Tag Archives: consumer behavior

The Impact of Organic Certification and Labeling on Wine Prices

 

—————————————————————————————————-

Welcome to The Academic Wino! If you are new here, please read the “About Me” page to find out more about myself and the blog. If you would like to receive free updates on articles like this by email, then sign up here or you can subscribe to the RSS feed. Also, check us out on TwitterFacebookGoogle+, and or Pinterest. Thanks for visiting!

—————————————————————————————————-

The following is a guest post by Laura Collier, whose passion is where wine and law intersect.  Please see her complete bio at the end of this post for more information!

Sales of organic foods have skyrocketed in the past decade. In addition to increased sales, organic foods can typically command a price premium over their conventionally farmed counterparts. As a wine industry professional, I see a moderate amount of dedicated organic wine drinkers, but generally speaking, organic wines don’t seem to have the same momentum with a broad spectrum of consumers that organic foods do. This is surprising, given the craze for many other organic products. In a paper titled Eco-Labeling Strategies: The Eco-Premium Puzzle in the Wine Industry, Magali Delmas and Laura Grant of the University of California at Santa Barbara conducted research into the impact of organic certification and organic labeling on wine prices, and provided some insight into the factors that influence consumer perceptions of organic wines.

Delmas and Grant studied information from over 13,000 California wines, including data on price, grape variety, vintage, and winery production volume. They also evaluated whether the wines were certified organic, and if so, whether the wine’s label indicated the eco-certification. The results of their study were surprising: the factors of organic certification and organic labeling had opposite impacts on the price of the wine. They found that wines certified as organic, but without the certification indicated on the label, could command a 13% higher

Photo By Dick Rochester (originally posted to Flickr as Our Daily Red) [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Photo By Dick Rochester (originally posted to Flickr as Our Daily Red) [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

price. However, listing the organic certification on the label reduced the price by 20%. Furthermore, by examining the Wine Spectator rating score of the wines included in the study, they found that organic certification led to a score increase of almost one point.

If organically certified wines can command a price premium, and receive higher score ratings, then why does indicating the certification on the label actually lead to a decrease in price? To answer this question, Delmas and Grant evaluated other studies and surveys of consumer perceptions of organic wines for clues. One key cause is likely the consumer confusion surrounding the labeling of organic wine. In the United States, organic wines can bear two labels, but the meaning of the different terminology is not further explained on the label. “Organic” designates a wine that is made with organically grown grapes and does not contain any added sulfites. “Made with organically grown grapes” designates a wine made from organic grapes that does contain added sulfites. There are also different organic certification requirements, logos, and phrases on the labels of organic wines from other countries. This high volume of competing labels in the marketplace, without any apparent distinctions, confuses many wine drinkers. Furthermore, many consumers associate organic wine with inferior quality. This stigma is perhaps due to early attempts by inexperienced winemakers to produce “natural” wines without filtering or the use of sulfites, which resulted in faulty, poor tasting wines. This bad reputation, coupled with the lack of consumer understanding of organic labeling, are likely contributing reasons why wines labeled as organic command a lower price.

However, if we remove the organic label, why are consumers willing to pay 13% more for an unlabeled organic wine than a conventionally farmed wine? And why do organic certified wines have higher Wine Spectator scores? Delmas and Grant theorize that organic certification has benefits that improve the quality of the wines, the winery’s practices, and the winery’s reputation. Delmas and Grant cite the belief of many winemakers that organic farming leads to healthy vines,

Photo By drdcuddy (Flickr: Italia 2010) [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Photo By drdcuddy (Flickr: Italia 2010) [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

healthy grapes, and better tasting wines. In the winemaking community, the driving reason behind adopting organic practices is the desire to produce better wines, and not necessarily the desire to protect the environment. Additionally, the organic certification process provides an opportunity for wineries to learn about best practices and improve their existing procedures, which could lead to higher quality wines. Finally, organic certification could raise the winery’s reputation within the industry, and could assist the winery with cultivating goodwill and avoiding government regulation as an environmentally friendly operation.

I mentioned before that as someone who works in wine retail, I haven’t noticed the fervor for organic wines that I see for organic foods. But consumer attitudes toward organic wines do not seem to me as bleak as the results of this study would indicate. Perhaps something has changed since this study? The research by Delmas and Grant was conducted in 2008, and the dataset included wines from vintages 1998 to 2005. When organic food sales took off, the change was quick and intense. As this article is now five years old, perhaps there is an organic wine revolution among consumers that is preparing to burst on the scene?

I think that the consumer demand for organic wines is steadily increasing; however, I am unsure whether the market for organic wines will ever expand as rapidly or as broadly as the market for organic foods. Personally, I have found that there is a connection between conscientious farming and quality, and I believe that as wine drinkers explore the world of wine and find out that some of their favorite wines are organic, they will begin to make the connection as well and to seek out more organic wines at retail stores and restaurants. It will be

Photo By Jorge Royan (Own work) [CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Photo By Jorge Royan (Own work) [CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

quality and taste that win consumers for organic wines. And converting consumers based on taste will take longer than converting consumers to organic foods, which many people quickly and enthusiastically jumped at because they were seeking healthier food options. For drinkers to seek out organic wines because of taste, they must first develop their own personal palate, to differentiate between wines they simply do not care for and wines that are of poor quality. Then drinkers must taste many organic wines, with the knowledge that those wines are organic, and make the connection between improved taste and the organic methods. This is certainly not an overnight process. But only time will tell. Hopefully Delmas and Grant will follow up on their research in the coming years, and expand their dataset to include wines from around the world. Organic wines and consumers currently have such a tenuous relationship, that I would not be surprised if I were surprised again by the results!

Citation: Magali A. Delmas and Laura E. Grant, Eco-Labeling Strategies: The Eco-Premium Puzzle in the Wine Industry, INSTITUTE FOR SOCIAL, BEHAVIORAL, AND ECONOMIC RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS (Jan. 9, 2008), available at http://escholarship.org/uc/item/4qv7c61b.

Laura Collier is a wine consultant and lawyer in Raleigh, NC. When she’s not working at The Wine Feed, she’s exploring where the worlds of wine and the law intersect. Follow her @SpiritedLawyer on Twitter!

The Environmental Impact of Producing a Single Bottle of Wine in Nova Scotia, Canada

 

Climate change is a very real threat that has many industries concerned over how their businesses with be affected. More importantly, it’s this changing climate that has and continues to push many industries into developing better ways to function that has less environmental impact as well as developing ways to function under altered conditions. Prior to making any change, businesses and industries must step back and take a look at their current environmental footprint, and how their business practices and procedures impact the overall health of the environment.

When considering the wine industry, there has been a lot of work focus on the micro-scale of within the winery or vineyard, and what sort of a carbon footprint or environmental impact is left after all is said and done. However, outside influences that also heavily contribute to the overall carbon footprint or environmental impact have largely gone ignored; factors by which if one really wishes to improve their overall environmental impact, they need to take into consideration. These outside influences include, but are not limited to,

By James Ellison (Flickr: Gaspereau Vineyards, NS) [CC-BY-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

By James Ellison (Flickr: Gaspereau Vineyards, NS) [CC-BY-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

greenhouse gas emissions (think the emissions of machinery or transport vehicles), and total energy use (think all the gas, oil, or electricity that is used to create and distribute the product).

The Academic Wino reviewed one study in particular that examined the overall environmental impact of wine distribution in the United States, which is an important piece of literature examining the energy expenditure of the shipping and distributing side of the wine industry. However, a model incorporating both the distribution side of the industry as well as the grape growing and winemaking side of the industry is needed in order to get an accurate picture of the overall environmental impact of the wine industry as a whole. (See Part I and Part II here for the review of that piece of literature).

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a tool that is used to determine the environment impact associated with a particular product “from cradle to grave”. In other words, using complex mathematically modeling, LCA takes into consideration the positive and negative energy inputs and outputs from the very beginning to when an individual product is first made, all the way through when that individual product is sold to the consumer. In terms of wine, the LCA starts from when the grapes are first grown (either starting from the planting of the vine or the start of the growing season the spring, depending upon the model), through harvest and winemaking, then finally through bottling, storing, shipping, and purchase by the consumer.

The study presented today used LCA to determine the energy inputs and environmental emission of one complete life cycle of one standard sized 750mL wine bottle, from grapes grown and wine made in Nova Scotia, Canada all the way through the recycling of the bottle, which could have potential implications for other vineyards and wineries trying to minimize their carbon footprint on the world.

