2000
DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-0238.2000.tb00180.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A ‘Mouth-feel Wheel’: terminology for communicating the mouth-feel characteristics of red wine

Abstract: A hierarchically structured vocabulary of mouth-feel sensations elicited by red wines has been produced. Represented as a wheel, this structured vocabulary should assist tasters in their interpretation and use of terminology relating to 'in mouth' sensations produced by red wines. These terms and their definitions were generated by consulting the opinions of experienced wine tasters following exposure to an extensive range of commercial red wines. Logical relationships among the derived terms were formulated b… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
218
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 293 publications
(220 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
2
218
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, although 37 different attributes were generated during the first descriptive Association test, the sensory exploration of seaweeds remains a wide open field with a need to address other species, various preparation methods and numerous characteristics which are bound to change with geography, harvest season and processing methods, to name just a few relevant factors. Descriptive sensory encyclopaedias or aroma wheels are commonly used in the sensory characterisation of tea, wine, beer and olive oil (Langstaff et al 1991, Mojet and de Jong 1994, Gawel et al 2000, Koch et al 2012, and similar methods lend themselves to be applied also to seaweeds.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, although 37 different attributes were generated during the first descriptive Association test, the sensory exploration of seaweeds remains a wide open field with a need to address other species, various preparation methods and numerous characteristics which are bound to change with geography, harvest season and processing methods, to name just a few relevant factors. Descriptive sensory encyclopaedias or aroma wheels are commonly used in the sensory characterisation of tea, wine, beer and olive oil (Langstaff et al 1991, Mojet and de Jong 1994, Gawel et al 2000, Koch et al 2012, and similar methods lend themselves to be applied also to seaweeds.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Subsequently, associated terms were collected and grouped by species and treatment method, and the most consistent terms were selected to design a quality control test (Lyon and Watson 1994, Mojet and de Jong 1994, Gawel et al 2000, Koch et al 2012). …”
Section: Flavour Descriptive Analysis -Association Testmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A restrictive approach to Parr (Parr et al, 2002) has been made to select expert respondents. The questionnaire was designed according to the classical three-tier sensory method of assessment: visual, aromatic and gustatory/tactile attributes (Noble et al, 1987;Fischer et al, 1999;Gawel et al, 2000;Gawel et al, 2001;Hernández et al, 2009). Color Tonality results were standardized to match the overall 11-integer-points scale, as a study by Hernández et al (2009) justified the use of a 4-integer-points scale with 1 VioletPurple, 2 Purple-Ruby, 3 Ruby-Garnet and 4 GarnetBrick.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The 14 initial taste descriptors, based on the work of Peynaud and Blouin (1996), Gawel (1998) and Gawel et al (2000Gawel et al ( , 2001, were statistically grouped into four Principal Components (PCs; Table I). PCs were named in accordance to sensory perceptions which are commonly cited in the scientific literature: TASTE_dryastringent (PC1), TASTE_sweetviscous (PC2), TASTE_bittersalty (PC3) and TASTE_fullpersistent (PC4).…”
Section: Inner Key Profilers From Reported Nationwide Sensory Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As such, the sensory characteristics of wines are highly varied. Use of standardized terminology can aid in the communication of sensory attributes of wine products among winemakers, marketers, consumers, and researchers , Gawel 1998, Gawel et al 2000. However, standardized terminology is not always used by winemakers, wine writers, and consumers, who frequently use everyday language to infer relationships between the wine product and the sensory properties of other common food products and smells.…”
Section: Sensory Evaluation Of Winementioning
confidence: 99%