WINETECH Technical Yearbook 2020

Wine sensory benchmarking (PART 2): The pros and cons of three suitable sensory methods

HOW DO THE SENSORY METHODS WORK?

free description of wine by wine industry professionals. When performing PP, wine judges compare each wine (to be profiled) to the reference wine called the “pivot” sample. They have to write down all the attributes, that they perceive as “less intense” and “more intense”, in the wine sample (to be profiled) than the pivot sample. PP provides information on the intensity of the attributes relative to the pivot sample and is for that reason particularly suitable when wines are compared. The most difficult aspect with PP is the choice of the pivot sample when this method is used for profiling purposes. When direct comparisons between wines are required, the choice of the pivot sample is set and not a problem. Eric Teillet and his colleagues first intro - duced polarised sensory positioning (PSP) to compare the sensory characteristics of different bottled waters. The idea behind the PSP was to describe products relative to reference products as a whole rather than in terms of sensory attributes. Judges are asked to indicate on a line scale, ranging from “exactly the same” to “completely different”, how similar the wine sample is to the “pole” or reference sample. This method can be particularly useful when it is difficult to describe the specific sensory attributes of every product, for example when bottled waters are assessed. Since wine is a complex product, it is often hard

CATA is a multiple choice-based method that originated from marketing research, where it is used in surveys. Adams and co- workers used it for the first time in 2007 to profile food products in terms of their sensory characteristics. This method is widely used for profiling food products one- by-one using a tick list also called the CATA question. These CATA lists can consist of words or phrases. When a wine is profiled, the list consists of sensory descriptors, for example “guava”, “green pepper”, “oaky”, “buttery”, etcetera. The most challenging aspect of CATA is to decide how to construct the list and which terms to use. Vocabulary developed to describe specific wine styles and cultivars is available within the wine industry and wine appreciation community in the form of aroma wheels and booklets. This “wine language” was developed by various role players, such as academic institutions, wine tasting groups, wine writers and critics, over the years and can be used as terms on CATA lists and thus in formal sensory evaluation to describe a wine’s properties. Pivot Profile (PP) is a relatively new sensory method that was proposed in 2015 by the Frenchman Bertaut Thuillier and his colleagues in Dijon and Cedex. The method was specifically tested on Champagne and was proposed as an easier alternative for

MARCH 2020

JEANNE BRAND 1 , HÉLÈNE NIEUWOUDT 1 & LEANIE LOUW 2 : 1 Department of Viticulture and Oenology, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch; 2 SenseLab, Oude Molen Building, Distillery Road, Stellenbosch KEYWORDS: Sensory benchmarking methods, wine evaluation

Benchmarking is a tool used in the wine industry for branding, re-branding and product development. RAPID SENSORY METHODS SUITABLE FOR BENCHMARKING Comparing the appearance, aroma (“nose”), taste and mouthfeel (“palate”) of a wine to other wines on the market, can form a key part of the overall benchmarking process. Check-All-That-Apply (CATA), Pivot © Profi le (PP) and Polarised Sensory Positioning (PSP) are sensory methods that can be used to assess differences and similarities between wines. This implies

that all three of these methods can be useful during the benchmarking process when comparing wines to each other. Choosing a fit-for-purpose method for a specific benchmarking exercise requires taking into account the strengths and weaknesses, and pros and cons of each method. In order to determine and discuss the pros and cons of these methods as benchmarking tools, it is: • Important to know how these methods work and • to test them against each other by analysing the same set of wines using the same panel with all three methods independently.

WINETECH TECHNICAL YEARBOOK 2020 80