Methods

The mathematical model created included the “material and energy flows associated with”: growing the grapes, making the wine, making of the bottle, transporting the wine to the store, the consumer transporting the wine home, refrigeration of the wine, and the recycling of the bottle. Also included was energy associated with the vineyard equipment, as well as the emissions related to pesticides. Energy related to the following was also included: corks, sugar, labels, and heat-shrink capsules. Only the energy related to transport of the following items were included: yeasts, filtering agents, clarifying agents, bacteria, enzymes, and antioxidants. Water consumption was not included in the model, as the data were not available. The authors note that irrigation is not needed in Nova Scotia due to ample rain during the growing season, so omitting the water component may not be as bad as it would be if a lot of water was required for irrigation.

For space considerations, I will omit some of the details on the breakdown of exactly what went into the model and under what conditions, but if there is a certain item you’d like me to elaborate on or you have questions as to whether it was in the model and what assumptions were outlined for the model, please feel free to comment and I’ll clarify that for you.

The following categories were examined during the analysis: “abiotic resource depletion potential, freshwater acidification potential, eutrophication potential, global warming potential, stratospheric ozone depletion potential, aquatic eco-toxicity potential, terrestrial eco-toxicity potential, photo-oxidant formation potential, and cumulative energy demand”.

Three different scenarios were tested to evaluate how each would alter the life cycle assessment of the bottle of wine, and if one scenario were superior over

By Patrick Heusser, www.x8ing.com (own work, www.x8ing.com) [GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html), CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/) or CC-BY-SA-2.5-2.0-1.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5-2.0-1.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

By Patrick Heusser, www.x8ing.com (own work, www.x8ing.com) [GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html), CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/) or CC-BY-SA-2.5-2.0-1.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5-2.0-1.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

any others in regards to improving the energy usage or carbon footprint of the bottle. The following scenarios were tested: 1) an organic viticulture scenario; 2) a lighter bottle scenario; and 3) an increased transport distance and new transport mode scenario. Again, due to space considerations I’m leaving out the specific changes made to create these scenarios, but once again, just ask if you have specific questions regarding any one of them.

Results

This paper is chock full of interesting results, though I will just highlight some of them.

• Taking into account the energy and emissions of all categories related to producing and distributing a bottle of wine, the two categories with the highest relative impact were vineyard activities and consumer shopping.
• Recycling of the glass bottle and refrigeration at home contributed very little to the life cycle impact of a single bottle of wine.
• In regards to the vineyard activity category, the majority of the impacts were associated with nutrient management activities and fuel usage.
o The trellis system itself was responsible for half of the vineyard activity impacts (related to toxicity) due to the energy and emissions required for making the steel posts and the use of chromium copper arsenate to preserve the wood.
• Most of the categories were impacted mostly by the manufacturing process related to that particular category.
• Consumer shopping represented between 8% and 58% of the total life cycle impacts of a single bottle of wine.
o Nearly all of this was a result of the use of the car to pick up the bottle at the store and bring it back home.
• The glass bottle impact (between 3% and 24% of the total life cycle impacts) resulted mostly from the electricity used to create the bottles.
• Winery impacts were mostly derived from the electricity needed to run all of the equipment (note: Nova Scotia electricity is primarily coal-fired) as well as the ethanol emitted during fermentation.

Scenarios

• Organic viticulture practices only improved the life cycle impacts of 3 of the categories by 0.14% and 3%.
o Organic viticulture practices resulted in an increase in the following categories: freshwater acidification potential, eutrophication potential, and global warming potential.
o Organic viticulture significantly decreased the aquatic eco-toxicity potential and the terrestrial eco-toxicity potential as the toxic wood preservatives were no longer used in this scenario.
• Creating bottles that are 30% lighter than the typical bottle results in an improvement in life cycle category impacts between 2% and 10%.
o These improvements were found mostly from the reduced energy and emissions needed to produce the lighter bottle, though some of it was found in the transportation of the bottle from winery to store as well.
• Using a larger shipping truck reduced the life cycle impacts of a single bottle of wine. Using a ship or a larger transport truck was more environmentally friendly than using a small “domestic” transport vehicle.
o It was more environmentally friendly on a per bottle basis to ship a bottle of wine from Nova Scotia to Australia on a container ship than it was to ship a bottle from Nova Scotia to Vancouver in a small transport truck.

Conclusions

According to the results of this study, in regards to the environmental impact of the life cycle of a single bottle of wine produced and sold in Nova Scotia, improvements on carbon footprint and emissions would be most felt in the vineyard practices (i.e. grape growing) and consumer shopping areas. While the electricity required to produce the wine and many of the materials needed for the production of the wine and the bottle itself, improving upon the vineyard practices and the consumer shopping experience will produce the most significant results.

In regards to vineyard management practices, the results indicated that most of the energy and emissions comes from nutrient usage. The authors of the study suggested that switching to or incorporating organic fertilizers or using methods to increase nutrient-uptake efficiencies by the plant could result in significant

By Huhu Uet (Own work) [GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html) or CC-BY-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

By Huhu Uet (Own work) [GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html) or CC-BY-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

improvements in emissions from this area. The authors noted that simply switching to manure would not be an appropriate solution, as they found that manure emits significantly more nitrous oxide, ammonia, and nitric oxide than synthetic fertilizers, and that the nitrogen in manure is not as easily taken up by the plants.

In regards to the consumer shopping experience, the authors noted that a consumer driving 5km to the store to buy a single bottle of wine had a greater negative environmental impact than the vineyard practices and winemaking practices combined. The authors suggest that trying to avoid these consumer car trips by implementing more direct-to-consumer shipping options (where a more efficient transport truck would be used) as well as car-pools or purchasing multiple bottles at a time could reduce the emissions produced from this category.

Finally, using lighter weight bottles would significantly reduce the environmental impact of a bottle of wine, thus incorporating these into a winery’s arsenal would likely be effective in reducing the negative environmental impact produced by that particular winery.

It is important to keep in mind that these results are based on the wine industry in Nova Scotia, which is a relatively small industry. Thus, some of the factors may be different when scaled up to a wine region with significantly greater production and output. It would be interesting to apply this same model using data from larger wine regions to see if the same trends hold, or if other categories or management practices were more or less efficient when scaled up.

I’m leaving out a lot of details in this study, so if there is any clarification that you need or you have additional questions, please feel free to ask. Do you think the authors missed any important potential emissions creators in this model? Please leave your comments!

Source: Point, E., Tyedmers, P., and Naugler, C. 2012. Life cycle environmental impacts of wine production and consumption in Nova Scotia, Canada. Journal of Cleaner Production 27: 11-20.

What Motivates You to Drink?: Comparing Reasons For Drinking with Problem Drinking in Australian Adults

In July of last year, The Academic Wino covered a paper that examined the perceived healthiness of wine, and whether or not that perception led to an increase in wine consumption frequency and an increase in willingness to pay for a bottle of wine.  The authors found that if subjects believed wine to be healthy, it did in fact increase the frequency of consumption of wine and increased consumers’ willingness to pay per bottle of red wine.  One study found that 39%-88% of people in Western countries believe alcohol to be health, particularly when it comes to wine.

The same authors are back again to expand on this finding:  what about other motives for drinking?  Is the perceived healthiness of wine more important when it comes to frequency of consumption or is taste a more important motivator?

Photo by isante_magazine: http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4086/5057195715_74f63d6cca.jpg

Specifically, the authors sought to examine a variety of motives for drinking and correlate them with drinking behaviors in an adult population, which up until now has largely been studied only in younger populations such as college students.

The study utilized what is known as the “Drinking Motives model”, the purpose of which is to highlight both positive factors (social and mood motives) and negative factors (coping and conformity motives).  Some studies have found these motives to correlate with “problem drinking” (not clearly defined as alcoholism), though that has not been the result in other studies.  It is also not clear whether or not these motives for drinking change as an individual ages, or if these motives remain consistent throughout an individuals’ life.  Some researchers speculate that older people will “grow out” of these motives and evolve different motives for consumption, but there has been little to no evidence presented thus far.

In wine preference research, it is often found that taste is a primary driver of consumption behavior.  One study found that younger consumers tend to drink sweeter mixed drinks, while older consumers drink more wines and/or beer.  The authors note that one problem with this study is that the “older” consumers were only between the ages of 24-30, which in the grand scheme of things is still relatively young.

In regards to social cues, campaigns are often focused on reducing the levels of alcohol consumed in order to reduce the potential threat of overconsumption and all the negative associations that follow the behavior.  In fact, some believe that by promoting alcohol as healthy, this could lead to overconsumption.  It is not clear whether this belief is true, and whether or not wine consumption follows the same patterns as other types of alcohol consumption.

Photo by The Academic Wino: November 2008.

The authors of the study presented today aimed to address these questions by examining a variety of motives for drinking in older adults, and whether or not these motives were in any way associated with problem drinking.

Methods

Participants (older than 18 years of age) were recruited into the study by way of an Australian national telephone survey.  A wide variety of individuals coming from many backgrounds were selected, filling quotas for race, sex, income, state, and postcode.  Those participating were told the study was focused on alcoholic beverages and that questions revolved around alcohol preference, consumption patterns, and other factors that are related to drinking.

The phone survey lasted from 20 to 25 minutes, and included questions related to adult’s motives for drinking (ex. taste and health motives) and possible issues related to problem drinking using the CAGE questionnaire (Cut-down, Annoyed, Guilt, Eye-opener).

The reasons for drinking in this study reflected those outlined in the Cooper’s Drinking Motives model, a model that which states the use of alcohol is driven by the desire to reduce negative feelings and increase positive feelings about consuming the beverage.  For this study, reasons for drinking focused on responses to the following:

  • “I drink X beverage because…”
    • “…it makes me feel good.”
    • “…it reduces my level of anxiety.”
    • “…it makes me more outgoing.”
    • “…most of my friends drink it.”
    • “…I like the taste.”
    • “…I believe it is healthy for me.”

For determining possible problem drinking, the CAGE questionnaire as mentioned above was employed.  This questionnaire is based on four questions:

  • “Have you ever felt the need to cut down on drinking?”
  • “Have you ever been annoyed by others criticizing your drinking?”
  • “Have you ever felt guilty about your drinking?”
  • “Have you felt you’ve needed a drink first thing in the morning to steady your nerves or get rid of a hangover?”

The authors note the CAGE questionnaire does not allow for diagnosing alcoholism, and merely characterizes some individuals as “problem drinkers”.

Participants were categorized as being “wine drinkers”, “beer drinkers”, “spirit drinkers”, or “premixed drink drinkers” if they drank that one type of beverage 90% or more of the time.

The goals of the study were to 1) determine the motives behind why participants drink; 2) how do CAGE scores relate to the reasons cited for drinking; 3) how do CAGE scores relate to the type of beverage consumed; and 4) how do beverage type and motive for drinking predict CAGE scores?

Results

Demographics

  • 1229 Australians participated in the phone survey with a mean age of 50.13 years (S.D. 16.14).
  • Income was highly correlated with age, and was not looked at further in this study.
  • 55% of participants were female.
    • Women were more likely to drink wine than beer.
    • Men drank similar amounts of beer and wine.
  • For those preferring a single beverage type, 67% were categorized as wine drinkers.
    • 50% of the total participant pool did not prefer one particular type of beverage most of the time.

Motives

  • 86% of participants reported that taste was the biggest motivatorfor drinking.
    • This result was found for all preferred types of alcohol.
  • “Drinking to cope” (i.e. reducing anxiety) and “drinking to enhance well being” (i.e. it feels good) were other common motives reported by participants.

Motives & Problem Drinking

  • CAGE scores were significantly different for those reporting internal motives of “enhancing well being” (i.e. feeling good) and “coping” (i.e. reducing anxiety).
    • The stronger the motives influence on an individuals’ drinking, the higher the individuals’ CAGE score.
  • CAGE scores were significantly different for those reporting external motives of “social” (i.e. more outgoing).
    • The more social/outgoing, the higher the CAGE score.
  • CAGE scores were not influenced by the external motive of “conforming to a friends’ behavior”.
  • “Taste” had no influence on CAGE scores.
  • “Health” had a negative influence on CAGE scores.
    • Those who reported drinking for health reasons had lower CAGE scores than those not reporting this motive for drinking.
  • CAGE scores were significantly different for wine and beer drinkers.
    • Beer drinkers had significantly higher CAGE scores than wine drinkers.
    • Spirit drinkers and premixed drink drinkers were not included in this analysis, since their subgroup was too small for statistical analysis.
  • Controlling for beverage type, men were more likely to have higher CAGE scores than women, and younger drinkers were more likely to have higher CAGE scores than older drinkers (the latter was not significant, but was trending).

What does this all mean?

