Study shows how opaque glasses affect sensory perception in wine tasting, indicating the impact of visual cues and grape variety.
Global wine standards often require product descriptions to be based on both analyti-cal and sensory criteria, despite the subjective nature of sensory perceptions, especially sensory features. The present study focused, as far as possible, on tasting pairs of ‘Blanc de noir’ and red wines made from the same grape variety, produced by the same win-ery, and from the same vintage. On one hand, the aim was to investigate whether the grape variety consistently imparts perceptible characteristics, regardless of the wine-making method. On the other hand, the research aimed to assess the influence of the absence of visual stimuli on the olfactory and gustatory senses. This approach differs from earlier studies, which mainly examined how visual context affects sensory per-ceptions across a wider range of wines with different colours. Tastings were conducted under various conditions, using either opaque or transparent glasses, and sensory at-tributes were assessed and recorded by experienced tasters. The data collected by tast-ers were analysed with XLSTAT–Student, a statistical analysis tool. A Lyza 5000 wine analyser was used to measure basic physicochemical properties, ensuring that com-mercial samples met wine quality standards. It was found that making assumptions based on visual cues influences tasters' sensory experiences during a tasting. At statis-tically significant levels, wine tasters could distinguish between white and red wines. Furthermore, the sensory descriptors linked to wines produced through red winemak-ing techniques - such as the presence of a maceration stage, perceived intensity, or flavours of red or opaque fruits, or astringency - were directly correlated with physi-cochemical parameters, including pH, lactic acid, glycerol, and volatile acidity. At the same time, an indirect correlation with malic acid content and titratable acidity was observed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Coman et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: