Pricey Wine Tastes Better Because It’s Pricey?

Stephen Shankland over at CNet (does anyone else remember when CNet used to stick to technology reviews and news and we liked it that way?) has found this dandy of a research project conducted by California Institute of Technology and Stanford’s business school that says people think they like wine when it costs more.

A sample of the results:

Researchers from the California Institute of Technology and Stanford’s business school have directly seen that the sensation of pleasantness that people experience when tasting wine is linked directly to its price. And that’s true even when, unbeknownst to the test subjects, it’s exactly the same Cabernet Sauvignon with a dramatically different price tag.

Specifically, the researchers found that with the higher priced wines, more blood and oxygen is sent to a part of the brain called the medial orbitofrontal cortex, whose activity reflects pleasure. Brain scanning using a method called functional magnetic resonance imaging (FMRI) showed evidence for the researchers’ hypothesis that “changes in the price of a product can influence neural computations associated with experienced pleasantness,” they said.

First, I must take exception with how the results were presented. At no point in the write up does the author point to results that found wine priced at $90/bottle is somehow tastier than the $10/bottle comparison. Rather, people’s brain waves acted in a certain way to provide pleasure.

What is this a cigarette ad? Are they actually trying to say taste equals pleasure?

Here’s all they’ve gotten to us through this study. People derive pleasure out of thinking they have gotten a good deal. In this case, some poor college student that wouldn’t know a good wine from bad vinegar got paid $50 for his time and told he was drinking a wine that costs $90/bottle. You think he might be having a good time? You think his brain might have “experienced pleasantness.”

You know what else might provide more pleasure than a $90 bottle of wine? A dime bag of marijuana.

Thus, the most obvious flaw of the study is the lack of control. When was the $10 bottle purchased? Was it $10 in 1990 or $10 yesterday? Obviously, a $10 bottle of California Cabernet Sauvignon purchased in 1990 would be one hell of a nice drink today (assuming the bottle was properly taken care of, but I’ll get there in a moment). Thus, it would be unfair to compare it to a $90 grand cru classe from Bordeaux in 2005, which is being sold at that price today to wine drinkers who intend to cellar it for at least 10 years.

While that represents the extreme end of the experiment, something as simple as decanting can have a major impact, particularly on the $90 bottle. What about serving temperature, a $10 bottle of Chianti served at 65 degrees will trump a $90 Chianti served at 90 degrees, or for that matter 40 degrees. Any number of presentation variables could have a major impact in how the taster reacts to a particular bottle of wine. And it sure as hell would impact the pleasantness of the experience.

Now that I’ve torn down the presentation, allow me please to agree with the underlying psychology: the pleasantness of a product is not based solely on its intrinsic qualities.

See wine is an incredible nuanced beast, where unfortunately paying more does not necessarily mean getting a better deal. Prices of wine are determined by a market economy and basic supply and demand. Yet, distribution is governed by arcane Byzantine laws which were organized to protect the business of alcohol distributors. What does this mean? Artificial agents in the wine market will create anomalies in how wine is priced. For example, a bottle of North Dakota’s finest may sell for $10. One reason is because North Dakota is a low population state and a lot of other states do not allow the importation of North Dakota wine. Thus, there is no market for the product, and the price is driven down as supply increases. (Note – I’ve never tasted a North Dakota wine, so it might all suck).

Anyone who is even half an oenophile knows that wine, particularly good wine, is incredibly complex and subjective. Yet, too many people think just because they selected the third most expensive bottle on the wine list, they have quality. Fact is, they don’t necessarily, it could be complete and utter crap that was marked up based on some complete arbitrary reason (such as a restaurant trying to make money on a high margin product).

Just because you shell out a lot of money for a bottle doesn’t mean you are going to like what you got (though you may have a pleasant experience). The fact is, it doesn’t matter what one pays for a bottle of wine. What matters is how one enjoys said bottle. I firmly and completely believe in the idea that a good bottle of wine is one you enjoy. Thus, if someone pays $10 for a bottle, opens it up to go with their hotdogs and sauerkraut, and enjoys it….it’s a good bottle of wine. That is the only measure that counts.