Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Wine consumers' subjective responses to wine mouthfeel and understanding of wine body
University of Adelaide, Australia.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2642-283x
Show others and affiliations
2017 (English)In: Food Research International, ISSN 0963-9969, E-ISSN 1873-7145, Vol. 99, p. 115-122Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Wine mouthfeel is considered important for wine quality by experts, while consumers understanding of mouthfeel and the role of wine body in their wine choice is unknown. One experiment determined the influence of intrinsic wine mouthfeel on consumers' wine liking and emotions, and the other, how consumers understand the term wine body. The first experiment used a 2 astringency level × 2 body level experimental design. The samples were base wine with; nothing added (control), added xanthan gum (for increased body), added grape seed extract (GSE, for increased astringency), and with both added xanthan gum and GSE. The consumer taste trial (n = 112) indicated that wine with increased body did not influence wine liking and emotions; while increased astringency decreased liking and elicited more intense negative emotions. The second experiment examined consumers' knowledge of wine body through an online survey (n = 136). Consumers described wine body most frequently using words such as flavour, fullness, and strength. Wine body was therefore understood by consumers predominantly as a holistic multi-sensory perception of flavour. Wine flavour was indicated by consumers to be the most important factor driving purchase decisions followed by balance of flavours and wine body. It is crucial that wine professionals carefully communicate wine characteristics to consumers to prevent possible misunderstandings such as the meaning of wine body and as a result better meet consumer expectations. In future, the term body may benefit from a clearer definition for academic research as well as industry.  

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier Ltd , 2017. Vol. 99, p. 115-122
Keywords [en]
Consumer language, Content analysis, Emotion, Liking, Wine body, Wine mouthfeel, Sensory perception, Xanthan gum, Mouthfeel, Wine, bacterial polysaccharide, food additive, grape seed extract, xanthan, analysis, classification, comparative study, comprehension, consumer attitude, human, nomenclature, pleasure, taste, Consumer Behavior, Emotions, Food Additives, Humans, Polysaccharides, Bacterial, Taste Perception, Terminology as Topic
National Category
Food Science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ri:diva-56371DOI: 10.1016/j.foodres.2017.05.015Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85019644364OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ri-56371DiVA, id: diva2:1592328
Note

Funding details: University of Adelaide, H-2013-048; Funding details: Wine Australia, UA1203; Funding details: School of Agriculture, Food and Wine, University of Adelaide; Funding text 1: The authors wish to thank all the consumers who participated in this tasting trial and online survey. This research was funded by the School of Agriculture, Food and Wine of the University of Adelaide. Authors also thank Wine Australia for funding. Wine Australia invests in and manages research, development and extension on behalf of Australia's grape growers and winemakers and the Australian government (UA1203). The consumer studies were approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of the University of Adelaide (H-2013-048).

Available from: 2021-09-08 Created: 2021-09-08 Last updated: 2023-05-23Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Niimi, Jun

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Niimi, Jun
In the same journal
Food Research International
Food Science

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 15 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf