Skip to content
Have an account?
Login
or
Register
  • About
    • People
    • Fellows
    • Tastings
    • In the News
    • Awards
      • Christophe Baron Prize
      • AAWE Scholarships
      • AAWE Awards of Merits
    • Downloads
    • Contacts & Copyright
  • Journal
    • Online Journal Member Access
    • Online Journal Library Access
    • Editors
    • JWE – All Issues
    • Submission Guidelines
  • Working Papers
  • Meetings
    • 2023 Stellenbosch
    • 2022 Tbilisi
    • 2019 Vienna
    • 2018 Ithaca
    • 2017 Padua
    • 2016 Bordeaux
    • 2015 Mendoza
    • 2014 Walla Walla
    • 2013 Stellenbosch
    • 2012 Princeton
    • 2011 Bolzano
    • 2010 Davis
    • 2009 Reims
    • 2008 Portland
    • 2007 Trier
  • Membership
Menu
  • About
    • People
    • Fellows
    • Tastings
    • In the News
    • Awards
      • Christophe Baron Prize
      • AAWE Scholarships
      • AAWE Awards of Merits
    • Downloads
    • Contacts & Copyright
  • Journal
    • Online Journal Member Access
    • Online Journal Library Access
    • Editors
    • JWE – All Issues
    • Submission Guidelines
  • Working Papers
  • Meetings
    • 2023 Stellenbosch
    • 2022 Tbilisi
    • 2019 Vienna
    • 2018 Ithaca
    • 2017 Padua
    • 2016 Bordeaux
    • 2015 Mendoza
    • 2014 Walla Walla
    • 2013 Stellenbosch
    • 2012 Princeton
    • 2011 Bolzano
    • 2010 Davis
    • 2009 Reims
    • 2008 Portland
    • 2007 Trier
  • Membership
DONATE
  • Data
  • Jobs & Programs
  • Data
  • Jobs & Programs
Home
»
Working Papers
»
Blind Tasting of South African Wines: A Tale of Two Methodologies

Working Paper No. 164

Published: 2014
Category:
Economics

Blind Tasting of South African Wines: A Tale of Two Methodologies

Domenic Cicchetti
Full Text PDF
Abstract
The author compared two methods for assessing the reliability of blind wine tastings of South African Sauvignon Blanc and Pinotage white and red wines.
The first method required the taster to rank each of the 8 white and red wines from 1 for the most preferred to 8 for the least preferred, with tied ranks permitted when 2 or more wines were equally preferred. The second used scores representing a taster’s perceived quality of wine as: 50%-69% =Poor/Unacceptable;
70%-79%= Fair/Mediocre; 80%-89%= Good/Above Average; and 90%-100%= Excellent to Superior. Results indicated that the two methods provided quite different results with respect to the critical issue of identifying replicate wines; while the identification of replicate white and red wines proved successful when wine scores were used, not a single wine taster could successfully identify replicate white or red wines when using ranking methods. This finding, plus the fact that very different scorings can produce the very same rankings, such as 1, 2, and 3 being given scores of 60, 64, 66 (Poor/Unacceptable); 70,72, 76 (Fair/Mediocre);
80, 83, 87 (Good/Above Average; and 90, 95, 98. (Excellent to Superior), led to the conclusion that such flaws in the ranking method render it of very limited usefulness in the evaluation of the results of blind wine tasting.

Submission

Please send your papers as PDF files to the editor, Victor Ginsburgh, at vginsbur@ulb.ac.be
Papers will be quickly reviewed, prior to potential posting on the website. Decision will be to post or not, possibly with short comments, but without referee reports. The decision will be based primarily on the suitability of the paper’s topic to the aims of the Association.
Such decisions are independent of publication decisions for the Journal of Wine Economics.

Working Paper publication requires that at least one author
is a regular member of AAWE.

Subscribe to our Email List

You can cancel your subscription at any time.
SUBSCRIBE HERE

Contact

AAWE
Economics Department
New York University
19 W. 4th Street, 6FL
New York, NY 10012, U.S.A.
Tel: (212) 992-8083
Fax: (212) 995-4186
E-Mail: karl.storchmann@nyu.edu

AAWE

Journal

Working Papers as a List

Membership

Videos

LINKS

Fifthsense

JWE at Cambridge University Press

Liquid Assets

Stuart Pigott

Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Policy

Cookies Policy

Twitter Facebook-f Youtube

© AAWE 2021 - All rights reserved