they were given the information reg

they were given the information regarding the closure
type. Since the difference test results showed that consumers
could not distinguish the wine samples with different
closures, or perceived the different wine samples as
effectively the same, participants based their liking decision
primarily on the sensory properties of the wines, not
the closures, so a change in liking would not be expected.
However, when participants were informed that the wine
sample they tasted was from a bottle with a natural cork,
they increased their quality scores, indicating that they
believed the wine sample was of higher quality. There was
a tendency, although not significant at the 95% confidence
level, toward an increase in the quality rating for
the synthetic cork. There was no change in ratings for the
screwcap wine samples. One concern for this sample is
that in both the unknown and known condition, the average
scores tended to be in the midpoint of the liking and
quality scale: neither like nor dislike and moderate quality.
These scores are lower than would be expected for a commercial
product. Thus, measuring the impact of the closure
on a wine that is not well liked for its sensory properties
may not be meaningful. It would be expected that
closure knowledge might have greater impact on quality
perception and be more easily measured in wines that are
well liked and perceived to be of high quality than those
that are not so well liked or of moderate or lower quality.
This expectation is supported by the observation that the
quality ratings for the natural cork and somewhat for the
synthetic cork increased when the closure information was
revealed.
Consumer closure knowledge and attitudes. Results
from this study confirm a report that U.S. consumers believe
alternative closures are used by the wine industry
because they are cheaper (Cartiere 2004). That report also
indicated 64% of consumers believe screwcaps cheapen
the image of the wine, while less than 1% of consumers in
our study indicated a screwcap indicates a high quality
wine. In our study, only 20% of consumers indicated
screwcaps were acceptable substitutes for natural cork,
while Cartiere reported only 19% of consumers accepting
screwcaps on wines priced over $15. Additionally, 80% of
participants in our study indicated disappointment if a
wine in a restaurant was to be served with a screwcap,
supporting the similar finding that 75% of consumers
would not serve wine with a screwcap at a formal diner or
bring it as a gift (Cartiere 2004). Regarding cork taint, our
results indicate that 30 to 55% of consumers believe
screwcaps or synthetic corks can prevent spoilage associated
with natural corks—indicating that consumers are not
well informed about cork taint problems. This lack of
knowledge was also confirmed by low consumer responses
(24%) for those who believe natural corks can
cause off-tastes and smells in wine.
Consumer attitudes toward closures reported in this
study are both time and place sensitive. Consumer attitude
data were collected in March 2004 and are congruent
with results reported that same year (Cartiere 2004).