January 14, 2008 10:55 AM PST

Study: $90 wine tastes better than the same wine at $10

This graph shows the activity in the brain's pleasure center; there's more activity with wine subjects think costs $90 a bottle (top line) than the same wine priced at $10. The arrow shows the moment when the subjects started tasting the wine.

(Credit: CalTech, Stanford)

In a study that could make marketing managers and salespeople rub their hands with glee, scientists have used brain-scanning technology to shed new light on the old adage, "You get what you pay for."

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.

The study, by Hilke Plassmann, John O'Doherty, Baba Shiv, and Antonio Rangel, was published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

This chart shows that people ranked taste of a $45 wine higher than the same wine priced at $5, and the same for a different wine marked $90 and $10.

(Credit: CalTech, Stanford)

The research, along with other studies the authors allude to, are putting a serious dent in economists' notions that experienced pleasantness of a product is based on its intrinsic qualities.

"Contrary to the basic assumptions of economics, several studies have provided behavioral evidence that marketing actions can successfully affect experienced pleasantness by manipulating nonintrinsic attributes of goods. For example, knowledge of a beer's ingredients and brand can affect reported taste quality, and the reported enjoyment of a film is influenced by expectations about its quality," the researchers said. "Even more intriguingly, changing the price at which an energy drink is purchased can influence the ability to solve puzzles."

Recent posts from Underexposed
Yahoo hopes users will help pinpoint photos
Red Hat lives on the edge with Fedora 9
Firefox add-on infected with Trojan remnant
Linux video project evades DMCA, back on Google Code
Google: Unicode conquers ASCII on the Web
Add a Comment (Log in or register) 35 comments (Page 1 of 3)
i already knew this
by boopiejones January 14, 2008 11:39 AM PST
i hosted a christmas party a few years back and jokingly told a lady that i was originally planning to serve two buck chuck. her reply was that she would be absolutely offended if someone served her cheap wine at a party. so i put some chuck in an expensive bottle, poured her some, and she loved it. alot of wine people are really just "wine snobs." the ones that MUST drink the expensive wine and MUST drink out of a reidel glass. get over yourselves.
Reply to this comment View all 2 replies
Not surprised....
by lmr2020 January 14, 2008 11:48 AM PST
This simply proves my contention that the world is full of pretentious posers. :)
Reply to this comment
It is twat it is...
by cubesquared January 14, 2008 11:52 AM PST
Now a whole lot of $10 crack-****** are gonna become $1500 call girls. Amazing!
Reply to this comment View reply
It's not about taste...
by imoretti January 14, 2008 12:13 PM PST
The article headline is a bit misleading. The authors of the study did not conclude that subjects found the $90 bottle 'tastier' than the $10 bottle. They found the subjects simply had a more pleasant experience -- pretty much what one might expect knowing (or believing) that one is enjoying an expensive bottle of wine. Unless, perhaps, one gets stuck with the check.
Reply to this comment View reply
Wine Gets Better With Price
by Dan Greenfield January 14, 2008 12:23 PM PST
Seems age is not the only criteria for better tasting wine. As a side note, I once went to a boutique restaurant in Santa Monica and asked for a glass of red. I didn't look at the price. So I was quite surprised when the bill was for $55 (2003 dollars) a glass. I can assure that the taste of the wine gets better each time I tell that story. Dan http://bernaisesource.blog.com
Reply to this comment
I don't much care for wine
by aka_tripleB January 14, 2008 12:29 PM PST
So you can serve me the cheap stuff, because I'm not going to like it anyway. Just don't go too cheap, because then I will get offended. One of those boxes of wine you find at Wal-Mart will work for me.
Reply to this comment
Ripple is still Ripple ?
by Kalama January 14, 2008 1:42 PM PST
Straight out of the bottle or in fine crystal ... It's still Ripple !
Reply to this comment
The actual study
by lennonjon January 14, 2008 3:50 PM PST
In response to imoretti: The primary article actually explains that they also collected subjective ratings of the taste of the "different" wines. This CNET article simply did not report that aspect of the study. So indeed not only were brain areas implicated, but participants reported that the "more expensive" wines tasted better. Of course the opposite can be said for Guinness. My $2.50 pints always seem to taste better than the $5.50 ones... Anyhoo, as a scientist I rarely take what is published in the popular press as factual. Always try to consult the primary source. At any rate, I am not at all surprised by these findings. We know that experience and expectations have dramatic effects on human perceptual processes.
Reply to this comment View reply
Greed is becoming hardwired...
by chash360 January 14, 2008 4:40 PM PST
The argument really only holds true for wine and art, the valuation of such being total snobbery. They should have done a completely blind taste test first, then repeat it (same wine and participants) knowing the prices, for a true control. Regardless, it just means that people are either programming themselves with a pleasure response to expensive consumption, or lying about their perceptions to impress or meet the percieved expectations of others. Honestly pathetic, really, really pathetic our society has become. All those years of keeping up with the Jones', my car is better than yours, and my wine is better becuase it's more expensive have got us distorting our perceptions, so that we can appear impressive to others. I'll bet most of the participnats in this test, don't know crap about wine, and just assumed because it was more expensive it was better, and responded so, paying no attention to their real preferences. Try some vintage rothschild, heard its real expensive... and tastes like crap too...but its for real conesuers. (apologies, my spellings not with it today) P.S. All wine taste like crap to me, you won't find me trying to impress anyone with my approval of it, regardless of the price. Try the same test with something not so snobbish, like pizza, or beer, and see what you get.
Reply to this comment View all 3 replies
You pay more attention to the expensive stuff.
by ralfthedog January 14, 2008 5:52 PM PST
You drink $100 a bottle wine differently than a $20. When you open a $20 or $30 dollar a bottle of wine with your friends, you don't pay attention to the wine. You just talk. When you drink a $100 a bottle wine you pay attention to every little sub taste, the texture, even the way the light plays off of the top of the glass. When you eat Cheetos do you pay attention to your food or the football game? When you eat a very good NY strip steak, do you pay attention to the food or the TV (Or I will admit, the blond)?
Reply to this comment
1 | 2 | 3 | Next 10 Comments >>
Powered by Jive Software
advertisement
  • About Underexposed