To sum up, taste was the most important motivator for drinking in this study of Australian adults, with 86% of participants responding in this way.  Drinking for health reasons was also a motivator for 24% of participants, who claimed they drink because they perceive the beverage to be good for them.  Though some studies have found differences in motivators for younger drinkers, this study did not seem to find these differences, with no statistical differences found between younger and older drinkers when it came to specific motivations for drinking.

In regards to problem drinking, this study found that the desire to change internal states (i.e. wanting to feel good, cope with something, or reduce anxiety) puts individuals more at risk for problem drinking than those influenced by external factors (i.e. social context or peer pressure).  These relationships were found to be independent of age and preferred beverage, and for the most part, sex.  In other words, it didn’t matter what age participants were or what their preferred beverage type was, they still cited the same motives and scored the same CAGE scores depending upon which motives were cited.

Taste as a motivator was found to not be related to problem drinking, and health was found to be negatively associated with problem drinking.  These results seem to indicate that drinking for these positive reasons result in non-overindulgence.  Though age was not a factor when considering the internal and external motivators described in the previous paragraph, age was a factor when it came to the motive of health.  Specifically, older participants cited health as a reason for drinking more often than younger participants.  This is not surprising, considering older individuals tend to have more health problems than younger individuals, thus the desire to focus more on consuming foods and beverages that are beneficial for one’s health.

The authors stress that to those worried that promoting certain types of alcohol as “good for your health”, such as red wine, there should be no concern that this type of advertising will result in overindulgence, according to the results of this study.  In fact, those consuming alcohol because they believe it to be good for their health appear to do so in a more responsible manner.

One thing to keep in mind from this study is that the results are only specific to Australian drinkers.  It is quite possible that the same study performed in a

Photo by Evil Erin: http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3049/3081308438_b1848656d2.jpg

different region would present different results.  Different cultures have different motivators for drinking, and I would not be surprised if we saw different results in another place (i.e. the United States).

Another limitation to this study is that it only included a small handful of motivators for drinking, and did not include one potentially important motivator for younger drinkers: drinking to get drunk.  This motivator is seen in a positive light in the minds of some young people, despite the negative consequences that can occur after the fact, thereby may be an important factor to consider in this type of analysis.

What do you all think of this topic?  What other limitations do you see (if any) with this study?  Are the authors missing any other big motivators that you think may change the reported outcome? Please leave your comments and participate in the discussion!

Source: Moran, C.C., and Saliba, A.J. 2012. Reasons for drinking wine and other beverages – comparison across motives in older adults. International Journal of Wine Research 4: 25-32.

Women Prefer Wine and Liquor While Men Prefer Beer: Using an Implicit Measures Approach to Determine Consumer Behavior

Often when we see a study examining alcohol preferences and habits in people, we cannot be certain if the results are based on what the participants want to report due to potential guilt or embarrassment, or if the results are actually based on fact.  Survey-type research often runs the risk of experiencing this type of variation, which may not actually reflect what the individual or group of individuals prefers or how they behave in real world situations.

One way to work around the survey method in order to obtain a potentially more accurate presentation of consumer preference and behavior is using what is called “implicit measures”.   What this means is that the strength of an

Photo by jenni from the block: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8434/7827785878_34859830a8.jpg

association (i.e. how strongly one associates or attaches oneself to a particular stimuli such as a specific type of alcohol) is inferred by the behavior of an individual as opposed to simply asking the individual how they feel about that particular stimuli.  Using implicit measures allows for capturing information that is beyond the conscious control of the individual, theoretically giving a more accurate representation of their preferences and consumption behaviors.

The short communication (i.e. quick study) presented today aimed to evaluate using implicit measures to determine how gender and drinker status (i.e. how much and how often one drinks) relates to selection stimuli (in this case, type of alcohol).  The implicit measures test used in this study is the Implicit Association Test (IAT).  This test uses picture or words to represent a single type of alcohol or picture or words to represent different types of alcohol.  According to the authors, this type of methodology could provide more accurate answers and ensure that the choice made actually reflects the true behavior of the consumer compared to survey methods or other methods that may be inaccurate and inconsistent.

Note: this study is a test of methods.

Methods

300 undergraduates (136 male, 164 female) between the ages of 18 and 25 (mean = 20.47) participated in this study.  They were recruited by email, and were told that they would be participating in a research study about cognitive processes and alcohol.

  • 57% identified themselves as white/Caucasian;
  • 30% Asian;
  • 9% multiracial;
  • 4% as black/African American, American Indian/Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian/other Pacific Islander, unknown, or declined answer.

During the IAT test, classification of preference should be faster when the

Photo by batrax: http://farm1.staticflickr.com/24/92549990_37387f7ca0.jpg

pairing of the target and attribute categories match the individual’s personal associations in their memories.  Two separate IAT tests were used:  alcohol approach (approach or avoid) and alcohol excitement (excite or depress).  A higher IAT score indicates a stronger relationship between alcohol and approach than alcohol and avoid, and between alcohol and excite than alcohol and depress.  In other words, a higher score indicates the individual would consume the alcohol and not avoid drinking it, and that the individual is excited about drinking a particular type of alcohol and not indifferent or “depressed” about drinking another type.

During the test, participants selected four images of alcoholic beverages out of 15.  Each image contained 3 different examples of the alcohol they were representing (i.e. 3 different types of beer or 3 different types of wine, etc).  They were asked to choose the images that corresponded to the type of alcohol they drink most often, and if they were classified as “non-drinkers”, they would select the image that corresponded to the type of alcohol that was offered to them most often.

Quantity of consumption at one time and frequency over the past 30 days were also measured.

Results

  • Women chose more wine and liquor than men.
  • Men chose more beer than women.
  • Those considered heavy episodic drinkers (i.e. binge drinkers) chose more beer than those that were not binge drinkers.
  • Binge drinkers chose less wine than those that were not binge drinkers.
  • Binge drinkers chose more liquor than those that were not binge drinkers.
  • Female non-drinkers were more likely to choose iced malt beverages than female binge drinkers.
  • Those who consumed higher amounts of alcohol had higher IAT scores than other consumers
    • In other words, they associated more closely with “alcohol and approach” than “alcohol and avoid” and more closely with “alcohol and excite” than “alcohol and depress”.
    • Non-drinkers had significantly lower IAT scores than binge drinkers and those consuming alcohol more moderately.

Conclusions

In general, the results of this study are consistent with other studies examining the drinking habits of college students.  Males preferred more beer than females, and females preferred more wine and/or liquor than males.  In regards to the preference of those who consumed a heavy amount of alcohol at one time, those participants preferred more beer and liquor, and not wine.  Finally, females that do not drink alcohol and those that do not drink heavily at one time preferred iced malt beverages more than the other participants.

Results from the IAT test suggest that alcohol associations (i.e. “approach or

Photo by Rennette Stowe: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8308/7847608288_5b02fcc912.jpg

avoid” or “excite or depress”) are sensitive to differences in the amount of alcohol consumed and not to the particular type of beverage selected.  In other words, IAT test scores were significantly higher for those that consumed heavily during a drinking episode than for those that do not consume heavily at one time or that don’t drink at all.

The authors suggest that due to these results, research examining alcohol preferences among individuals or groups should use the Implicit Association Test, which would help decrease variability associated with survey-type methods that can be complicated by lying or stretching of the truth due to guilt or embarrassment.

One problem with this study is that it only includes undergraduate students; therefore the results may or may not reflect what the entire population as a whole represents.  The study also did not include other types of alcohol such as alcoholic energy drinks, even though these types of beverages are popular among college-aged students.

Ultimately, the authors claimed that the results of this study indicate that implicit measures may be a more appropriate and more accurate methodology for measure actual preferences of alcohol consumers than traditional survey methods.

I would like to have seen this study coupled with a survey method, to compare the results from the survey directly to the results of the implicit measures test.  The authors say that the implicit measures method would provide more accurate results in regards to actual alcohol consumption behavior, however, they do not describe or compare what the participants responses would have been if they were just answering the questions directly on a survey.  If they did do this, it wasn’t made clear in the paper.

What do you all think about using implicit measures methods for determining consumer behavior?  Have you ever filled out a survey asking for alcohol consumption habits?  Did you stretch the truth a little, or were you completely honest?  Please feel free to leave your comments!

Source: Lindgren, K.P., Westgate, E.C., Kilmer, J.R., Kaysen, D., and Teachman, B.A. 2012. Pick your poison: Stimuli selection in alcohol-related implicit measures. Addictive Behaviors 37: 990-993.