Article

Cite This: J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 95, 1307−1315 pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc

Chemistry of Candy: A Sweet Approach to Teaching Nonscience

Majors
Jennifer Logan Bayline,* Halie M. Tucci, David W. Miller, Kaitlin D. Roderick, and Patricia A. Brletic
Department of Chemistry, Washington & Jefferson College, Washington, Pennsylvania 15301, United States
*
S Supporting Information

ABSTRACT: Candy, an everyday treat, is a convenient theme for teaching

chemistry. Making candy incorporates solution concentration, colligative
properties, and phase transformations while flavoring and color reflect synthesis
or extraction. In this article, a nonscience major laboratory course on candy
Downloaded by UNIV TECNOLOGICA DE PEREIRA at 22:27:16:242 on June 04, 2019

chemistry is presented. The course combines laboratory experiments and candy-

making exercises, illustrating general chemistry principles and data collection.
For example, students investigate crystal formation with rock candy and fudge,
browning reactions with UV−vis spectroscopy and caramels, enzyme kinetics
from https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00739.

with polarimetry and cherry cordials, and freezing point depression with
temperature measurements and ice cream. Imitation and natural flavors are
obtained through Fischer esterification and distillation, respectively, while
colorants are characterized through chromatography and spectroscopy. The
course incorporates statistics through sensory analysis and color distribution.
Student assessment and feedback as well as a poster/tasting session are also described.
KEYWORDS: High School/Introductory Chemistry, Curriculum, Interdisciplinary/Multidisciplinary, Laboratory Instruction,
Hands-On Learning/Manipulatives, Applications of Chemistry, Consumer Chemistry

■ INTRODUCTION
Candy is a confection based on sugar. Making it involves
January term over the past four years, the course meets every
week day for 3 h. The class comprises 12 students with one
instructor and one student assistant and is held in both a food-
heating an unsaturated aqueous sugar solution to achieve a
safe classroom (for candy exercises) and an organic chemistry
desired concentration through water evaporation followed by
laboratory (for nonedible experiments). It counts as a general
cooling. If heated to a high enough temperature and left
laboratory requirement for graduation and is always fully
undisturbed, glass formation can occur. If stirred, crystallization
enrolled with a wait list. Table 1 presents a list of topics,
ensues. Additives can cause gelation, chemical reactions, or
concepts, skills, exercises, and experiments included in the
emulsification. Examples include gelatin (gelation), cream of
course. Candy recipes and explanations of the science behind
tartar (sugar inversion), and milk proteins (emulsification).
them can be found in Supporting Information.

Colors and flavors are obtained through synthesis or extraction.
As such, candy encompasses a variety of concepts and skills
inherent to chemistry.
Candy-based chemistry teaching appears in numerous guises.
For example, candy has been used to teach stoichiometry,1,2
atomic orbitals,3 kinetics,4 and statistics.5 In this Journal alone,
candy has been analyzed by calorimetry,6 liquid chromatog-
raphy,7,8 and gas chromatography mass spectrometry.9 (Many
other examples exist and are compiled in Supporting
Information.) Weaving candy into the science classroom is
often described10−12 and was even the theme for National
Chemistry Week in 2014.13
Despite such an array of topics, an actual course on candy
chemistry has not been reported in this Journal. While food
chemistry is a common theme and often includes a candy
unit,14,15 the only candy course we could find through an
Internet search is a two-week technology one at the University
of WisconsinMadison.16
In this article, we describe a laboratory candy chemistry
course for nonscience majors. Offered during our three-week
© 2018 American Chemical Society and
Division of Chemical Education, Inc.
■
CANDY SCIENCE
The magic of candy making lies in sugar concentration and
heating/cooling such that crystallization or an amorphous,
sometimes glassy, state often results. The glass transition
temperature (Tg) marks the temperature at which a hard
amorphous substance, upon heating, becomes a soft, rubbery
material. Sugar syrup can undergo such changes with the Tg of a
candy dependent on the kind of sugar used, the molecular
weight of the components, and the amount of water
(plasticizer) present.17 LifeSavers have a relatively high Tg,
resulting in a harder, crunchier candy.18 In contrast, caramels,
with higher water content, have a lower Tg, leading to a more
fluid, chewier candy. Moisture absorption impacts shelf life by
lowering the Tg. If a candy is stored at a higher temperature
Received: September 22, 2017
Revised: May 10, 2018
Published: June 19, 2018
1307 DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00739
J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 95, 1307−1315
Journal of Chemical Education Article

Table 1. Topics Covered in the Candy Chemistry Course

Topic Experiment/Candy Exercise Chemistry Concepts/Skills
Candy Stages Candy: Lollipops Amorphous solid; sucrose hydrolysis, acid catalyst
Candy: Sponge Candya Candy stages/phases; aeration due to chemical reaction
Candy: Peanut Brittlea Taste test: Effect of maximum temperature on sponge candy; artificial vs natural
sweeteners in peanut brittle
Crystallization Crystal Growth of Rock Candy Solubility; supersaturation; crystallization, nucleation
Candy: Fudgea Taste test: Effect of agitation temperature on fudge
Sugar Reactions Sugar Effect on Caramelization and Maillard Chemical reactions; UV−vis spectroscopy; temperature effect
Reactions
Candy: Caramelsa and Pralines Taste test: Effect of temperature on caramel
Tracking Sucrose Inversion Through Optical Chemical reaction, hydrolysis; optical activity, polarized light, polarimeter; reaction
Activity kinetics, enzyme catalysis
Candy: Cherry Cordials
Special Additives Hydrocolloids: Viscosity and Sweetness of Corn Hydrocolloids, hydrophilicity; molecular weight, chain branching, viscosity; Zahn cups
and Techniques Syrups with Different Glucose Levels
Taste test: Effect of glucose level on corn syrup sweetness
Candy: Gumdropsa Taste test: Artificial vs natural orange flavors in gumdrops
Candy: Taffya Aeration due to pulling
Taste test: Effect of maximum temperature on taffy; effect of corn syrup viscosity/
sweetness on taffy
Flavors Preparation of Vanilla Extract Solvent extraction; unit conversion, percent weight
Distillation of Essential Oil from Cloves Distillation; solvent extraction, phase separation, polarity; functional groups, infrared
spectroscopy; yield
Synthesis of an Artificial Flavor Fischer esterification, chemical reaction, equilibrium, stoichiometry, yield; distillation;
product extraction; functional groups, infrared spectroscopy
Candy: Clove Hard Candya Taste test: Artificial vs natural clove flavors in hard candy
Colors Chromatography of Artificial Dyes Paper chromatography; mobile vs stationary phases; chemical structure, polarity,
retention factor
UV−Vis Spectroscopy of Artificial Dyes Spectroscopy; light, wavelength, energy; absorbed vs transmitted color
Candy Size and Color Distribution Gaussian distribution; descriptive statistics, confidence interval; volume estimate,
number estimate, scatter plot
Candy: Hard Candya Color Taste test: Effect of hard candy color on taste perception
Sensory Analysis Taste Threshold of Different Sweeteners Sense of taste; supertaster, taste threshold; standard solution preparation; dilution,
concentration
Candy: Gumdrops,a Peanut Brittle,a Hard Candy,a Triangle test, paired comparison test, ranking test, statistics
Sponge Candya
Candy: Fudge,a Caramel,a Taffya Quantitative descriptive analysis, spider/radar plot
Other Confectionery Candy: Chocolate Truffles Saturated vs unsaturated fatty acids; polymorphs
Sweets
Freezing Point Depression Colligative properties, freezing point, solution concentration
Candy: Ice Cream
a
Denotes candy that appears twice, as these exercises combine topics.

than its Tg, its viscosity decreases, causing deformation, volatile

flavor molecule loss, and undesirable crystal growth or graining.
In the food industry, first-order (e.g., boiling, solubilization)
and second-order (glass) transitions are often compiled into a
state diagram. Figure 1 provides a general representation of the
phases/states that occur in sucrose−water mixtures, the basis
for candy making.19 Here, a starting mixture (A) of sugar
(sucrose), water, and other additives is heated to boiling (B).
Water evaporates, leading to increased sugar concentration and
boiling point elevation. Once a desired temperature/concen-
tration is achieved (C), the mixture is cooled (D), resulting in
supersaturation and reduced molecular mobility. If agitated
(stirred), nucleation and crystallization occur (E1), perhaps
resulting in a candy like fudge. (The concentration drops as
sugar precipitates out of solution.) If undisturbed (or if Figure 1. State diagram of sucrose−water showing both first-order
(boiling, solubilization) and second-order (glass) transitions that occur
doctoring agents that inhibit crystallization are present), in candy making. Note that freezing/melting equilibria are not shown.
reduced molecular mobility can immobilize the sugar mixture Adapted with permission of Springer Nature and the author, R. W.
into a metastable glassy state (E2), leading to a product like Hartel (ref 19). Copyright 2001 Springer Nature.
hard candy.
1308 DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00739
J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 95, 1307−1315
Journal of Chemical Education
Table 2. Candy Stages and Temperatures at Which These Stages Occur
a
Results of spooning the sugar syrup heated to a particular temperature range into cold water. bA solution of 3 cups of sugar and 1 cup of water were
heated with red food coloring for better visualization. cThe light caramel stage appears pink because of red food coloring.
■ CANDY STAGES
The competing forces between crystallization and glass
formation can explain the general stages of candy making
(Table 2).20 For example, heating a sugar syrup to 300 °F (149
°C) reaches the hard-crack stage, so named because the sugar
syrup, if dropped into cold water, stretches into hard, brittle
threads.21 Hard candy is made this way, with corn syrup
included in the initial sugar syrup as a doctoring agent that
inhibits crystallization.
1309
Article
To investigate crystallization, students make rock candy,
testing the impact of different conditions on crystal growth.
They find that stirring results in smaller crystals, due to the
creation of more nucleation sites (Figure 2). Temperature’s
effect on crystals in fudge is also investigated. Students heat a
fudge mixture, cooling it to one of three temperatures before
stirring vigorously. They find the lowest temperature leads to
grittier texture; the solution has been left too long, allowing
larger, fewer crystals to grow. In contrast, higher agitation
temperatures encourage the formation of numerous small
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00739
J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 95, 1307−1315
Journal of Chemical Education Article

Figure 2. Sugar crystals made from a supersaturated sucrose solution cooled to room temperature with (A) and without (B) stirring. Images
obtained using a dissecting microscope with the inset showing individual crystals.

crystals due to more nucleation sites, creating a smoother caramelization reaction is then demonstrated by making praline
consistency (too hot, however, and the sucrose remains almonds.
solubilized).

■ SUGAR REACTIONS
Sugar in food undergoes three primary reactions: Maillard,
caramelization, and inversion. In the Maillard reaction, reducing
sugars react with amino acids in proteins. The resulting brown
color and products are responsible for the tasty brown flavor of
roasted meat or crusty bread. Students investigate different
sugars (monosaccharides and disaccharides) by combining
them with the amino acid glycine and heating. Subsequent
UV−vis analysis allows them to quantify which sugar yields the
brownest (most desirable) color (Figure 3). They apply these
concepts by then making Maillard-browned caramels.
Figure 4. Effect of temperature on caramelization colors for fructose,
sucrose (table sugar), and glucose when heated at 30 °F intervals.
Fructose is seen to caramelize at a lower temperature with sucrose and
glucose at higher ones. Note that caramelization occurs at much higher
temperatures than the Maillard reaction.

Sucrose inversion is a hydrolysis reaction where sucrose

breaks down into glucose and fructose (Scheme 1). The name

Scheme 1. Sucrose Inversion in Which Sucrose (a

Disaccharide) Hydrolyzes To Form Glucose and Fructose
(Monosaccharides)

Figure 3. Bar graph showing the absorbance (430 nm) and colors of
sugar solutions (1 wt %, aqueous) mixed with glycine and heated at
212 °F (100 °C) for 30 min. Monosaccharides (fructose, galactose,
glucose) more readily undergo the Maillard reaction, as evidenced by
their dark brown colors. Sucrose cannot, suggesting that the Maillard
reaction in candy making is actually due to glucose and fructose,
produced from sucrose inversion.
Caramelization is another nonenzymatic browning reaction.
Here, a sugar is heated until it undergoes pyrolysis reactions,
again leading to new flavors and a brown color. To demonstrate
the effect of temperature on this reaction, students heat either
sucrose, fructose, or glucose, removing samples at various
temperatures to document color change (Figure 4). The
1310
reflects the “inversion” of the optical rotation of polarized light
from a positive value for sucrose to a negative one for an
equimolar mixture of fructose/glucose. Typically catalyzed by
acid or invertase, the reaction kinetics can be studied through
NMR22 or a glucometer.23 Students use a polarimeter to record
the optical activity of aqueous sucrose solutions over several
days. They determine the rate at which conversion occurs
depending on the amount of invertase (Figure 5). In a related
exercise, students make cherry cordials, a candy whose liquid
center is due to sucrose inversion. While significantly higher
amounts of invertase are used (e.g., 1/4 teaspoon (tsp) is about
1,200 μL), the medium is different as the cordials contain very
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00739
J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 95, 1307−1315
Journal of Chemical Education
Figure 5. Specific rotation of 0.25 g/mL sucrose (aq) with 0−50 μL of
invertase (above). The rate of sucrose inversion increases with greater
amounts of invertase while no hydrolysis is seen for 0 μL. The same
invertase is also tested in candy making. Cherry cordials (below) with
5/8 tsp of invertase have a liquid center after only 2 days whereas no
such change is observed in cordials lacking invertase.
little water while the polarimetry experiments are conducted
with aqueous solutions.
■ SPECIAL ADDITIVES AND TECHNIQUES
Hydrocolloids are large hydrophilic macromolecules that swell
or form gels when dissolved in water. In candy, these might be
polysaccharides (starch, pectin, agar) or proteins (gelatin) and
are responsible for the texture of jelly beans, licorice, gummies,
and marshmallows. Students use gelatin to make gumdrops,
observing how the candies swell as a result of hydrocolloids.
Hydrocolloids also behave as thickeners, increasing the
viscosity of a candy. For example, corn syrup is made from
cornstarch, a polysaccharide, by partially breaking down the
starch into small molecules of glucose (dextrose). The more
glucose present in corn syrup, the lower the viscosity and the
sweeter the taste.24 Students measure the viscosity of several
brands of corn syrup using Zahn cups. They also conduct a
ranking taste test,25 determining if runnier syrups are indeed
sweeter (Figure 6). Given the presence of corn syrup in most
candy recipes, correlating sweetness with viscosity is of
importance in confectionery design.
Aeration is a special technique in which a suspension of gas
bubbles is trapped within the candy. Introducing these bubbles
can involve chemical reactions. Students make sponge candy
using sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) to generate carbon
dioxide either through decomposition (heat) or reaction with
an acid (vinegar). Another technique, pulling, is demonstrated
by making taffy. Stretching the sticky sugar glass incorporates
air, leading to the glossy, satin-like pastel color that results from
light reflecting off these tiny bubbles.
■ FLAVOR
Flavors can be obtained through extraction or synthesis. Two
extraction techniques include solvent extraction and distillation.
To illustrate the former, students make vanilla extract, a
1311
Article
Figure 6. Viscosity of three corn syrup brands, measured at 25 °C with
Zahn cups. Sweetness was determined by summing the ranks
(sweetest = 3; middle = 2; least = 1). The least viscous syrup was
found to be the sweetest while the other two brands were
indistinguishable in sweetness, highlighting the challenges with
amateur taste testing.
tincture in which a vanilla bean is soaked in ethanol (or
vodka).26 Students also distill eugenol from cloves, determining
percent yield based on material used.
An alternative approach is synthesis. Fischer esterification in
which an alcohol and a carboxylic acid are condensed to form
an ester yields a variety of aromas. Students use this reaction to
produce ethyl cinnamate (cinnamon), isobutyl propionate
(rum), isopentyl acetate (banana), and methyl salicylate
(wintergreen), though other options are also available.27,28
Showing students where flavors come from leads to
discussion on natural versus imitation. While “natural” sounds
better, a synthetic version can arguably be safer, consisting of
one known chemical whereas extracted oils can contain
hundreds in variable concentrations. To determine to what
extent natural or imitation impacts taste, students make two
versions of a particular candy, conducting a taste test to assess
whether or not a difference can be detected. Gumdrops, for
example, are made with either expressed orange oil or food-
grade limonene. Hard candy is used to test food-grade eugenol
versus distilled clove oil while imitation and natural vanilla are
assessed by making fudge or chocolate. In general, students
were unable to distinguish between natural and imitation
flavors.
Additional concepts are functional groups and Fourier
transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR). Students obtain
spectra of their distilled clove oil and synthesized ester and,
through peak assignment, argue if the spectra support what
their noses tell them.
■ COLOR
Candy color, in many ways, parallels flavor. Chemicals
responsible for color can be obtained through both extraction
and synthesis, inspiring a discussion on safety concerns. FD&C
Red 2, for example, was banned in 1976 due to evidence that it
causes cancer in laboratory animals while FD&C Yellow 5 and
Yellow 6 are approved dyes that can cause allergic reactions.29
Color also relates to flavor by creating presumptions about how
a food should taste. A red lollipop likely tastes of strawberry or
cherry. Students test the relationship between color and flavor
by creating hard candies with colors that deliberately do not
match expected flavors. They assess their abilities to guess the
correct flavor in a subsequent taste test.
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00739
J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 95, 1307−1315
Journal of Chemical Education Article

Figure 7. Paper chromatography of FD&C Red 40, Yellow 5, Blue 1, and McCormick Black food coloring with matching UV−vis spectra. Both
techniques demonstrate that McCormick black is a mixture of the red, yellow, and blue FD&C dyes. The paper chromatography is an artistic
rendition of an actual experiment.

Figure 8. Spider plots showing the differences between five attributes of (A) caramels and (B) taffy. For caramels, heating temperatures were tested
and found to impact taste. For taffy, different corn syrup brands ultimately led to minimal variations in taste.

Two common experiments concerning food dyes appear in

this Journal: chromatography30−32 and spectroscopy.33−36 Our
students conduct a paper chromatography experiment,
determining the components present in each dye. They
correlate these results with UV−vis spectroscopy, investigating
how absorbed wavelengths relate to colors (Figure 7).
The color of candy is convenient for teaching statistics.
Students count the number of M&M’s of each color in bags and
use statistics to assess color distribution.37 They also measure
the volume of 10 M&M’s in a graduated cylinder, repeating this
several times, to generate a plot of number vs volume. From
this, the number of M&M’s in a jar is estimated. Students thus
learn about Gaussian distribution, average, standard deviation, t
testing, and the meaning of significant differences as well as
basic graphing skills.
1312
■ SENSORY ANALYSIS
The sense of taste stems from taste buds found in papillae
(bumps) on the tongue. It is believed that supertasters, showing
extreme sensitivity to flavor, have a higher density of papillae.38
Students measure the density of papillae on their tongues to
identify if they are supertasters.39 They also conduct a threshold
test to determine the lowest concentration at which they detect
flavor using serial dilutions of sugar and artificial sweeteners
(aspartame, erythritol, fructose, saccharin, sucralose).40 The
structural difference between sucralose and sucrose and the
impact on sweetness are further emphasized by using these
sweeteners to make peanut brittle and judging the resulting
flavor.
Describing a candy’s taste requires sensory analysis, used in
the food industry to assess quality control, product develop-
ment, and correlation with measured parameters (physical or
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00739
J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 95, 1307−1315
Journal of Chemical Education
chemical).25 Analytical tests involve trained testers who
determine if there are differences between samples and the
nature and magnitude of these differences. Consumer tests
comprise a representative sample from a target audience and
focus on acceptance, preference, or degree of liking for a
product. Students employ several of these methodologies
throughout the course. For example, a triangle (difference) test
in which the odd sample in a group of three (where two
samples are the same) is identified is used to assess natural vs
synthetic flavors in gumdrops, hard candy, chocolate, and
fudge.41 Quantitative descriptive analysis (QDA) is also done to
generate a flavor profile. Students rate five characteristics on a
scale of 1 (least) to 5 (most), producing a spider (or radar)
plot.41 Taste test results for caramels (Figure 8A) demonstrate
an impact of cooking temperature while different corn syrup
brands are shown to not affect taffy (Figure 8B).
■
OTHER CONFECTIONERY SWEETS
No candy course would be complete without chocolate, a topic
that easily merits its own course. Chocolate consists of cocoa
butter, a fat known to crystallize into six different
polymorphs.42,43 These crystalline forms vary in density and
energy, leading to differences in taste, texture, and appearance.
Tempering is the careful process of heating and cooling that
yields the most desirable form, resulting in shiny, smooth
chocolate that breaks with a snap and melts in the mouth. Our
students make their own chocolate from more basic
components of cocoa powder, cocoa butter, and sugar. Their
level of success in tempering is based on appearance and
whether or not bloom (marking a transition to a less desirable
polymorph) is seen.
Ice cream is another popular confection that relies on
freezing point depression. Students measure the freezing point
of different amounts of salt and ice, determining the optimal
ratio needed for the coldest temperature. Using this
information, they make ice cream using rock salt. A fun
variation of this activity involves making ice cream with liquid
nitrogen, as described in Supporting Information.
■ STUDENT ASSESSMENT
For this laboratory-only course, students are graded on reports
(50%) consisting of the laboratory notebook and postlab
analysis. Candy-making exercises are not graded, but students
are held accountable for the concepts and skills as these are
included on a final exam (15%). Safety and technique represent
10%.
The course ends with students presenting posters (15%) on
candy-related chemistry topics. Past examples include browning
reactions, natural vs synthetic flavors, sensory analysis, and
hydrocolloid viscosity. During this session, they present their
candy in a decorated candy box (10%), asking the general
audience to rate the quality of their sweets (Figure 9), an
assessment that becomes part of their grade. Liquid nitrogen ice
cream is also served.
■
EVALUATION OF COURSE
In the past two offerings of the course, 79% of the students
were seniors, and 42% were either business, economics, or
accounting majors (unsurprising given that ∼35% of our
students graduate with these majors). Pre- and postcourse
surveys were administered to students in the 2017 offering.
Independent sample t tests (α = 0.05) showed no significant
1313
Article
Figure 9. Students present posters on candy science, displaying their
confections for tasting at the end of the course. Photographs used with
permission from S. Dudik. Copyright 2017.
change in attitudes. For example, both before and after the
course, students expressed interest in candy chemistry (n = 12,
tstat 0.24, p 0.81), perceived the level of difficulty to range from
normal to hard (tstat 1.66, p 0.11), and judged the amount of
work to be a little more than other courses (tstat 0.66, p 0.51).
Most of them (75%) stated that fulfilling the graduation
requirement was their primary reason for taking the course
though half of them remarked they would consider taking
another science course if designed for nonscience majors.
Students enjoyed making taffy and fudge the most because they
were fun and tasty. The clove hard candy was least popular
because of its flavor. The favorite laboratory experiment was
color chromatography, so voted for being “an interesting topic”.
The least popular was the ester synthesis as the students found
the concepts difficult to understand. Some of the comments on
course evaluations were “I enjoyed [the course] more than I
would any random chemistry class. Learning these concepts
through candy making was fun, especially for someone who
doesn’t like science.” Another was “I really enjoyed making the
candyit allowed me to put the concepts to use.” Especially
rewarding was the “I am more interested in chemistry now.”
■ CONCLUSION
A nonscience major laboratory course on candy chemistry is
presented. This topic covers an array of concepts, including
crystallization and glass transition, colligative properties,
supersaturated solutions, color and flavor analysis, chemical
reactions, extraction techniques, and statistics. Numerous
extensions of the course are detailed in Supporting Information,
with possibilities ranging from the high-school level up to an
advanced instrumental analysis laboratory. The course has been
well-received and is a popular option for students seeking a
general science graduation requirement. In addition, the poster
and candy tasting session at the end provides the opportunity
to share this sweeter side of chemistry with a wider audience.
■
ASSOCIATED CONTENT
*
S Supporting Information
The Supporting Information is available on the ACS
Publications website at DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00739.
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00739
J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 95, 1307−1315
Journal of Chemical Education
Candy-making tips, candy recipes with scientific
explanations, additional candy resources and experi-
ments, and course syllabus (PDF, DOCX)
■
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
*E-mail: jbayline@washjeff.edu.
ORCID
Jennifer Logan Bayline: 0000-0002-0045-1261
Notes
The authors declare no competing financial interest.
■
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank the candy chemistry students
for their participation and tasty confections over the last four
years. The authors also thank Prof. R. Hartel (University of
WisconsinMadison) for his suggestions and advice.
■
REFERENCES
(1) Merlo, C.; Turner, K. E. A Mole of M&M’s. J. Chem. Educ. 1993,
70 (6), 453.
(2) Cain, L. S’MoresA Demonstration of Stoichiometric Relation-
ships. J. Chem. Educ. 1986, 63 (12), 1048−1049.
(3) Liguori, L. The Chocolate Shop and Atomic Orbitals: A New
Atomic Model Created by High School Students To Teach
Elementary Students. J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91 (10), 1742−1744.
(4) Jennings, L. D.; Keller, S. W. An Interactive Classroom Activity
Demonstrating Reaction Mechanisms and Rate-Determining Steps. J.
Chem. Educ. 2005, 82 (4), 549−550.
(5) Canaes, L. S.; Brancalion, M. L.; Rossi, A. V.; Rath, S. Using
Candy Samples to Learn about Sampling Techniques and Statistical
Data Evaluation. J. Chem. Educ. 2008, 85 (8), 1083−1088.
(6) Smith, M. J. Using Differential Scanning Calorimetry To Explore
the Phase Behavior of Chocolate. J. Chem. Educ. 2016, 93 (5), 898−
902.
(7) Carlin-Sinclair, A.; Marc, I.; Menguy, L.; Prim, D. The
Determination of Methylxanthines in Chocolate and Cocoa by
Different Separation Techniques: HPLC, Instrumental TLC, and
MECC. J. Chem. Educ. 2009, 86 (11), 1307−1310.
(8) Stitzel, S. E.; Sours, R. E. High-Performance Liquid
Chromatography Analysis of Single-Origin Chocolates for Methyl-
xanthine Composition and Provenance Determination. J. Chem. Educ.
2013, 90 (9), 1227−1230.
(9) Witter, A. E. The Quantitative Determination of Butylated
Hydroxytoluene in Chewing Gum Using GC-MS. J. Chem. Educ. 2005,
82 (10), 1538−1541.
(10) Levine, E. H. Confectionary Chemistry: Sweet incentives yield
enthusiastic hands-on learning. Science Teacher 1996, 63 (5), 18−21.
(11) Ennever, F. K. A Spoonful of C12H22O11 Makes the Chemistry
Go Down: Candy Motivations in the High School Chemistry
Classroom. J. Chem. Educ. 2007, 84 (4), 615−616.
(12) Mitchell, S. B. Experimenting with the Sweet Side of Chemistry:
Connecting Students and Science through Food Chemistry. J. Chem.
Educ. 2014, 91 (10), 1509−1510.
(13) The Sweet Side of Chemistry: Candy! http://www.acs.org/
content/dam/acsorg/education/outreach/ncw/celebratingchemistry/
ncw-2014-celebrating-chemistry-english.pdf (accessed May 2018).
(14) Miles, D. T.; Bachman, J. K. Science of Food and Cooking: A
Non-Science Majors Course. J. Chem. Educ. 2009, 86 (3), 311−315.
(15) Bell, P. Design of a Food Chemistry-Themed Course for
Nonscience Majors. J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91 (10), 1631−1636.
(16) University of WisconsinMadison. Department of Food
Science. Resident Course in Confectionery Technology. https://
foodsci.wisc.edu/extension/candy/schedule.php (accessed May 2018).
1314
Article
(17) Hartel, R. W. Crystallization in Foods; Aspen Publishers:
Gaithersburg, MD, 2001; pp 138−141.
(18) Hartel, R. Sweet Science: Having Fun with Candy Chemistry.
ACS Webinars [Online]; American Chemical Society, October 15,
2014. https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/acs-webinars/culinary-
chemistry/candy-chemistry.html (accessed May 2018).
(19) Hartel, R. W. Controlling Crystallization. Crystallization in
Foods; Aspen Publishers: Gaithersburg, MD, 2001; pp 251−252, 270−
271.
(20) Corriher, S. O. Cookwise: The Hows and Whys of Successful
Cooking, 1st ed.; William Morrow and Company, Inc.: New York,
1997; pp 421−476.
(21) Dropping hot sugar syrup into cold water is known as the “water
test” and was used by confectioners prior to the existence of reliable
candy thermometers. The highest temperature the sugar syrup attains
indicates a certain concentration, dictating the type of candy that will
form.
(22) Kehlbeck, J. D.; Slack, C. C.; Turnbull, M. T.; Kohler, S. J.
Exploring the Hydrolysis of Sucrose by Invertase Using Nuclear
Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy: A Flexible Package of Kinetic
Experiments. J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91 (5), 734−738.
(23) Heinzerling, P.; Schrader, F.; Schanze, S. Measurement of
Enzyme Kinetics by Use of a Blood Glucometer: Hydrolysis of Sucrose
and Lactose. J. Chem. Educ. 2012, 89 (12), 1582−1586.
(24) Hobbs, L. Sweeteners from Starch: Production, Properties and
Uses. In Starch: Chemistry and Technology, 3rd ed.; BeMiller, J.,
Whistler, R., Eds.; Food Science and Technology; Elsevier: New York,
NY, 2009; pp 797−832.
(25) Guinard, J. X.; Robertson, I. Sensory Evaluation for Brewers. In
Evaluating Beer; Brewers Publications: Boulder, CO, 1993; pp 55−74.
(26) Kitchen Projects. Vanilla Extract Recipe. http://www.
kitchenproject.com/vanilla/4FoldVanillaExtract.htm (accessed May
2018).
(27) Epstein, J. L.; Castaldi, M.; Patel, G.; Telidecki, P.; Karakkatt, K.
Using Flavor Chemistry To Design and Synthesize Artificial Scents
and Flavors. J. Chem. Educ. 2015, 92 (5), 954−957.
(28) Bromfield-Lee, D. C.; Oliver-Hoyo, M. T. An Esterification
Kinetics Experiment That Relies on the Sense of Smell. J. Chem. Educ.
2009, 86 (1), 82−84.
(29) Sharma, V.; McKone, H. T.; Markow, P. G. A Global
Perspective on the History, Use, and Identification of Synthetic
Food Dyes. J. Chem. Educ. 2011, 88 (1), 24−28.
(30) Kandel, M. Chromatography of M & M Candies. J. Chem. Educ.
1992, 69 (12), 988−989.
(31) Emry, R.; Curtright, R. D.; Wright, J.; Markwell, J. Candies to
Dye for: Cooperative, Open-Ended Student Activities to Promote
Understanding of Electrophoretic Fractionation. J. Chem. Educ. 2000,
77 (10), 1323−1324.
(32) Birdwhistell, K. R.; Spence, T. G. A New Glow on the
Chromatography of M&M candies. J. Chem. Educ. 2002, 79 (7), 847.
(33) Aurian-Blajeni, B.; Sam, J.; Sisak, M. Sweet Chemistry. J. Chem.
Educ. 1999, 76 (1), 91−92.
(34) Sigmann, S. B.; Wheeler, D. E. The Quantitative Determination
of Food Dyes in Powdered Drink Mixes. J. Chem. Educ. 2004, 81 (10),
1475−1478.
(35) Stevens, K. E. Using Visible Absorption To Analyze Solutions of
Kool-Aid and Candy. J. Chem. Educ. 2006, 83 (10), 1544−1545.
(36) Erhardt, W. Instrumental Analysis in the High School
Classroom: UV-Vis Spectroscopy. J. Chem. Educ. 2007, 84 (6),
1024−1026.
(37) Ryan, S.; Wink, D. J. JCE Classroom Activity #112: Guessing the
Number of Candies in the JarWho Needs Guessing? J. Chem. Educ.
2012, 89 (9), 1171−1173.
(38) Bartoshuk, L. M.; Duffy, V. B.; Miller, I. J. PTC/PROP Tasting:
Anatomy, Psychophysics, and Sex Effects. Physiol. Behav. 1994, 56 (6),
1165−1171.
(39) Science Buddies. Super-Tasting Science: Find Out If You’re a
“Supertaster”! Scientific American; Dec 27, 2012. https://www.
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00739
J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 95, 1307−1315
Journal of Chemical Education Article

scientificamerican.com/article/super-tasting-science-find-out-if-youre-
a-supertaster/ (accessed May 2018).
(40) The taste threshold test is a modified version of the olfactory
one described in Cain, W. S.; Gent, J. F.; Goodspeed, R. B.; Leonard,
G. Evaluation of Olfactory Dysfunction in the Connecticut Chemo-
sensory Clinical Research Center. Laryngoscope 1988, 98 (1), 83−88.
(41) Stone, H.; Bleibaum, R. N.; Thomas, H. A. Descriptive Analysis.
In Sensory Evaluation Practices, 4th ed.; Food Science and Technology;
Elsevier Academic Press.: San Diego, CA, 2012; pp 233−289.
(42) Tannenbaum, G. Chocolate: A Marvelous Natural Product of
Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2004, 81 (8), 1131−1135.
(43) Rowat, A. C.; Hollar, K. A.; Stone, H. A.; Rosenberg, D. The
Science of Chocolate: Interactive Activities on Phase Transitions,
Emulsification, and Nucleation. J. Chem. Educ. 2011, 88 (1), 29−33.

1315 DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00739

J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 95, 1307−1315