OENO One 2021, 1, 69 - 79 69
© 2021 In e na ional Vi icul u e and Enology Socie y - IVES
Recei ed: 19 Augus 2020 y Accep ed: 3 Decembe 2020 y Published: 11 Janua y 2021
DOI:10.20870/oeno-one.2021.55.1.4475
Access o wine expe s’ long- e m memo y o deciphe an ill-de ined senso y
concep : he case o g een ed wine
Ma ía P. Sáenz-Na ajas1*, Ignacio A ias-Pé ez2, Sa a Fe e o-del-Teso1, Ana Escude o2, Vicen e Fe ei a2,
Pu i icación Fe nández-Zu bano1, Dominique Valen in3
1Ins i u o de Ciencias de la Vid y del Vino (CSIC-GR-UR). Depa men o Enology, Finca La G aje a,
C a. de Bu gos Km. 6 (LO-20 - salida 13), 26007 Log oño, Spain
2Labo a o io de Análisis del A oma y Enología (LAAE), Depa men o Analy ical Chemis y, Uni e sidad de
Za agoza, Ins i u o Ag oalimen a io de A agón (IA2) (UNIZAR-CITA), Associa e uni o Ins i u o de Ciencias de la
Vid y del Vino (CSIC-GR-UR), c/ Ped o Ce buna 12, 50009 Za agoza, Spain
3Cen e des Sciences du Goû e de l’Alimen a ion, INRA, Uni e si é de Bou gogne F anche-Com é, Dijon, F ance
*co esponding au ho : mpsaenz@ic .es
abs ac
The p esen s udy aims o unde s and an ill-de ined senso y concep by a long- e m memo y-based s a egy wi h
Spanish winemake s om ou wine egions using “g een wine” as a case s udy. A o al o 77 Spanish winemake s om
ou Spanish wine egions ca ied ou a non- as ing ee desc ip ion ask. The desc ip ion ask yielded e ms belonging
o wo main ca ego ies including o igin- ela ed e ms as well as senso y e ms. Senso y e ms belonged o a oma, as e,
igeminal, colou , mul imodal and hedonic subca ego ies, which elucida es he mul idimensionali y o he s udied
concep . The mos ci ed speci ic e ms we e “ ege al a oma”, “bi e ” and “unpleasan ”. Despi e hese commonali ies,
a ce ain idiosync asy linked o as e (“excessi e sou ness”) and igeminal (“as ingency”) subca ego ies as well
as o wine componen s (“ annins”) was e idenced as hey we e ci ed dis inc ly by expe s belonging o sepa a e
wine egions. The capaci y o app oaches based on long- e m memo y o deciphe mul idimensional and ill-de ined
concep s is highligh ed. The egional e ec is also explained in e ms o cogni i e p ocesses (i.e., knowledge and
expe ience), which is linked o he use o senso y concep s by wine expe s.
keywo ds
as ingency, annins, ege al a oma, a oma, la ou , op-down, bo om-up, cogni i e
© 2021 In e na ional Vi icul u e and Enology Socie y - IVES
70 OENO One 2021, 1, 69 - 79
Ma ía P. Sáenz-Na ajas e al.
INTRODUCTION
The e alua ion o ood senso y cha ac e is ics, o
senso y p o iling, p o ides aluable in o ma ion
o he ood indus y. P oduce s ha e o know he
exac senso y p o ile o hei p oduc s o quali y
con ol pu poses and o ensu e ha he p oduc ion
p ocess ul ils he p oduce ´s equi emen s.
In e ms o p oduc de elopmen , senso y
cha ac e is ic e alua ion can help in he p oduc ion
p ocesses by de ining he ing edien composi ion
and hus achie e a speci ic and desi ed senso y
p o ile. In classical consume science, he linkage
o a p oduc ´s senso y p o ile o he consume ´s
p e e ence o pe cei ed quali y app aisal
(i.e., hedonic a ings) is a e y common s a egy.
I allows he iden i ica ion o he main senso y
a ibu es which d i e he consume p e e ence
o any single p oduc . Con en ional desc ip i e
analysis (DA) is among he mos widely used
echniques o senso y p o iling. DA equi es a
panel which is usually composed o a minimum
o eigh pa icipan s. In each p oduc , he panel
mus ha e p e ious expe ience wi h he speci ic
senso y a ibu es o be e alua ed. The selec ed
a ibu es ha e o be associa ed wi h ep oducible
e e ences ha unequi ocally ep esen each e m
(Lawless and Heymann, 2010). This classical
app oach has h ee main limi a ions. The i s
limi a ion is he cos ; DA is a e y expensi e
echnique, mainly due o he highly quali ied
panel leade s, he de elopmen o e e ences, and
he in es men needed o ain he panel in e ms
o epea abili y, ep oducibili y and consis ency.
The second limi a ion is ela ed o linking DA and
hedonic da a which assumes ha he ained panel
and consume s ha e simila pe cep ions o he
s udied p oduc s (Va ela and A es, 2012). The hi d
limi a ion is ela ed o he use o DA o complex
p oduc s such as wine (Campo e al., 2010).
In DA, di e ences among p oduc s a e iden i ied
by measu ing monodimensional a ibu es, while
pe cep ion is mul idimensional. This meaning ha
pe cep ion is he esul o he in eg a ion o senso y
signals elici ed by di e en senso y modali ies o
dimensions ( isual, ol ac o y, as e, igeminal)
a he han he sum o indi idual signals as hose
measu ed by DA (P esco , 2015). This can make
in some cases o neglec senso y di e ences in
complex p oduc s. In he las decade, al e na i e
desc ip i e echniques ha e gained p ominence.
Thei main ad an age is o educe aining ime o
e en o a oid i because hei pu pose is no o each
a consensus among pa icipan s bu o iden i y
senso y di e ences among p oduc s, ela ed o
ei he monodimensional o mul idimensional
pe cep ion (Valen in e al., 2012). Mo eo e ,
pa icipan s desc ibing he p oduc s a e consume s,
which elimina es o educes he di e ences in
pe cep ion be ween consume s (hedonic a ings)
and ained panellis s (senso y p o ile) inhe en o
classical app oaches. The hypo hesis behind hese
s a egies is ha consume s can desc ibe p oduc s
(Va ela and A es, 2012). In gene al, al e na i e
echniques a e mo e apid and, in ce ain
occasions, can be good al e na i es o classical
DA; bu canno subs i u e DA when an accu a e
desc ip ion is needed ( o ex ensi e e iews
conce ning al e na i e desc ip i e s a egies see
Valen in e al. (2012) and Va ela and A es (2012)).
The main d awback o employing un ained
panels o desc ibing p oduc s is he di icul y
in e p e ing he e ms gene a ed by hem;
consume s use wo ds employed in daily
con e sa ions, de ined by Lawless and
Heymann (2010) as “e e yday language”.
To a oid his p oblem, in ce ain domains,
echnical expe s a e selec ed o ca y ou he
desc ip ion o p oduc s as hei ocabula y is a
p io i easie o unde s and and mo e consensual
han he ocabula y o consume s. Senso y
analysis in wine is a e y good example o
his ype o app oach. Wine expe s, including
winemake s, p oduce s, oenologis s and wine
c i ics ha e de eloped speci ic language and
e ms o desc ibing wines and exchanging
in o ma ion among hemsel es (B oche and
Dubou dieu, 2001). Howe e , he communica ion
capaci y o expe s’ desc ip ions was ques ioned
some decades ago when Leh e (1975)
demons a ed a lack o unde s anding among
wine expe s. Wine expe s ha e de eloped a
speci ic ocabula y ha includes “scien i ic
e ms” and “e e yday language”. Scien i ic o
monodimensional e ms a e also employed by
ained panels because hey can be unequi ocally
ep esen ed by senso y e e ences such as
“ke osene” ( ep esen ed by he molecule TDN),
“ iole ” (β-ionone) o “honey” (phenyle hyl
ace a e) o a oma, “swee ness” (suc ose),
“sou ness” ( a a ic acid) o “bi e ness” (quinine
sulpha e) o as es, among o he s. “E e yday
language” e e s o he indi idual p e ious
expe ience o he expe and hus likely d aws
on op-down cogni i e p ocesses (Pa e al., 2015).
In ela ion o his las ype o language, i is
a challenge o unequi ocally in e p e some
concep s no mally employed by expe s when
desc ibing wines. Some examples o di icul
o in e p e wine concep s a e: “mine ali y”
(Rod igues e al., 2015), “complexi y”
(Pa e al., 2011), “bouque ” (Pica d e al., 2015)
OENO One 2021, 1, 69 - 79 71
© 2021 In e na ional Vi icul u e and Enology Socie y - IVES
and “g een” (Sáenz-Na ajas e al., 2018) among
o he s. Expe s accumula e an impo an numbe
o as ing expe iences and iden i y common
senso y pa e ns ha a e e balised by using
his ype o language. These ambiguous senso y
concep s, which a e usually mul idimensional, a e
he esul o he e balisa ion o pe cep ion. In his
con ex , i is impo an o unde s and and deciphe
hese concep s o u he unde s and pe cep ion.
The p esen a icle is ocused on unde s anding
he concep o g een wines. This concep has
been inconsis en ly and aguely desc ibed by
di e en wine dic iona ies: “[…] a la ou in
wine gene ally associa ed wi h hose o g ass,
moss, o ege ables. Also a la ou ound in wines
made om unde ipe g apes. A ce ain amoun o
g eenness can be cha ac e is ic o , and, he e o e,
posi i e in some a ie als like Sau ignon
Blanc. Wi h mos ed a ie als, howe e ,
ob ious g eenness is conside ed a aul […].”
(MacNeil, 2015) o “[…] pejo a i e as ing e m
o wine made om g apes ha did no each ull
ipeness […].” (Robinson and Ha ding, 2015).
Simila ly, he scien i ic li e a u e lacks consensus
when i comes o he meaning o “g een wine”.
The concep is mainly ela ed o a oma e ms such
as g een ege ables o ui y/boxwood (G een
e al., 2011), capsicum, g ass, oma o lea and
aspa agus (Makho kina e al., 2012), allow-like
a oma (Moheka e al., 2017), he baceous a oma
(Mozzon e al., 2016; Slabizki e al., 2016), o
esh cu g ass and “s emmy and s alky”, his las
being exempli ied by ozen blackcu an s and
blackbe ies (Sal man e al., 2017). In hese a icles,
“g een wine” mainly ela es o a concep o med
by a di e si y o e ms selec ed e ospec i ely by
expe imen e s. This has con ibu ed o he lack
o he consensual de ini ion o he e m g een
o desc ibing wines. On he o he hand, Gawel
e al. (2000) ca ied ou an exhaus i e s udy o
iden i y di e en as e and mou h eel ca ego ies
o wine desc ip ions esul ing in he mou h eel
wheel. On he wheel, “g een” was included in he
main ca ego y “as ingency” and he subca ego y
“un ipe”. Un ipe was de ined wi h a ibu es om
di e en modali ies, including as e and la ou :
“[…] a nega i e hedonic g ouping consis ing
o an as ingen eel associa ed wi h excessi e
acidi y and associa ed g een la ou no es […].”
(Gawel e al., 2000). Mo e ecen ly, ollowing a
as ing-based s a egy, a g oup o wine expe s
om he Somon ano egion, in Spain, sco ed
he le el o “g een cha ac e ” o 54 ed wines.
They showed ha “g een cha ac e ” was co ela ed
o e ms linked o wo senso y modali ies: a oma
( ege al a oma) and igeminal sensa ions
(as ingency) and ha i had a nega i e alence.
One weakness o he as ing-based app oach is ha
he wo k is limi ed o samples ha a e p e iously
selec ed by expe imen e s as examples o g een
and no g een wines. This can lead o a o ced
sco ing o he a ibu e e en i he cha ac e is
no p esen o i he e is no pe cep ible di e ence
among samples. Thus, e alua o s end o sco e
he cha ac e is ics ha di e mos among he
wines; which may no necessa ily be he ocus o
s udy. A second limi a ion is ela ed o he a igue
gene a ed du ing wine as ing, which is mainly
linked o he accumula ion o as ingen and
bi e sensa ions. To o e come hese d awbacks,
Jose-Cou inho e al. (2015) p oposed a cogni i e-
based desc ip i e me hodology conside ing
expe s’ long- e m memo y wi hou using ac ual
wine as ing. They employed his me hodology
o pe o m he senso y p o iling o Po uguese
wines. This s a egy was success ul in de ining
h ee dis inc geog aphical a eas in Po ugal which
a e associa ed wi h speci ic wine senso y p o iles.
The cogni i e-based desc ip i e me hodology
is p o ing o be a p omising ool o conduc
la ge scale senso y s udies; i also elimina es
he d awbacks o app oaches ha in ol e wine
as ing. Thus, he p esen esea ch aims o p o ide
eliable in o ma ion abou he g een wine concep
by using a non- as ing men al desc ip i e ask,
based on expe s’ long- e m memo y.
The di icul y in he in e p e a ion o his senso y
concep could be a ibu ed o 1) he mul imodali y
na u e o he e m and 2) a lack o consensus in
i s use by expe s accumula ing di e en senso y
expe iences. Thus, in he p esen wo k, we i s
hypo hesised ha he e m is mul imodal, being he
esul o he e balisa ion o pe cep ion. Besides,
he lack o consensus can be he esul o he
dis inc lea ning phenomena among expe s; he
pe spec i e o he pa icipan s is o en o med in
he egion whe e hey wo k as winemake s. This is
based on he possibili y ha winemake s om one
egion usually a end simila educa ion sou ces
and as ing e en s, u he mo e, hey a e mos
p obably exposed o simila wines, in con as o
expe s om di e en egions. These common
expe iences wi hin winemaking egions can lead
o he de elopmen o a common e e en ial
lexicon o desc ibe and e balise senso y
expe iences and concep s (Temme man, 2017).
In his con ex , he second hypo hesis o his
a icle is he p esence o a egional e ec on
expe s’ unde s anding o he g een wine concep .
To e alua e his hypo hesis, he concep o
© 2021 In e na ional Vi icul u e and Enology Socie y - IVES
72 OENO One 2021, 1, 69 - 79
Ma ía P. Sáenz-Na ajas e al.
g een wine has been s udied in ou di e en
denomina ions o o igin in Spain by a desc ip i e
ask based on long- e m memo y. The e o e,
he desc ip ion o a eal wine om memo y
(i.e., desc ibe he las g een wine you as ed),
which will be di e en o each pa icipan , was
employed o gene a e a mo e ealis ic desc ip ion
o he ca ego y, han app oaches applied o he
iden i ica ion o a cen al endency s o ed in mind,
and hus o heo e ical wine p o o ype (e.g., wha
is o you a g een wine?).
MATERIAL AND METHODS
1. Pa icipan s
Se en y-se en Spanish winemake s (65% men and
35% women, aged be ween 23 and 67, a e age o
41 yea s old), om ou wine egions, wi h wo
o 43 yea s’ expe ience in hei egion (a e age
o 16 yea s) we e in e iewed. The ou egions
in No he n Spain mainly p oduce ed wines
(> 80% o o e all p oduc ion in all cases). These
ou egions we e selec ed because hey p esen
ma ked di e ences in he wines p oduced wi hin
hem. Thei main di e ences a e hei geog aphical
loca ions, clima e, soil p ope ies and a ie y. The
DO Somon ano egion p oduces wines wi h a wide
ange o a ie ies, including o eign and na ional
cul i a s such as Cabe ne Sau ignon, Me lo and
Temp anillo; he la e being he mos impo an
a ie y. The o he h ee egions a e p oduce s o
one main na ional a ie y: Ga nacha in DO Campo
de Bo ja and Temp anillo in bo h DOCa Rioja and
DO Ribe a del Due o. These las wo egions ha e
p ominen di e ences in bo h clima ic condi ions
and soil cha ac e is ics.
Table 1 illus a es he demog aphic da a o
pa icipan s. The panel o pa icipan s did no p esen
signi ican di e ences in e ms o gende and age.
Winemake s om DO Somon ano had signi ican ly
mo e yea s o expe ience (a e age = 20) han hose
om DO Ribe a del Due o (a e age = 12).
2. P ocedu e
Ques ionnai es we e sen by email o LAAE´s
da abase o winemake s. The ques ionnai e included
wo main pa s. The i s pa consis ed o a non-
as ing ee desc ip ion ask e oking he las g een
wine hey had as ed: “Remembe he las ime you
as ed a g een wine, could you please desc ibe i ?”
In he second pa o he ques ionnai e, pa icipan s
we e asked i hey a e used o as e g een wines
and i hey belie e ha wines wi h g een cha ac e
a e a p oblem in hei egion. Las ly, demog aphic
ques ions we e asked (gende , age, wine egion and
yea s o expe ience as winemake s).
3. Da a analysis
One co pus was ob ained o each egion. Te ms
we e lemma ised and synonyms we e eg ouped.
Then, he e ms we e g ouped in ca ego ies and
subca ego ies o compa e hei equency o ci a ion
ac oss egions by using a iangula ion p ocedu e
(Ab ic, 2003). Th ee expe imen e s g ouped e ms
belonging o simila ca ego ies and subca ego ies.
When disc epancies we e ound, hey we e
discussed un il consensus was eached. Finally, he
equencies o occu ence o each indi idual e m,
ca ego y and subca ego y we e calcula ed o each
g oup o wine expe s. Only e ms men ioned by a
leas 10% o he pa icipan s in a leas one egion
we e included in u he analyses.
The e ec o egion on he equency o ci a ion o
e ms, subca ego ies and ca ego ies was assessed
by means o Chi-squa e (χ2). Ma ascuilo pos -
hoc pai wise compa isons (95%) we e ca ied
ou o signi ican e ec s. The simila i ies and
di e ences among he ou denomina ions o o igin
we e isualised using a co espondence analysis
pe o med on he e m equency able.
Analyses we e ca ied ou using XLSTAT
( e sion 19.03, Addinso , New Yo k, USA)
and SPAD ( e sion 5.5, CISIA-CESRESTA,
Mon euil, F ance) so wa e.
TABLE 1. Gende , age anges and a e age age (in b acke s) and ange and a e age (in b acke s) yea s
o expe ience in p oducing wine. Signi icance (P- alue) o each a iable (ns: no signi ican di e ences).
Di e en le e s in a ow mean signi ican di e ences be ween egions o a gi en a iable acco ding o
pos -hoc es s (Fische es ).
DOCa Rioja
(n = 19)
DO Somon ano
(n = 19)
DO Campo de Bo ja
(n = 19)
DO Ribe a del Due o
(n = 20) P
gende (men/women) 9/10 14/5 15/4 12/8 ns
age (yea s) 26 – 67 (41) 5 – 30 (44) 3 – 43 (42) 2 – 26 (37) ns
expe ience (yea s) 4 – 35 (15)ab 2 – 26 (20)a3 – 43 (18)a5 – 30 (12)b< 0.05
OENO One 2021, 1, 69 - 79 73
© 2021 In e na ional Vi icul u e and Enology Socie y - IVES
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
1. Ca ego ies, subca ego ies and e ms linked
o he concep o g een wine
Figu e 1 illus a es a hie a chical classi ica ion o
e ms employed o desc ibe g een wines.
A o al o 23 e ms we e ci ed by ≥ 10% o
pa icipan s in a leas one egion (Table 2). These
indi idual e ms we e classi ied in wo main
ca ego ies: 1) in insic wine cha ac e is ics ela ed
o senso y p ope ies (ci ed by 69% o expe s, as
shown in Table 2) and 2) o igin o g een wines (ci ed
by 60% o expe s). These wo e m ca ego ies,
employed o desc ibe he g een wine concep ,
included six and i e subca ego ies o senso y and
o igin, espec i ely. Fo he senso y ca ego y, he
ollowing subca ego ies could be iden i ied: a oma,
as e, igeminal, colou , mul imodal and hedonic.
These subca ego ies co espond o he usual
s uc u e ollowed by expe s when desc ibing
wine and ecen ly de ined as “wine as ing
sc ip ” in an analogy o compu e science sc ip
(Hono é-Chedozeau e al., 2020). The ollowing
desc ip ion is an example o he wine as ing
sc ip : “a wine wi h low colou in ensi y, young,
he baceous a omas and in he mou h as eless,
as ingen , acidic, in sho , unbalanced. I was an
unpleasan wine”. The s uc u e o desc ip ions
ca ied ou by expe s s a s wi h a desc ip ion
o he colou (low colou in ensi y), ollowed by
a oma (he baceous a omas), as e and mou h eel
sensa ions ( as eless, as ingen , acidic), hen he
use o global mul imodal desc ip o s (unbalanced)
and inally an o e all hedonic judgemen o he
wine (unpleasan ).
By he occu ence o hese wo main ca ego ies,
senso y p ope ies and o igin, we see ha expe s
ollow a combina ion o bo om-up and op-
down cogni i e s a egies o desc ibe wines as
was ecen ly obse ed o bo h pe cep ual and
concep ual ca ego isa ion o Beaujolais wines
(Hono é-Chedozeau e al., 2020) and p e iously
epo ed by se e al o he au ho s (Pa e al.,
2003; Solomon, 1997). The bo om-up s a egy
is based on he su ace cha ac e is ics o he
p oduc (i.e., senso y cues), ha is: “ as ing
be o e hinking”, while he op-down s a egy
e e s o he pa icipan ´s p e ious knowledge
and expe ience (i.e., he o igin o he g een wine
concep ): “ hinking be o e as ing” (Hono é-
Chedozeau e al., 2019). This means ha wine
expe s in eg a e bo h cogni i e p ocesses when
FIGURE 1. Hie a chical classi ica ion o common ca ego ies, subca ego ies and speci ic e ms ela ed o
he g een wine concep e oked by wine expe s. A eas a e p opo ional o he equency o ci a ion o each
ca ego y, subca ego y and e m.

© 2021 In e na ional Vi icul u e and Enology Socie y - IVES
74 OENO One 2021, 1, 69 - 79
Ma ía P. Sáenz-Na ajas e al.
TABLE 2. F equency o ci a ion (exp essed in %) o e ms, ca ego ies (in insic/senso y, o igin) and
subca ego ies elici ed in he ou egions de i ed om he desc ip i e ask, o al equency o e ms (%)
ci ed by all winemake s (77 pa icipan s), and signi icance (P) calcula ed om chi-squa e es (ns: non-
signi ican ; *P < 0.1; **P < 0.05; ***P < 0.001). Signi ican e ms ma ked in bold. Di e en le e s o a
gi en a ibu e mean signi ican di e ences based on pai -wise pos -hoc Ma ascuilo es .
CATEGORY/
Subca ego y/Te m DOCa Rioja
(%)
DO Campo
de Bo ja (%)
DO Somon ano
(%)
DO Ribe a del
Due o (%)
TOTAL
(%) P
1. INTRINSIC/SENSORY 79 53 74 70 69 ns
1.1. A oma 37 26 42 60 42 ns
ege al 26 11 32 25 23 ns
he baceous 16 5 11 20 13 ns
aspa agus 0 0 0 15 4 ns
1.2. Tas e 53a 16b 42ab 20ab 32 **
excessi e sou ness 32a 5b 26ab 5b 17 **
bi e 26 11 11 15 16 ns
1.3. T igeminal 53a 16b 42ab 30ab 35 *
d y 21 5 16 5 12 ns
as ingen 26a 5ab 16ab 0b 12 **
low body 11 5 5 15 9 ns
ha d/agg essi e 11 011 5 6 ns
1.4. Colou 21 16 21 5 16 ns
low colou 11 0 16 0 6 ns
ed wine 11 5 5 5 6 ns
1.5. Mul imodal 21 16 32 5 18 ns
unbalanced wine 21 16 21 5 16 ns
low complexi y 5 5 11 0 5 ns
1.6. Hedonic 32 16 26 10 27 ns
unpleasan /de aul 26 11 26 10 18 ns
low quali y 0 0 16 0 4 ns
2. ORIGIN 63 42 68 65 60 ns
2.1. Wine componen s 37b 0c 32b 75a 36 ***
annins 26a 0b 32a 10ab 17 *
py azines 11 0 5 20 9 ns
2.2. Wine ageing 32 32 32 45 35 ns
un ipe/young wine 32 32 32 45 35 ns
2.3. G ape a ie y 11 32 16 10 17 ns
Cabe ne 5 21 11 10 12 ns
2.4. G ape ma u i y 21 11 16 20 17 ns
un ipe g ape 11 511 15 10 ns
no phenolic ma u i y 11 11 0 5 6 ns
2.5. Vin age 16 0 11 20 12 ns
in age 2015 0 0 11 10 5 ns
in age 2018 16 0 0 5 5 ns
OENO One 2021, 1, 69 - 79 75
© 2021 In e na ional Vi icul u e and Enology Socie y - IVES
e balising he sensa ions p oduced by a p oduc .
In he p esen case, he concep o g een wine
ac i a es a pu e desc ip ion s a egy o which
he pa icipan s use senso y- ela ed e ms as well
as a highe -o de cogni i e p ocess in which
hey make a diagnosis based on hei echnical
expe ise. This op-down p ocess de eloped wi h
expe ise can be conside ed an ad an age o e
ained panels o consume s when he objec i e
o he ask is o p oduce an elabo a ed desc ip ion
alongside a diagnosis o he p oblem. Howe e ,
ained panels o consume s should be p e e ed
when a su ace desc ip ion wi hou cogni i e
in e ence is he aim, mainly because he panellis s
and he consume s end o ollow he bo om-
up s a egy (Hono é-Chedozeau e al., 2019;
Pa e al., 2003; Solomon, 1997).
Fo he g een wine concep , a oma (42%) was he
senso y subca ego y ci ed mos , i was ollowed
by igeminal (35%), as e (32%) and hedonic
(27%) subca ego ies; illus a ed in Table 2.
Mo e speci ically, “ ege al a oma” (ci ed by
23% o o al wine expe s), and he hedonic
e m “unpleasan /de aul ” (18%) we e among
he mos equen ly ci ed ollowed by wo as e-
ela ed e ms: “excessi e sou ness” (17%),
and “bi e ” (16%).
Alongside senso y- ela ed e ms, he o igin
ca ego y p esen ed high o e all ci a ions o he
wine componen subca ego ies (36%) and wine
ageing (35%) wi h hei espec i e e ms “ annin”
(17%) and among he mos ci ed, “un ipe/young
wine” (35%). No ably, “ annin” was always
accompanied by an adjec i e, namely “agg essi e
annin”, “g een annin” o “un ipe annin”.
The ela i ely low equency o ci a ion o
e ms is ela ed o he na u e o he app oach
because pa icipan s we e asked o desc ibe
he las g een wine hey as ed, and hus o
exempli y he ca ego y o g een wines, a he
han sea ching o he desc ip ion o a p o o ype,
which would ha e led o highe equencies o
ci a ions. The mul idimensionali y obse ed o
he g een wine concep in he p esen esea ch
coincides wi h he esul s obse ed in a s udy
ca ied ou by expe s om DO Somon ano
which in ol ed he as ing o 54 ed wines
(Sáenz-Na ajas e al., 2018). In ha a icle,
“g een cha ac e ” o wines was sco ed and
signi ican ly co ela ed wi h he a oma
e m “ ege al a oma”, he igeminal e m
“as ingency” and wi h a e m linked o wine
componen s such as (d y and g een) “ annins”.
Besides his, “g een cha ac e ” was nega i ely
co ela ed wi h p e e ence. On he one hand,
hese esul s con i m ou i s hypo hesis ela ed
o he mul idimensionali y o he g een wine
concep . Thus, i seems o be easonable o
hink ha la ou pe cep ion is he esul o he
in eg a ion o independen senso y inpu s, mainly
a oma, as e and igeminal sensa ions, a he
han he pe cep ion o independen s imuli. This
in eg a ion leads one o o m a global concep ual
uni (P esco , 2015), in his case, he g een wine
concep . This in eg a ion o s imuli could be he
esul o he mul idimensionali y a ibu ed o a
wide ange o senso y concep s such as mine ali y
(Pa e al., 2015), complexi y (Pa e al., 2011)
o quali y (Sáenz-Na ajas e al., 2016) among
o he s. P esco (2015) a ibu ed la ou
in eg a ion o epea ed co-exposu e o simila
senso y p ope ies o p o iles o a gi en p oduc ,
and hus o associa i e lea ning. In his con ex ,
he g een concep could ha e been buil o
sha e and communica e expe s´ sensa ions
(Temme man, 2017) o conc e e senso y p o iles
ha encompass mul idimensional sensa ions
co-occu ing epea edly in wines; e balised
as g een. F om a me hodological s andpoin ,
he long- e m memo y s a egy employed in he
p esen esea ch yielded e ms simila o hose
appea ing in classical app oaches while e oking
new e ms. The e ms common o bo h s a egies
a e “ ege al a oma”, “as ingency”, “ annin” and
he hedonic e m “unpleasan ”. The new e ms
we e linked o he senso y ca ego y and as e
subca ego y such as “excessi e sou ness” and
“bi e ” as well as he o igin ca ego y including
he subca ego ies “wine ageing”, “g ape a ie y”,
and “ma u i y”.
2. E ec o expe ´s egion on he e ms linked
o he g een wine concep
Among he 23 e ms gene a ed (Table 2), ou
we e he mos ci ed in he ou egions. Among
hem h ee belong o he senso y ca ego y:
“ ege al a oma” (23% o e all ci a ions), ollowed
by “unpleasan /de aul ” (18%), and “bi e ”
(16%) whe eas, he ou h, “un ipe/young wine”,
belongs o he o igin ca ego y. Besides hese
commonali ies, he o he e ms a ied om one
egion o he o he one. The signi ican di e ences
obse ed o h ee speci ic e ms (Table 2)
we e no ewo hy. Two we e senso y- ela ed
e ms linked o as e (“excessi e sou ness”) and
igeminal subca ego ies (“as ingen ”), and
one belonged o he o igin ca ego y and wine
componen s subca ego y (“ annin”). “Excessi e
sou ness” and “as ingen ” we e mainly ci ed by
© 2021 In e na ional Vi icul u e and Enology Socie y - IVES
76 OENO One 2021, 1, 69 - 79
Ma ía P. Sáenz-Na ajas e al.
expe s om Rioja and Somon ano, bu ba ely
used by pa icipan s om he o he wo egions.
The e m “ annin” was ne e ci ed in DO Campo
de Bo ja, and highly ci ed in DO Somon ano and
DOCa Rioja.
The simila i ies and di e ences among egions a e
syn hesised in he Co espondence Analysis (CA)
plo (Figu e 2).
The i s wo ac o s, explaining 82.9% o he
o iginal a iance, we e e ained based on Kaise
c i e ia (eigen alues highe han a e age). The
i s ac o (53% o o iginal a iance) places DO
Ribe a del Due o in opposi ion o he o he h ee
egions. Expe s om his egion a e cha ac e ised
by he usage o he “wine componen s”
subca ego ies, which hey ci ed signi ican ly mo e
o en (75%, P < 0.001) han expe s om he o he
egions, mo e speci ically he e m “py azines”
was employed. The second ac o , which explains
almos 30% o he o iginal a iance, places DO
Campo de Bo ja on he opposi e side o he o he
h ee egions. This ac o is mainly explained by
he subca ego y “ a ie y” and he speci ic e m
“Cabe ne ”, bo h belonging o he ca ego y o igin.
This could be a ibu ed o an e ec o highe
exposu e and hus he expe s´ amilia i y wi h
wines elabo a ed wi h his a ie y om his egion.
Cabe ne is mainly cul i a ed in DO Somon ano
ollowed by DO Campo de Bo ja. The lowe
ci a ion o he e m Cabe ne in DO Somon ano
may be because hey cul i a e a wide ange o
a ie ies ha a e associa ed wi h he g een wine
concep such as Mo is el o Me lo in compa ison
o DO Campo de Bo ja whe e Cabe ne was he
sole a ie y ci ed.
Desc ip ions o winemake s om DOCa Rioja
and DO Somon ano seem o be mo e con e gen ,
wi h a a he high emphasis on as e (“excessi e
sou ness”) and igeminal (“d y” and “as ingen ”)
senso y subca ego ies. DO Campo de Bo ja
p esen s an in e media e posi ion wi h a close
p ojec ion o DOCa Rioja and DO Somon ano.
This is mainly due o he ela i e impo ance gi en
o common ca ego ies ela ed o he o igin o
g een wine, such as he “wine ageing” subca ego y
(“un ipe/young wine”) and senso y- ela ed e ms
linked o “colou ” and he mul imodal e m
“unbalanced wine”.
These esul s demons a e ou second hypo hesis,
ha e en hough he e a e common e ms, sha ed
by expe s om he ou egions, which belong
o he senso y ca ego y and a oma, as e and
hedonic subca ego ies (“ ege al a oma”, “bi e ”
and “unpleasan ”) an impo an idiosync asy is
linked o he g een wine concep ha is con ingen
on he egion o o igin o he wine expe s. Ou
second hypo hesis is demons a ed by he ac
ha he egion a ec s he de elopmen o senso y
concep s by wine expe s as he one s udied in he
p esen esea ch (g een wine). This esul could
be a ibu ed o he expe s´ dis inc exposu es
o g een wines and hus o di e en le els o
FIGURE 2. Co espondence Analysis space p ojec ion o ca ego ies, subca ego ies and e ms elici ed by
pa icipan s (ci ed by a leas ≥ 10% o pa icipan s in a leas one egion) om he ou egions on Fac o s 1–2.
OENO One 2021, 1, 69 - 79 77
© 2021 In e na ional Vi icul u e and Enology Socie y - IVES
amilia i y wi h his concep . Howe e , his
does no seem o be he case because he sel -
epo ed incidence o g een wines p esen ed no
signi ican di e ence among egions (45 - 60% o
pa icipan s acknowledged he p esence o g een
wines in hei egions). Al e na i ely, di e ences
in he concep o g een wine among egions could
be ela ed o a ia ions based on dis inc echnical
and senso y expe iences acqui ed by expe s
om di e en egions. Zannoni (1997) s a ed ha
he same wo d can be associa ed wi h di e en
concep s depending on he loca ion because i is
linked o he cul u e o indi iduals. He cle e ly
showed he example o he wo d “b ead” ha
can be easily ansla ed in o di e en languages
(“pan” in Spanish, “pain” in F ench, “B o ” in
Ge man, o “pane” in I alian). Howe e , he
concep associa ed wi h b ead is o ally di e en
(in e ms o ex u e, o m, composi ion…) o
indi iduals belonging o di e en cul u es. Thus,
expe s belonging o di e en p oduc ion egions
accumula e di e en expe iences which can
in luence he o ma ion o senso y concep s. Thus,
one can assume ha op-down cogni i e p ocesses
a e used o o m knowledge om expe ience,
which would gene a e di e ences among expe s
om di e en egions. Along hese lines, Pa e
al. (2015) epo ed ha mul idimensional concep s
(complexi y, amilia i y o liking), as could be he
case o g een wine, show g ea e di e ences in
hei meaning among di e se cul u es (unde s ood
as social g oups exposed o di e en expe iences),
han simple analy ical desc ip o s which a e
employed o e balise speci ic a oma o as e
concep s. This di e ence is ela ed o he dis inc
p ocesses in ol ed in he o ma ion o bo h
ypes o concep s. Mul idimensional concep s
a e mainly ela ed o op-down s a egies, while
analy ical desc ip o s co espond mo e o bo om-
up p ocesses.
CONCLUSIONS
The p esen wo k has shed ligh on he concep o
g een wine which is concep ualised wi h a long-
e m memo y s a egy. To s a wi h, he esul s
con i m ha expe s use a combina ion o bo om-
up and op-down s a egies o ca y ou wine
desc ip ions; hei desc ip ions a e suppo ed by
he use o bo h senso y and o igin ca ego ies o
desc ibe wines. Secondly, he mul idimensionali y
o he g een wine concep has become e iden in
ha i includes a oma, as e, igeminal, colou ,
mul imodal and hedonic senso y subca ego ies.
Thi dly, he senso y dimensions “ ege al a oma”,
“bi e ” and “unpleasan ” a e he speci ic e ms
sha ed by expe s om he ou egions o desc ibe
g een wines and may ep esen he co e o he
g een wine concep . Despi e hese commonali ies,
an impo an egional e ec ela ed o senso y
e ms associa ed wi h as e (“excessi e sou ness”)
and igeminal (“as ingen ”) sensa ions and
wine componen s (“ annin”) was demons a ed.
This e ec is a ibu ed o he op-down p ocess
in ol ed in he concep ualisa ion o g een wine.
Thus, echnical and senso y expe iences di e ing
among expe s om dis inc wine egions can
con ibu e o he o ma ion o di e se wine
concep s. Thus, mo e s udies e alua ing he g een
wine concep in o he wine egions a e equi ed
o unde s and he senso y concep and imp o e
communica ion among wine audience.
The esul s illus a ed ha his app oach can
deciphe and p omo e he cha ac e isa ion o
ill-de ined concep s used by winemake s. The
main ad an ages o memo y-based app oaches
o e classical me hods a e ha hey do no
equi e he in as uc u e needed in classical
as ing app oaches, and hey consume a less
ime and esou ces. A po en ial limi a ion o
he p esen app oach is ha pa icipan s we e
asked o emembe he las ed wine hey as ed,
which leads o low equencies o ci a ions o
speci ic e ms. The idea behind his app oach is
ha he cha ac e isa ion o di e en exempla s
s o ed in he memo y o expe s will p o ide a
be e desc ip ion o he ca ego y, being close o
eali y, han he desc ip ion o a cen al endency
o a p o o ype o wine, which p o ide a mo e
heo e ical cha ac e isa ion, bu leads o highe
equencies o ci a ions.
Acknowledgemen s: This esea ch p ojec was
unded by he Spanish Minis y o Economy and
Compe i i eness (MINECO) (p ojec AGL2017-
87373-C1/C3). I.A. and S.F.T. a e g a e ul o
he MINECO o he p edoc o al ellowships
FPU-2015, and FPI-2018 (Uni e sidad de La
Rioja), espec i ely. MPSN acknowledges he
Spanish Na ional Resea ch Agency, he Minis y
o Science, Inno a ion, and Uni e si ies and
he Eu opean Social Fund o he pos doc o al
ellowship: Ramón y Cajal P og am (RYC2019-
027995-I/AEI/10.13039/501100011033).
LAAE acknowledges he con inuous suppo
o Dipu ación Gene al de A agón (T53) and
Eu opean Social Fund. The au ho s also exp ess
hei g a i ude o he wine expe s o pa icipa ing
in he s udy.