I Practiced What I Preached at SSP 2026. Here's What Happened.

Back in January, I wrote a blog about how to make conferences worth it, and tip five was all about sharing what you learned. Well, it's time to practice what I preach! 

SSP only happens every two years, and it’s the rare conference where everyone in the room speaks our language! Eight of us from MMR made the trip to Louisville this year (Huizi, Alexandra, Caitlin, Nadia, Adrianne, Ana, Shannon, and me). Between us, we had four sessions, a sunrise workshop, and six posters on the program. We split up, covered as much ground as we could, and swapped notes every night. And yes, bourbon country delivered. 

So here's what we keep talking about! 

Beth Altringer Eagle kicked things off with her keynote, "Training Taste & Creativity," and it set the tone for the whole week. Sensory expertise and creativity aren't gifts you're born with. You build them through practice, exposure, and play! She also made the point that when experts judge a product, they aren't just asking whether they like it. They want to know if it delivers what they were looking for. (Bonus: my favorite slide of the week was "Air is our water. Smell is how we read it." I'm still thinking about it.) 

That theme popped up all over the place. My favorite stat of the conference? Penn State asked people if they'd try cell-cultivated meat, and more than 90% said yes. Then they put them in a virtual reality buffet, and 47% didn't pick a single one! 

So a great liking score is lovely, but it won't tell you if people will actually choose your product, keep buying it, or come back for more. If your go/no-go still rests on mean liking, it might be time to look a little deeper. (This is exactly why we built our Product Potential Rating™!) 

Some of my favorite studies were also the simplest. Cargill served the exact same chicken twice. Blind, nobody could tell a difference. But once it was labeled "fresh" versus "frozen"? Fresh won on liking, juiciness, and purchase intent. Same chicken! NC State found something similar with coffee, which people liked more in a ceramic mug than in a foam cup. 

I know, it sounds obvious. But when you're designing a test on a tight deadline, it's so easy to forget. If the setting, the serving, or the label doesn't match how people will really meet your product, your results probably won't either.

How and where someone experiences a product changes what they notice, so it should change how we test it. 

Okay, AI. It was everywhere (shocker, I know). The sessions that stuck with me were less about shiny tools and more about what AI actually needs from us to work. PepsiCo talked about the "invisible work" of connecting sensory, analytical, and consumer data before you even start building a model. And the closing panel nailed it: 

AI only tells us what we already know, and consumers never stop changing. 

The tools keep getting better, and fast. But what really gives a brand the edge is the sensory data underneath, and that data has to be clean, well structured, and grounded in real people.

Okay, proud colleague moment! Here are a few highlights from our team: 

• Huizi Yu shared Sensory AI Drivers+ (SAID+), which gives preference-mapping-style insight from smaller studies. 
• Alexandra Kuzmina had two sessions! She took on "System 3," the AI layer now sitting in every sensory team, and presented Future Scenario Priming with PepsiCo. 
• Caitlin McLean presented two Sensory Bot™ studies, from unbranded sunscreen in Thailand to in-car air fresheners over 30 days. She also kicked off day two with a sunrise workshop on designing products for joy. 
• Nadia Byrnes introduced our Product Potential Rating™, built for exactly the problem in point one. 
• Adrianne Johnson led a workshop on panelist engagement with Christopher Simons of Ohio State, looking at how to keep sensory panels motivated (and why it matters for data quality). 
• Ana Quintero shared two posters with Bayer on DHA, showing how descriptive sensory data can guide ingredient choices and cost-saving supplier swaps. 

Busy week!

The closing session was such a great way to end. SSP's founders got a standing ovation (so deserved!), and their message really stuck with me. Our job isn't just to trust the data. It's to make it matter to the business. Edgar Chambers boiled it down to three questions I am 100% stealing: So what? Now what? Then what? 

Our own Nadia summed it up for the team: "Our scientific foundation is non-negotiable. But maintaining that foundation doesn't mean standing still." 

Consider this the highlight reel! We are working on a Conference Wrapped, our recap of every conference we've been to in 2026 (SSP included). It's coming soon, so keep an eye out!