innovation must protect the eating experience
Several sessions demonstrated why “better for you” cannot be treated as a purely nutritional brief.
Research into taste perception among people with Type 2 diabetes suggested that bitterness, rather than sweetness, may be perceived differently. With dietary change and GLP-1 use becoming increasingly relevant contexts, the findings raise useful questions about how products are experienced by different consumer groups.
Sodium reduction research in school lunches offered a practical reformulation lesson. In a vegetable pasta Bolognese, approaches using flavor-building cues, particularly citric acid and fond, came closest to the original recipe. This reinforces a broader principle: successful reduction strategies compensate intelligently for the sensory role an ingredient plays, rather than simply taking it away.
Presentations focused on people undergoing cancer treatment made the same point from a more complex perspective. Nutritional density, ease of swallowing and practicality matter, but so do variety, pleasure and familiar appeal. Metallic taste, altered sweetness and sodium perception, heightened sensitivity, food neophobia and negative associations can all change the experience of eating.
Client takeaway: Define health innovation around the whole experience. Segment by relevant sensory needs, test compensating flavor and texture strategies, and make pleasure a design requirement, not a trade-off.
3. Context can be as influential as the product
Cross-category research reinforced that sensory drivers do not transfer neatly from one occasion to another.
Carbonation may be central to the appeal of some alcoholic drinks, while heat and spice may carry greater weight in savory snacks. A universal preference model risks missing the cues that create value within a specific category, format and moment.
Research into real-world eating made the influence of context even clearer. When a chicken wrap was the default, more people chose it; when a vegetarian wrap became the default, choices moved in the same direction. Consumers still had freedom, but the environment made one decision easier than the other.
This has powerful implications for sustainable innovation. Good intentions and willpower are fragile in tempting or inconvenient environments. Brands can increase adoption by making the desired choice visible, easy, attractive and rewarding, and by framing plant-forward products around their own positive experience rather than as substitutes pretending to be something else.
Client takeaway: Test the product in its decision environment. Packaging architecture, menu position, defaults, availability, claims and occasion cues can all shape behavior alongside sensory performance.
4. Better tools still need human judgement and engagement
AI-generated recipes illustrated both the potential and the current limits of automated creativity.
A request for ratatouille produced a recipe with too many steps and too many unlikely household ingredients. The lesson extends well beyond recipe generation: outputs must be judged against the realities of the consumer, the kitchen, the supply chain and the brand.
Other sessions explored innovation in the research process itself. Gamification may make sensory panel training more collaborative and encourage discussion and knowledge-sharing, although further validation is needed. At the same time, increasingly narrow recruitment specifications can create complexity without always increasing relevance. Long questionnaires and opaque study objectives can also reduce participant engagement.
The opportunity is to design research experiences as carefully as product experiences. Participants who understand the purpose, feel involved and see the value of their contribution are more likely to provide thoughtful feedback. Technology can support that process, but clear objectives, sound methods and expert interpretation remain essential.
Client takeaway: Use AI and novel research tools to amplify expertise, not replace it. Start with the decision the business needs to make, recruit people who genuinely represent that decision and design participation to sustain attention and motivation.
Closing out EuroSense 2026
EuroSense 2026 pointed towards a more connected model of innovation: one that combines sensory performance with emotion, behavior, context and individual need. For FMCG and CPG leaders, four priorities stand out:
- Triangulate stated preference with sensory, emotional and behavioral evidence
- Make enjoyment a non-negotiable part of health and reformulation briefs
- Design for the real decision environment, not only the controlled test
- Apply AI and emerging methods with clear objectives, validation and human judgement
The commercial value lies in turning these principles into better questions earlier in the innovation process, before propositions, products and packs become expensive to change.
What could this unlock for your portfolio?
If you are navigating reformulation, changing health needs, sustainable choice, new research technology or a stubborn gap between claimed preference and real-world behavior, Curion can help turn these signals into an actionable learning plan.