Cultural differences in wine conceptualization among consumers in France, Portugal and South Africa

Abstract

Consumers’ mental pictures of wine are multifaceted and are shaped by their sensory (taste, smell, visual, sensation) perceptions, in addition to emotional, cultural and extrinsic (brand, price, and awards) influences. This study explores whether consumers from three different wine cultures share mental representations of three wine concepts. Through an online survey, French, Portuguese, and South African wine consumers described their conceptualizations of Wine, Red wine and White wine aroma. Given these nations’ rich winemaking traditions and diverse wine styles, differences in consumer perspectives were likely to emerge. The findings demonstrate that, regardless of cultural background, the broad concept of Wine aligns with the more specific Red and White wine conceptualizations, although the latter concepts diverge from each other. Notably, cultural contexts significantly influence participants’ representations of Red Wine, with particularly marked contrasts between the South African and French respondents. This suggests that like experts, wine consumers have also built representations of wine through semantic memory. This cross-cultural analysis of consumer interpretations of wine concepts holds the potential for refining marketing strategies to overcome cultural barriers in wine purchasing behaviour.

Full text

1
Vol.:(0123456789)
Scientic Reports | (2024) 14:15977 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-66636-3
www.nature.com/scientificreports
Cultural dierences
in wine conceptualization
among consumers in France,
Portugal and South Africa
Samantha Fairbairn
1, Jeanne Brand
1, Antonio Silva Ferreira
1,2, Dominique Valentin
1,3 &
Florian Bauer
1*
Consumers’ mental pictures of wine are multifaceted and are shaped by their sensory (taste, smell,
visual, sensation) perceptions, in addition to emotional, cultural and extrinsic (brand, price, and
awards) inuences. This study explores whether consumers from three dierent wine cultures share
mental representations of three wine concepts. Through an online survey, French, Portuguese,
and South African wine consumers described their conceptualizations of Wine, Red wine and White
wine aroma. Given these nations’ rich winemaking traditions and diverse wine styles, dierences
in consumer perspectives were likely to emerge. The ndings demonstrate that, regardless of
cultural background, the broad concept of Wine aligns with the more specic Red and White wine
conceptualizations, although the latter concepts diverge from each other. Notably, cultural contexts
signicantly inuence participants’ representations of Red Wine, with particularly marked contrasts
between the South African and French respondents. This suggests that like experts, wine consumers
have also built representations of wine through semantic memory. This cross-cultural analysis of
consumer interpretations of wine concepts holds the potential for rening marketing strategies to
overcome cultural barriers in wine purchasing behaviour.
Keywords Wine aroma, Consumer, Culture, Conceptualisation
Wine is a grape-derived alcoholic beverage with a long history and deep cultural resonance as evidenced by its
prominent role in literature and visual representations since antiquity1. In modern times, it can also claim to be
the most sensorially analysed and described food-item with a very large descriptive vocabulary2. Food and wine
are oen consumed in social contexts which also impacts our perception of these products3,4. It is within these
contexts, or cultures, that we develop and share our beliefs, values and wine consumption rituals and practices3.
Research indicates that wine consumers attribute signicant importance to the context of wine consumption,
encompassing factors such as the occasion being commemorated, the individuals present, and the pairing with
food5,6. Consequently, national- and cross-cultural research has received much interest, and the latter was recently
reviewed by Rodrigues and Parr7.
Examining the global wine landscape reveals that Portugal, France and South Africa are among the top 16
in terms of wine production, exportation and consumption based on the International Organisation of Vine
and Wine’s (OIV) 2020 data8. However, only the European countries are among the top ten wine importers with
South Africa lagging far behind as the 83rd largest importer. Consequently, South Africans mostly consume their
domestic product, whereas French and Portuguese consumers have exposure to international wines.
Moreover, within Europe, the signicance of terroir (place of origin) is pronounced, oen standing as a
representation of national pride. is reverence nds expression in wine marketing strategies, labelling, and
descriptions9,10. However, in South Africa, as in much of the new world, the emphasis of producers and mar-
keters shis to more technical aspects such as grape cultivar and method of production, setting their wine
perspective apart from their European counterparts9. is cultural distinction came to the fore in a comparative
analysis involving Chenin blanc experts in South Africa and France. South Africans predominantly considered
OPEN
1South African Grape and Wine Research Institute, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South
Africa. 2Escola Superior de Biotecnologia, Universidade Católica Portuguesa, Rua Dr. António Bernardino de
Almeida, 4200-072 Porto, Portugal. 3Centre des Sciences du Goût et de l’alimentation, AgroSup Dijon, CNRS,
INRA, Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté, F-21000 Dijon, France. *email: 2@sun.ac.za
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved

2
Vol:.(1234567890)
Scientic Reports | (2024) 14:15977 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-66636-3
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
the wine’s inherent characteristics. Conversely, the French placed greater emphasis on the wine’s origin and the
consumption context (meal and aperitif). is divergence underscores the varied perspectives between these
two cultures9. Portuguese and South African wine consumers have not been studied as extensively as French
consumers. Nonetheless, research has shown that Portuguese and South African consumers, like their French
counterparts, pair wine with meals5,6,9,11. Portuguese consumers associate drinking wine with feeling calm and
comforted5, the French with conviviality12 and South Africans drink wine to feel relaxed and condent as well
as an outward display of sophistication and status (when drinking red wine in particular)5. is association of
wine with success is a trait also seen among Asian wine consumers11.
A recent review by Barbe etal.13 outlined a three-step process to describe the sensory space of wine: e rst
is to determine whether the sensory concept exists and is shared on a purely conceptual basis, this is followed by
a perceptual evaluation of the product using categorization and descriptive tasks. In a recent study, our research
group explored Saccharomyces cerevisiae’s ability to create a global wine-like aroma prole, by fermenting a
minimal dened medium without any varietal aroma precursors14. Alterations in this medium ultimately resulted
in the perception of a wine-like character using rating, categorization, and descriptive tasks. Interestingly, the
attributes elicited were ones associated with white wine. is raised the question of whether this global wine
character exists and whether it is shared at a conceptual level. Recently, wine research has included the purely
cognitive description of wine, primarily by experts to describe various wines styles or wine concepts. is
approach has been used to understand the meaning of wine complexity15, to prole the typicality of Portuguese
white wines16, of wines within the Beaujolais region17 and to characterize the green character of red wine18. is
approach removes biases linked to the selection of suitable wines at adequate numbers for evaluation.
is study aimed to rst examine whether people have dierent mental representations of red and white
wine compared to a “global wine concept” and secondly to compare the degree to which culture impacts these
representations among South African, French, and Portuguese wine consumers. Consumers and experts approach
describing wine dierently. Consumers describe the inherent characteristics of wine (which we are interested
in), whereas experts usually describe it by comparing it to an idealised prototype of a specic wine style oen
using technical winemaking terms15,19.
Materials and method
Participants
Respondents were South African, French, or Portuguese wine consumers without any formal wine-related train-
ing, and who consume wine at least once a month. ey were recruited via email among the sta and postgradu-
ate students at Stellenbosch University, the University of Burgundy, and the Catholic University of Portugal at
Porto. As is oen the case in cross-cultural studies, the convenience sampling method used has some limitations
including the sample of participants not being representative of the whole country’s population, but rather a
regional self-selected sub-population.
South Africa, France and Portugal were selected for comparison based on data shown in Table1. ese coun-
tries are among the top sixteen wine producing and consuming countries, although there are notable dispari-
ties in their wine consumption. South Africans consume signicantly less wine per capita than their European
counterparts, however our inclusion criteria mitigate this disparity by using the frequency of consumption of
respondents. is study also aims to contrast the cultural dimensions of wine mental representation between a
‘New World’ (South Africa) and two ‘Old World’ countries with very dierent wine consumption and apprecia-
tion histories (France and Portugal), including signicant varietal dierences. e data may also reect the eects
of a more global wine exposure in France and Portugal compared to South Africa’s insular market.
e socio-demographic data collected were age, sex, nationality, and education. For the South African cohort,
186 responses (69% female, 30% male, 1% undisclosed) met the inclusion criteria compared to 46 French (57%
female, 41% male, 2% undisclosed) and 62 Portuguese (55% female, 45% male) respondents (Table2). e dif-
ference in number of participants between countries can be explained by the fact that data collection was carried
out during COVID and at this time the availability of sta and students diered among the three universities. To
have a more balanced dataset, the data of 60 South African (72% female, 28% male) consumers were randomly
selected and used in subsequent analyses (Table2). Multiple factor analysis (MFA, performed using XLSTAT®
soware, Addinso, 2023.) comparing the full South African dataset to this subset of 60 random consumers
(Supplementary gureS1) showed that they are similar.
Table 1. A summary of the wine production, consumption, import and export data and the corresponding
world ranking in terms of wine volume (OIV, 2020) of South Africa, France, and Portugal used as criteria for
selection for participation.
New world Old world
1000hL South Africa France Portugal
Production 10 385 (7th) 46 673 (2nd) 6 418 (11th)
Consumption 3 138 (16th) 24 361 (2nd) 4 374 (12th)
Per capita (L) 7.5 45.8 49.1
Exports 3 620 (8th) 14 085 (3rd) 3 151 (10th)
Imports 44 (83rd) 6 561 (4th) 2 745 (10th)
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved

3
Vol.:(0123456789)
Scientic Reports | (2024) 14:15977 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-66636-3
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Consumers’ wine consumption data with respect to wine training, consumption frequency, involvement (wine
interest) and regular consumption preference were also collected (Table3). To determine their wine interest or
involvement, participants rated the degree to which certain word pairs (important/unimportant, interesting/
boring, relevant/irrelevant, exciting/unexciting, means a lot/ means nothing, appealing/unappealing, fascinating/
mundane, valuable/worthless, involving/uninvolving and, needed/not needed) described their relationship with
wine using a 7-point scale. e participant’s context-free wine involvement was estimated by averaging these
scores20 (Table3) where seven indicates a high wine involvement and one low involvement. An overview of how
respondents rated these questions is summarised in Supplementary FigureS2.
e sex distribution was similar for the French (57% female, 41% male, 2% undisclosed) and the Portuguese
(55% female, 45% male) cohorts and diered from the South African participants (72% female, 28% male).
Additionally, most of the consumers had a tertiary education and were either employed or students.
Table 2. Consumer socio-demographic data.
South Afric a (n = 60) France (n = 46) Portugal (n = 62)
Sex
Female 43 26 34
Male 17 19 28
Undisclosed 0 1 0
Age (average ± standard deviation)
Baby Boomer 62.63 ± 4.66 61.5 ± 5.36 61.00 ± 3.00
Gen X 49.50 ± 4.37 49.65 ± 3.22 50.02 ± 3.26
Gen Y 31.27 ± 5.20 31.60 ± 5.27 31.56 ± 4.29
Gen Z 23.25 ± 0.89 22.46 ± 1.13 21.50 ± 2.12
Education
High School or less 1 5 2
Tertiary education 59 41 60
Employment
Employed 43 26 50
Student 11 14 5
Retired 2 2 1
Unemployed 1 0 3
Other 3 4 3
Table 3. e frequency data summarizes the respondent’s wine consumption habits, specically which wine
types they regularly consume and how oen, as well as their wine involvement.
South Afric a (n = 60) France (n = 46) Portugal (n = 62)
Regularly consumes
Red 48 (80%) 41 (89%) 48 (77%)
White 33 (55%) 41 (89%) 46 (74%)
Rosé 8 (13%) 16 (35%) 18 (29%)
Sweet 6 (10%) 8 (17%) 6 (10%)
Sparkling 18 (30%) 24 (52%) 20 (32%)
Consumption frequency
Daily 5 (8%) 4 (9%) 10 (16%)
Several times a week 18 (30%) 14 (30%) 22 (35%)
Once a week 15 (25%) 7 (15%) 9 (15%)
Several times a month 17 (28%) 19 (41%) 15 (24%)
Once a month 5 (8%) 2 (4%) 6 (10%)
Wine involvement score
Very low: < 2 1 (2%) 1 (2%) 0 (0%)
Low: 2–3 0 (0%) 2 (4%) 3 (5%)
Low: 3–4 4 (7%) 3 (7%) 8 (13%)
Neutral: 4–5 14 (23%) 19 (41%) 13 (21%)
High: 5–6 25 (42%) 10 (22%) 25 (40%)
Very high: > 6 16 (27%) 11 (24%) 13 (21%)
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved

4
Vol:.(1234567890)
Scientic Reports | (2024) 14:15977 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-66636-3
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
is simple wine involvement test is used as a proxy for wine interest and knowledge, the premise being that
the more interested (involved) you are in a subject the more familiar and knowledgeable you would be20,21. More
than 80% of the participants, in each cultural cohort, had a neutral to high wine involvement (Table3), as shown
by their averaged ratings. Wine involvement is more complex and nuanced than suggested here, as it is impacted
by several factors including the consumers’ context (situation)22.
e participants generallyconsumed red wine (South Africa 80%, France, 89% and Portugal 77%) and white
wine (South Africa 55%, France, 89% and Portugal 74%), with South Africans appearing to consume red wine
more regularly than white wine, whereas their European counterparts consume them at similar frequencies.
Ethical approval
is research was approved by the Ethics Committee of Stellenbosch University (10,095) and conducted in
accordance with their guidelines. Informed consent was obtained from all participants.
Procedure
All responses were collected using the Compusense® online platform (Compusense Inc., Guelph, Canada). As a
warm-up exercise, participants were asked to describe a car. A minimum of three descriptors was required and
a maximum of 16 permitted. ey were then tasked to describe wine aroma. e question was posed as follows:
“Imagine trying to make an alien understand the dierences between dierent drinks. Which descriptors would
you use to describe the smell of Wine?”. Participants then described Red and White wine concepts. e order of
the latter two concepts was randomized.
Data analysis
Text analysis
All analyses were carried out in the original language of the participants. Spelling errors were corrected, and
the descriptors were subjected to lemmatization which reduces words to their root (e.g., changing berries to
berry). e frequency of occurrence of lemmatized descriptors (for each concept and country) was computed
and tabulated in frequency tables with descriptors as row and concept/country as columns.
Descriptors with the same semantic meaning were then grouped (categorization) whilst retaining as much
nuance as possible to ensure that cultural dierences are retained (e.g., oral, owers and blossoms were charac-
terised as oral). is was done independently by three researchers in the original language following the same
grouping rules in all three datasets. e French and Portuguese nal descriptors were translated into English by
a native French or Portuguese speaker for further analyses. e frequency of occurrence of each descriptor for
each concept in each country was then tabulated and summed as described above to create contingency tables.
Aroma attribute specicity
e dierences in the aroma descriptor specicity were evaluated across and within wine concepts and coun-
tries. e characterised descriptors were classied as generic (e.g., fruity), intermediate (e.g., tropical fruit) and
specic (e.g., pineapple) largely using the aroma wheel as a guide23,24. e frequency with which attributes, at
each specicity level, were used to describe the concepts, in each country, was calculated. Pearson’s correlation
coecients and Chi (χ2) square independence tests were calculated between all pairs of concepts (Wine vs White
wine; wine vs Red wine; White wine vs Red wine) within each country and across countries (South Africa vs
France; South Africa vs Portugal; France vs Portugal) for each concept. Furthermore, the relationship between
the wine concepts, wine cultures and characterised attributes for the generic, intermediate, and specic attributes
were illustrated using correspondence analysis (Supplementary gureS3). All analyses were performed using
XLSTAT
® soware.
Relationships between all descriptors elicited and the wine concept and or culture
To evaluate the relationship between all the characterised attributes elicited for the three concepts in the three
countries, once again Pearson’s correlation coecients and Chi-square tests were conducted as discussed. To
visualize the relationship between the words used to describe the three wine concepts correspondence analyses
were performed. e rst set of three CAs (one per country) compared the descriptors associated with the three
wine concepts within each country. e second set (one per wine concept) compared the descriptors associated
with a wine concept across the three countries. All CAs were performed on descriptors mentioned by at least 10%
of the participants in at least one wine concept or country depending on the context, using XLSTAT
® soware.
Results
Aroma attribute specicity
e aroma attributes were grouped based on their degree of information specicity as generic (fruity), interme-
diate (tropical or exotic fruit), or specic (pineapple) using an aroma wheel23. Table4 shows the frequency with
which words in these three levels of descriptor specicity were associated with the Wine, White wine and Red
wine concepts in the three countries evaluated.
In all countries, when the wine concept evaluated is more precise, either White wine or Red wine, consumers
generally provided more informative (intermediate and specic) and fewer generic attributes (Table4). For the
French consumers, 86% of the attributes used to describe the global Wine concept were generic, compared to 64%
and 71% for the Red wine and White wine, respectively. Interestingly, the data trends suggest that South African
consumers were more detailed (specic) in their descriptions than their European counterparts, as shown by
the comparatively lower frequencies for the generic descriptors.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved

5
Vol.:(0123456789)
Scientic Reports | (2024) 14:15977 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-66636-3
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
At the generic description level, the data show that the foundation of all three wine concepts, regardless of
culture, is fruity, spicy and wood whereas other generic descriptors are context specic (Table4). Minerality
was associated with White wine in all three countries, but it was also associated with the global Wine concept by
French and the Red wine concept by South African consumers. Some other context dierences include French
(green, vegetal) and South African (grass, green) consumers highlighting the presence of vegetal and green aro-
mas which are generally absent from the Portuguese data (Table4). French and South African consumers also
cited animal related descriptors, which are entirely absent from the Portuguese dataset.
When comparing the relationship between the dierent wine concepts, within a culture, the correlation data
suggests that the global Wine concept generally correlates with the Red or White wine concepts for the generic
attributes (Table5, Supplementary gureS3). However, the Chi-square test of independence analyses show
that the relationship between the Wine and White wine concepts may not be signicant in the French cohort
(χ2 = 12.39, df = 8, p = 0.13). Additionally, with the increase in the specicity of the descriptor any correlation is
generally lost, and cultural dierences emerge (Supplementary gureS3).
When comparing the wine concepts across cultures, the generic attributes correlated, however, this correlation
was once again not necessarily signicant (Table6), as shown by the Chi-square independence test. Generally,
the French and Portuguese generic wine concepts correlated well—Wine: χ2 = 17.46, df = 8, p = 0.03, Red wine:
χ2 = 28.36, df = 7, p = 0.00, and White wine: χ2 = 16.44, df = 7, p = 0.02.
e aroma-only data shows that the wine conceptualizations of Portuguese, French and South African wine
consumers are well aligned at the generic level (Supplementary gureS3), but as the specicity of the attribute
increases nuances are more apparent.
Relationships between all descriptors elicited and the wine concept and or culture
Chi-square independence test was used to evaluate whether a relationship exists between two categorical vari-
ables, rstly comparing the wine concepts within (Table7) and then across cultures using all the elicited cat-
egorized data. e nature of these relationships was further described using Pearson’s correlation coecients.
Irrespective of cultural background, the Red wine concept diered from the White wine concept (Table7).
Moreover, both the Red wine and White wine concepts demonstrated greater resemblances to the broader global
Wine concept. Interestingly, when we compare the concepts across cultures (Table7), the data show that Wine and
White wine mental concepts were generally similar across all cultures. e Red wine concepts showed the poor-
est similaritywith the South African construct more closely resembling the Portuguese (0,57) than the French
(0,37). Additionally, the French Red wine construct more closely resembled that of the Portuguese (0,52) than the
South African cohort. Indeed, these relative trends are also seen for the Wine and White wine concepts where the
South African concepts were more similar to the Portuguese than the French and the French conceptualizations
were more similar to the Portuguese.
CA was conducted on the categorized data where a minimum of 10% of the participants used the attribute
within (Fig.1) or across cultures (Fig.2). For all cultures, the rst dimension describes the separation of the
Red and White wine concepts (explaining between 79 and 82.9% of the variation in the data), with the general
Wine concept, falling between them (Fig.1). Furthermore, the second dimension describes the separation of
this general concept from the two more specic concepts (explaining between 17.1 and 21.0% of the variation).
is agrees with the correlation data shown in Table7.
In all three countries, fruity was used to describe all wine concepts, although it was more frequently used to
describe Wine and White wine than Red wine, when berry related attributes (South Africa—berry, France, and
Table 4. e percentage of wine aroma attributes classied as generic, intermediate, or specic based on the
aroma wheel used to describe the wine concepts. e original language is shown in the parentheses as well as
which concept was described: Red wine (RW), White wine (WW), Wine (W) or all three concepts (All).
Wine (%) Red Wine (%) White Wine (%) Characterised attributes
South Africa
Specic 14 16 32 barrel (RW, W), butter (WW), chocolate (RW), cork (RW, W), dusty (RW, W), grape (All), grass
(WW, W), musty (RW, W), smoke (RW, W)
Intermediate 12 26 45 green (WW), fresh (All), berry (RW, W), black_fruit (RW), red_fruit (RW), tropical/exotic_fruit
(WW, W), white_fruit (WW), citrus (All), crisp (WW)
Generic 74 58 43 fruity (All), undergrowth (RW, W), animal (RW, W), nutty (RW, W), spicy (All), oral (WW, W),
mineral (RW, WW), wooded (All)
France
Specic 10 12 6 barrel (tonneau-RW, W), bell_pepper (légume-RW), butter (beurré-RW, WW), grape (raisin-
All), iron (fer-RW, W), smoke (fumée-WW, W), vanilla (vanillé-All)
Intermediate 5 24 23 citrus (agrume-WW), fresh (frais-RW, WW), green (vert-WW, W), red_fruit (fruit_rouge-RW,
W), stone fruit (fruit_à_noyaux-WW), tropical/exotic_fruit (fruit_exotique-WW)
Generic 86 64 71 animal (animal-RW, W), oral (oral-All), fruity (fruité-All), mineral (mineral-WW, W),
nut (fruit_sec-WW, W), spicy (épice-All), undergrowth (sous-bois-All), vegetal (végétal-All),
wooded (boisé-All)
Portugal
Specic 3 6 3 grape (uva-All), walnuts (nozes-RW)
Intermediate 13 21 41 black_fruit (fruta preta-RW, W), citrus (citrico-WW), dark_fruit (frutos pretos-RW, W), fresh
(fresco-WW, W), red_fruit (frutos vermelha-All), tropical/exotic_fruit (frutos tropicais-WW),
white fruit (Frutos brancos-WW, W)
Generic 84 73 56 oral (oral-All), fruity (frutado-All), mineral (mineral-WW), nutty (frutos_secos-RW), spicy
(especiarias-All), undergrowth (vegetação rasteira-RW), wooded (arborizada-All)
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved

6
Vol:.(1234567890)
Scientic Reports | (2024) 14:15977 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-66636-3
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Portugal—red fruit) become more prominent. As expected, attributes oen associated with red wine and white
wine, were used to describe the Red wine and White wine concepts, respectively.
South Africans associated the generic Wine concept with acidic, alcoholic, wooded, fermented, undergrowth
and aromatic attributes. e White wine concept was described as sweet, citrus, grassy, fresh, light, and crisp. e
Red wine concept was associated with wooded, spicey, undergrowth, and smoky aromas (Fig.1a).
e French participants described the Wine concept as pleasant, fruity, and alcoholic. e White wine concept
was described as sweet, citrus, fresh, mineral, and so. e Red wine concept was associated with wooded, spicy,
undergrowth, tannin, and red fruit (Fig.1b).
Lastly, Portuguese respondents used olfaction, alcohol, and aroma/bouquet to describe the general Wine
concept. e White wine concept was described as light, citrus, fresh, acidic, and so. e Red wine concept was
associated with wooded and red fruit aromas (Fig.1c).
When comparing these wine concepts across cultures, the rst dimension describes the dierences between
the French and South African participants for the Red and White wine concepts and European and South African
consumers in the case of the general Wine concept (Fig.2). e second dimension generally highlights the dif-
ferences between the French and Portuguese participants. Information-poor aroma descriptors such as aromatic
(South Africa), aroma/bouquet (South Africa, Portugal), olfaction (Portugal), alcohol (South Africa, France,
Portugal), pleasant (France), fermented (South Africa) were associated with the general Wine concept (Fig.2a).
All three cohorts also described the global Wine concept as complex, wooded and fruity.
Fruity, intensity (bold/intense) and wooded attributes were used to describe red wine aroma in all three
cultures (Fig.2b and Supplementary gureS4). Berry attributes were used by the South African cohort, and red
fruit in the French and Portuguese. South African and French consumers also used spicy and undergrowth to
describe the Red wine concept. South Africans used attributes such as heady/ rich, deep, heavy, smoke, and black
fruit to describe the Red Wine concept generally absent from other cultures. Body and dried fruit attributes were
associated with the Portuguese Red wine concept.
Table 5. Relationship(Pearson’s correlation and Chi-square tests) between the generic, intermediate, and
specic attributes used to describe the wine concepts within cultures. *Too few attributes to analyse. Numbers
in bold denote p-values smaller than 0.05.
Pearson’s correlation coecient Chi-squared (χ2)DF p-value
South Africa
Specic
Red Wine-White Wine − 0.396 26.15 8.00 < 0.001
Red Wine-Wine 0.021 8.82 7.00 0.27
White Wine-Wine 0.506 11.98 7.00 0.10
Intermediate
Red Wine-White Wine − 0.361 72.56 8.00 < 0.001
Red Wine-Wine 0.752 10.30 5.00 0.07
White Wine-Wine − 0.122 36.28 6.00 < 0.001
Generic
Red Wine-White Wine 0.326 55.35 7.00 < 0.001
Red Wine-Wine 0.606 23.31 7.00 < 0.001
White Wine-Wine 0.929 18.73 7.00 0.01
France
Specic
Red Wine-White Wine 0.539 4.58 6.00 0.60
Red Wine-Wine 0.281 4.96 6.00 0.55
White Wine-Wine − 0.556 3.11 5.00 0.68
Intermediate
Red Wine-White Wine − 0.382 33.32 5.00 < 0.001
Red Wine-Wine 0.904 5.25 2.00 0.07
White Wine-Wine − 0.556 20.04 5.00 < 0.001
Generic
Red Wine-White Wine 0.417 43.40 8.00 < 0.001
Red Wine-Wine 0.769 20.55 8.00 0.01
White Wine-Wine 0.868 12.39 8.00 0.13
Portugal
Specic
Red Wine-White Wine 1.000 1.60 1.00 0.21
Red Wine-Wine 1.000 1.12 1.00 0.29
White Wine-Wine * * * *
Intermediate
Red Wine-White Wine − 0.367 54.40 6.00 < 0.001
Red Wine-Wine − 0.414 17.71 4.00 < 0.001
White Wine-Wine 0.858 13.31 6.00 0.04
Generic
Red Wine-White Wine 0.336 44.24 6.00 < 0.001
Red Wine-Wine 0.655 18.33 5.00 < 0.001
White Wine-Wine 0.850 15.28 4.00 < 0.001
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved

7
Vol.:(0123456789)
Scientic Reports | (2024) 14:15977 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-66636-3
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Table 6. Relationship (Pearson’s correlation and Chi-square tests) between the generic, intermediate, and
specic attributes used to describe the wine concepts across culture. Numbers in bold denote p-values lower
than 0.05.
Pearson’s correlation coecient Chi-squared (χ2)DF p-value
Red Wine
Specic
South Africa-Portugal − 0.257 15.17 7.00 0.03
France-Portugal 0.359 7.47 6.00 0.28
South Africa-France − 0.340 18.49 10.00 0.05
Intermediate
South Africa-Portugal − 0.293 29.45 5.00 < 0.001
France-Portugal 0.838 9.63 3.00 0.02
South Africa-France − 0.266 32.73 4.00 < 0.001
Generic
South Africa-Portugal 0.820 21.67 7.00 < 0.001
France-Portugal 0.602 28.36 7.00 < 0.001
South Africa-France 0.740 15.72 8.00 0.05
White Wine
Specic
South Africa-Portugal − 0.381 6.68 2.00 0.04
France-Portugal 1.000 2.25 3.00 0.52
South Africa-France − 0.358 9.68 4.00 0.05
Intermediate
South Africa-Portugal 0.858 16.61 6.00 0.01
France-Portugal 0.960 10.45 6.00 0.11
South Africa-France 0.751 14.67 6.00 0.02
Generic
South Africa-Portugal 0.934 4.42 4.00 0.35
France-Portugal 0.906 16.44 7.00 0.02
South Africa-France 0.864 19.99 7.00 0.01
Wine
Specic
South Africa-Portugal 0.471 4.62 6.00 0.59
France-Portugal 0.875 2.50 4.00 0.64
South Africa-France 0.426 7.43 8.00 0.49
Intermediate
South Africa-Portugal -0.033 15.78 7.00 0.03
France-Portugal -0.279 11.16 5.00 0.05
South Africa-France -0.543 15.00 5.00 0.01
Generic
South Africa-Portugal 0.965 10.40 6.00 0.11
France-Portugal 0.969 17.46 8.00 0.03
South Africa-France 0.936 16.40 8.00 0.04
Table 7. Relationship(Pearson’s correlation and Chi-square test) between wine concepts within and across
cultures. Numbers in bold denote p-values lower than 0.05.
Pearson’s correl ation Chi-square independence test (χ2) Degrees of freedom p-value
Wine
South Africa-France 0.77 166.72 80 < 0.0001
South Africa-Portugal 0.79 167.56 87 < 0.0001
Portugal-France 0.83 142.20 72 < 0.0001
Red Wine
South Africa-France 0.37 201.97 79 < 0.0001
South Africa-Portugal 0.57 180.57 89 < 0.0001
Portugal-France 0.52 167.29 78 < 0.0001
White Wine
South Africa-France 0.75 123.26 55 < 0.0001
South Africa-Portugal 0.86 114.31 56 < 0.0001
Portugal-France 0.79 101.56 55 < 0.0001
South Africa
Red Wine-White Wine 0.28 263.69 72 < 0.0001
Red Wine-Wine 0.65 114.62 70 0.001
White Wine-Wine 0.69 155.01 64 < 0.0001
France
Red Wine -White Wine 0.44 134.81 47 < 0.0001
Red Wine-Wine 0.72 69.66 46 0.014
White Wine -Wine 0.79 84.58 47 0.001
Portugal
Red Wine -White Wine 0.31 208.41 65 < 0.0001
Red Wine -Wine 0.74 86.09 62 0.023
White Wine -Wine 0.69 125.39 56 < 0.0001
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved

8
Vol:.(1234567890)
Scientic Reports | (2024) 14:15977 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-66636-3
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Discussion
Consumers use dierent descriptive words to draw a mental picture of wine aroma. ese pictures are shaped by
personal experiences, but everyone’s experiences are dierent. erefore, we collected data from three countries
Figure1. Evaluating the wine concept dierences within each culture. Correspondence analysis comparing
the attributes associated with Wine, Red Wine and White concepts by a minimum of 10% of the participants in
South Africa (a), France and (b), Portugal (c).
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved

9
Vol.:(0123456789)
Scientic Reports | (2024) 14:15977 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-66636-3
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
with dierent winemaking histories to evaluate the degree to which personal experience is impacted by cultural
background in terms of the mental pictures describing the aromas of global, Red, and White wine concepts
(Figs.1 and 2). e Douro region in Portugal, grows several native cultivars, such as Touriga Nacional, Touriga
Figure2. Evaluating the cultural dierences for each wine concept. Correspondence analysis comparing the
attributes associated with Wine (a), Red (b) and White Wine concepts (c) when used by a minimum of 10% of
the participants in at least one of the cohorts in South Africa (SA), France (FR), and Portugal (PT).
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved

10
Vol:.(1234567890)
Scientic Reports | (2024) 14:15977 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-66636-3
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Franca, Tinta Barroca, Tinto Cao and Tinta Roriz (Tempranillo), not commonly found in France and South
Africa. In Burgundy, France, only Chardonnay and Pinot noir are cultivated and in the Western Cape, South
Africa, Chenin blanc, Sauvignon blanc, Chardonnay, Pinotage, Cabernet Sauvignon, Syrah are commonly grown.
In France and Portugal data were collected in specic wine regions with specic cultivars which may also have
inuenced participants’ wine concepts. Previous work showed that in France, wine producing regions have such
strong and distinct identities, that it impacts consumers’ conceptualizations of wine7, it is unclear to what extent
this regional identity is seen among Portuguese and South African wine consumers.
Our rst aim was to evaluate whether wine consumers have dierent mental representations of Red and White
wine compared to a Wine concept. In all three cultural contexts, the data shows that the Red and White wine
concepts are distinct from each other, with the Wine concept sharing elements of both. Interestingly, although
participants were asked to describe the wine aroma concepts as if to an alien, the elicited attributes included
descriptions of taste, mouthfeel, appearance, hedonic characteristics, emotions, intensity, as well as concepts
such as quality, minerality and complexity. is suggests that wine aroma is either inextricably linked to these
other traits or that wine’s aromatic conceptualization is dicult to describe and that wine consumers do not have
the required vocabulary24,25. Other research has shown that when wine colour is altered our perception of the
wines attributes also changed to align with wine colour rather than with its inherent traits26–28. is suggests the
existence of an underlying conceptualization used to describe wine based on visual cues, and when the visual
cue is removed so is the conceptualization switch29. Our data, for the rst time, conrms the existence of these
conceptual wine representations that underpin the perceptual dierences between red and white wines.
Moreover, as seen previously, South Africans favoured a “technical” approach when describing wine aroma
by using more specic attributes, whereas French consumers used more generic terms possibly reecting
the “terroir”9. Interestingly, only French consumers used a hedonic trait (pleasant, global wine aroma) above
the 10% threshold. is suggests a stronger emotional motivation in the French cohort associated with wine
consumption11. Interestingly, ChatGPT 3.5 was able to accurately identify the Red and White Wine concepts in
all three cultures, arming that the data collected indeed matches the characteristics associated with these two
broad wine styles.
Our second goal was to assess how culture inuences these mental representations. is study focuses solely
on experiential conceptualizations from consumers, disregarding grape variety. Moreover, the results indicate
that expectations are comparable for the Wine and White wine concepts, demonstrated by their strong correlation
across cultures. Indeed, the aroma data also shows that agreement seen across cultures, largely lies in the use
of generic aroma attributes but as the information become more precise linguistic, cultural, and wine concept
dierences emerge.
South African, and Portuguese wine consumers share an association of freshness (acid, crisp) in their con-
ceptualization of white wine, largely absent from the French data. is is possibly due to dierences in wine style.
Many wines in Burgundy undergo malolactic fermentation (MLF) which leads to acidity reduction, possibly
explaining the less frequent association with acidity. Red wines are generally considered more complex than white
wine, in terms of aroma and avour30. It is possible that this complexity in addition to dierent wine styles and
cultivars contributes to dierences observed between the three participating countries. Portuguese consumers
cited body, and boldness/intensity as being essential to their Red wine conceptualization. e French Red wine
concept was described as having animal and red fruit character with the presence of tannins. Whereas, South
African’s have cited an association of spicy and smoke with their Red wine concept. It is intriguing that the South
African conception of wine aligns more closely with that of the Portuguese consumers rather than French, despite
both South Africa and France cultivating the same grape varieties.
Research indicates that experts oen form idealized prototypes of various wine styles based on their personal
experiences, serving as benchmarks against which all wines are evaluated15,19,31–33. Our data suggests that wine
consumers may similarly rely on these preexisting wine prototypes to articulate their conception of wine. is
inuence is evident in the cultural dierences seen in the Red wine concept, also highlighting the opportunity
to dene and dierentiate the White wine prototypes within each cultural context more clearly.
Conclusion
e diculty consumers had in describing wine aroma serves as a valuable reminder of the importance of fully
engaging our senses as we experience life. is prompts us to delve deeper into the meanings we attach to the
words we use to describe wine.
e study has several limitations that should be acknowledged. First, the sample size was relatively small,
which restricts our ability to perform detailed segmentation based on socio-demographic data or specic wine
consumer behaviours. Consequently, the ndings may not be fully representative of the broader population,
although the stability of the South African data from a larger sample is promising (Supplementary gureS1).
Additionally, consumers perceive food products wholistically, so it may be unnatural for them to split their
perception into dierent sensory modalities. is might impact their mental constructs of these individual
modalities (odour, taste, mouthfeel).
Nonetheless, the data shows the existence of Red, White and global Wine conceptualizations. ese concep-
tualizations are established through personal experience. Particularly interesting is the discovery that while the
conceptualizations of white wine and generic wine aromas are shared across cultures, the conceptualization of
red wine aroma varies. is study enriches our understanding of consumer expectations across diverse contexts
and underscores the potential for targeted marketing strategies for red wine. Future research could delve into
how and if these conceptualizations evolve with training, further explore regional dierences within countries
and could intentionally explore facets of these wine conceptualizations that extend beyond aroma.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved

11
Vol.:(0123456789)
Scientic Reports | (2024) 14:15977 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-66636-3
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Data availability
e data collected and analysed during this study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable
request.
Received: 9 February 2024; Accepted: 3 July 2024
References
1. McGovern, P. E. Ancient Wine : e Search for the Origins of Viniculture (Princeton University Press, 2003).
2. Valente, C. C., Bauer, F. F., Venter, F., Watson, B. & Nieuwoudt, H. H. Modelling the sensory space of varietal wines: Mining of
large, unstructured text data and visualisation of style patterns. Sci. Rep. 8, 4987 (2018).
3. Fischler, C. Food, self and identity. Soc. Sci. Inform. Sur les Sci. Soc. 27, 275–292 (1988).
4. Lo Monaco, G. & Bonetto, E. Social representations and culture in food studies. Food Res. Int. 115, 474–479 (2019).
5. Weightman, C., Bauer, F. F., Terblanche, N. S., Valentin, D. & Nieuwoudt, H. H. An exploratory study of urban South African con-
sumers’ perceptions of wine and wine consumption: Focus on social, emotional, and functional factors. J. Wine Res. 30, 179–203
(2019).
6. Silva, A. P. et al. Functional or emotional? How Dutch and Portuguese conceptualise beer, wine and non-alcoholic beer consump-
tion. Food Qual. Prefer. 49, 54–65 (2016).
7. Rodrigues, H. & Parr, W. V. Contribution of cross-cultural studies to understanding wine appreciation: A review. Food Res. Int.
115, 251–258 (2019).
8. Country Statistics|OIV. International Organisation of Vine and Wine https:// www. oiv. int/ what- we- do/ count ry- report? (2020).
9. Valentin, D. et al. e impact of “Wine Country of Origin” on the perception of wines by south African and French wine consum-
ers: A cross-cultural comparison. Foods 10, 1710 (2021).
10. Ferreira, C., Lourenço-Gomes, L., Pinto, L. M. C. & Silva, A. P. Is there a gender eect on wine choice in Portugal?—A qualitative
approach. IJWBR 31, 618–639 (2019).
11. Do, V.-B., Patris, B. & Valentin, D. Opinions on wine in a new consumer country: A comparative study of Vietnam and France. J.
Wine Res. 20, 253–271 (2009).
12. Mouret, M., Lo Monaco, G., Urdapilleta, I. & Parr, W. V. Social representations of wine and culture: A comparison between France
and New Zealand. Food Qual. Prefer. 30, 102–107 (2013).
13. Barbe, J.-C., Garbay, J. & Tempère, S. e sensory space of wines: From concept to evaluation and description. A review. Foods 10,
1424 (2021).
14. Fairbairn, S. C., Monforte, A. R., Brand, J., Silva Ferreira, A. C. & Bauer, F. Yeast metabolic activity is sucient to create a wine like
aromatic feature in a synthetic grape must—a sensory-driven approach. OENO One 56, 29–40 (2022).
15. Parr, W. V., Mouret, M., Blackmore, S., Pelquest-Hunt, T. & Urdapilleta, I. Representation of complexity in wine: Inuence of
expertise. Food Qual. Prefer. 22, 647–660 (2011).
16. Jose-Coutinho, A., Avila, P. & Ricardo-Da-Silva, J. M. Sensory prole of Portuguese white wines using long-term memory: A novel
nationwide approach: Sensory prole of Portuguese white wines. J. Sens. Stud. 30, 381–394 (2015).
17. Otheguy, M., Honoré-Chedozeau, C. & Valentin, D. Do wine experts share the same mental representation? A drawing elicitation
study with wine makers, sellers, and critics. Food Qual. Prefer. 94, 104302 (2021).
18. Sáenz-Navajas, M. P. et al. Access to wine experts’ long-term memory to decipher an ill-dened sensory concept: e case of green
red wine. OENO One 55, 69–79 (2021).
19. Brochet, F. & Dubourdieu, D. Wine descriptive language supports cognitive specicity of chemical senses. Brain Lang. 77, 187–196
(2001).
20. Zaichkowsky, J. L. e personal involvement inventory: Reduction, revision, and application to advertising. J. Advert. 23, 59–70
(1994).
21. Zaichkowsky, J. L. Measuring the involvement construct. J. Consum. Res. 12, 341–352 (1985).
22. O’Cass, A. An assessment of consumers product, purchase decision, advertising and consumption involvement in fashion clothing.
J. Econ. Psychol. 21, 545–576 (2000).
23. Noble, A. C. et al. Modication of a standardized system of wine aroma terminology. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 38, 143–146 (1987).
24. Solomon, G. E. A. Conceptual change and wine expertise. J. Learn. Sci. 6, 41–60 (1997).
25. Speed, L. J. & Majid, A. Grounding language in the neglected senses of touch, taste, and smell. Cognit. Neuropsychol. 37, 363–392
(2020).
26. Morrot, G., Brochet, F. & Dubourdieu, D. e color of odors. Brain Lang. 79, 309–320 (2001).
27. Parr, W. V., Georey White, K. & Heatherbell, D. A. e nose knows: Inuence of colour on perception of wine aroma. J. Wine
Res. 14, 79–101 (2003).
28. Wang, Q. J. & Spence, C. Drinking through rosé-coloured glasses: Inuence of wine colour on the perception of aroma and avour
in wine experts and novices. Food Res. Int. 126, 108678 (2019).
29. Ballester, J., Abdi, H., Langlois, J., Peyron, D. & Valentin, D. e odor of colors: Can wine experts and novices distinguish the odors
of white, red, and rosé wines?. Chem. Percept. 2, 203–213 (2009).
30. Wang, Q. J. & Spence, C. Wine complexity: An empirical investigation. Food Qual. Prefer. 68, 238–244 (2018).
31. Ballester, J., Patris, B., Symoneaux, R. & Valentin, D. Conceptual vs. perceptual wine spaces: Does expertise matter?. Food Qual.
Prefer. 19, 267–276 (2008).
32. Parr, W. V. Demystifying wine tasting: Cognitive psychology’s contribution. Food Res. Int. 124, 230–233 (2019).
33. Parr, W. V., Green, J. A., White, K. G. & Sherlock, R. R. e distinctive avour of New Zealand Sauvignon blanc: Sensory charac-
terisation by wine professionals. Food Qual. Prefer. 18, 849–861 (2007).
Acknowledgements
Funding for the research presented in this paper was provided by the National Research Foundation (NRF) of
South Africa through SARChI [Grant 83471]. Authors thank Francine Grion and Cristina Santos for their
assistance in data collection in France and Portugal, respectively.
Author contributions
All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis
were performed by S.F., J.B. and D.V. e rst dra of the manuscript was written by S.F., and D.V. All authors
contributed to the nal version of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the nal manuscript.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved

12
Vol:.(1234567890)
Scientic Reports | (2024) 14:15977 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-66636-3
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Competing interests
e authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Supplementary Information e online version contains supplementary material available at https:// doi. org/
10. 1038/ s41598- 024- 66636-3.
Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to F.B.
Reprints and permissions information is available at www.nature.com/reprints.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional aliations.
Open Access is article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or
format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the
Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. e images or other third party material in this
article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the
material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not
permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from
the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http:// creat iveco mmons. org/ licen ses/ by/4. 0/.
© e Author(s) 2024
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Terms and Conditions
Springer Nature journal content, brought to you courtesy of Springer Nature Customer Service Center GmbH (“Springer Nature”).
Springer Nature supports a reasonable amount of sharing of research papers by authors, subscribers and authorised users (“Users”), for small-
scale personal, non-commercial use provided that all copyright, trade and service marks and other proprietary notices are maintained. By
accessing, sharing, receiving or otherwise using the Springer Nature journal content you agree to these terms of use (“Terms”). For these
purposes, Springer Nature considers academic use (by researchers and students) to be non-commercial.
These Terms are supplementary and will apply in addition to any applicable website terms and conditions, a relevant site licence or a personal
subscription. These Terms will prevail over any conflict or ambiguity with regards to the relevant terms, a site licence or a personal subscription
(to the extent of the conflict or ambiguity only). For Creative Commons-licensed articles, the terms of the Creative Commons license used will
apply.
We collect and use personal data to provide access to the Springer Nature journal content. We may also use these personal data internally within
ResearchGate and Springer Nature and as agreed share it, in an anonymised way, for purposes of tracking, analysis and reporting. We will not
otherwise disclose your personal data outside the ResearchGate or the Springer Nature group of companies unless we have your permission as
detailed in the Privacy Policy.
While Users may use the Springer Nature journal content for small scale, personal non-commercial use, it is important to note that Users may
not:
use such content for the purpose of providing other users with access on a regular or large scale basis or as a means to circumvent access
control;
use such content where to do so would be considered a criminal or statutory offence in any jurisdiction, or gives rise to civil liability, or is
otherwise unlawful;
falsely or misleadingly imply or suggest endorsement, approval , sponsorship, or association unless explicitly agreed to by Springer Nature in
writing;
use bots or other automated methods to access the content or redirect messages
override any security feature or exclusionary protocol; or
share the content in order to create substitute for Springer Nature products or services or a systematic database of Springer Nature journal
content.
In line with the restriction against commercial use, Springer Nature does not permit the creation of a product or service that creates revenue,
royalties, rent or income from our content or its inclusion as part of a paid for service or for other commercial gain. Springer Nature journal
content cannot be used for inter-library loans and librarians may not upload Springer Nature journal content on a large scale into their, or any
other, institutional repository.
These terms of use are reviewed regularly and may be amended at any time. Springer Nature is not obligated to publish any information or
content on this website and may remove it or features or functionality at our sole discretion, at any time with or without notice. Springer Nature
may revoke this licence to you at any time and remove access to any copies of the Springer Nature journal content which have been saved.
To the fullest extent permitted by law, Springer Nature makes no warranties, representations or guarantees to Users, either express or implied
with respect to the Springer nature journal content and all parties disclaim and waive any implied warranties or warranties imposed by law,
including merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose.
Please note that these rights do not automatically extend to content, data or other material published by Springer Nature that may be licensed
from third parties.
If you would like to use or distribute our Springer Nature journal content to a wider audience or on a regular basis or in any other manner not
expressly permitted by these Terms, please contact Springer Nature at
onlineservice@springernature.com