  • This blog sheds light on digital photography, science and open-source software--Stephen Shankland's eclectic beat. Shankland joined CNET News.com in 1998 after a five-year stint as a science writer. He's a lab rat who grew up in Los Alamos, New Mexico, and graduated from Harvard.

    Contact Stephen at Stephen.Shankland@cnet.com

Add this feed to your online news reader
Google
Yahoo
MSN

Stuff I'm reading:

Latest blog posts from News.com

Featured blogs

Beyond Binary by Ina Fried A look at how technology is changing our lives and at the people behind all that life-changing stuff.

Coop's Corner by Charles Cooper Charles Cooper weighs in on Silicon Valley hijinks, and he doesn't suffer fools gladly.

Defense in Depth by Robert Vamosi Covering the latest in computer viruses and computer crime.

Geek Gestalt by Daniel Terdiman At the tech culture nexus of video games, fire art, and virtual worlds.

Green Tech Fresh green tech news and commentary.

One More Thing by Tom Krazit Tom Krazit takes on the tech phenomenon that is Apple, and keeps a close watch on the chip industry.

Outside the Lines by Dan Farber When business and technology meet, that's when things get interesting.

The Iconoclast by Declan McCullagh Exploring the intersection of politics and technology.

The Social by Caroline McCarthy Exploring all facets of social media and tech culture.

Underexposed by Stephen Shankland Coverage of digital photography, science, and open-source software.

Resource center from News.com sponsors

advertisement
Click Here
On GameSpot: Banjo and Kazooie return on the Xbox 360
Advanced
search
Advanced
search
Visit other CNET Networks sites: