FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2756156915> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2756156915 endingPage "38" @default.
• W2756156915 startingPage "38" @default.
• W2756156915 abstract "The aim of this work is to evaluate the importance of the landscape in the wine quality perception, using a statistical method called Conjoint Analysis (Gustafsson at al., 2001). For this goal we developed a questionnaire which was evaluated on its reliability and on its correspondence to the research objective. Preliminary results proved the ‘logical’ validity of the research questions since the presence of a landscape with a high visual impact (“evocative”) induces a greater preference for the tasted wine. That increase in the preference is statistically significant. Introduction Country landscape is a mixture of material aspects (easy to codify) and emotional aspects revealed by sensorial mediation (Deloire and Martin, 2002). It is well known that morphology (slope, exposure, etc.), soil characteristics and climate conditions may directly affect wine quality potential (Marais et al, 1999; van Leeuwen et al, 2004), while the landscape and its emotional component, plays a not direct but significant role on the sensory assessment of a wine. Recently, we are discovering that this two-component-effect of the production area, are fundamental, and viticultural and enological efforts should match the “whole” quality of the wine in order to safeguard the “wine in the place where it is born”. By this way, wine will became a “mirror of the environment where grapevine has been produced” (Fregoni, 2003); the sensory assessment of this wine should recognise the whole puzzle of descriptors (both material and emotional) related with the native area. Wine taste notes are quite complex, so that the aim of the present work, consists in trying to explain the relative contribute of the territory landscape on the sensory assessment of a wine. Well ripe grape may affect wine quality (direct effect), but also the beauty of the landscape (indirect effects) are important for wine judgement. Claude Levy Strauss said: “good to think, good to eat”. Sample description 41 people were joined up for this “pre-test”. They were students between 18 and 23 years old, attending the 1 cycle degree in Forestry and Environmental Technology at the University of Padova, Italy. Before receiving the questionnaire about the importance of the landscape in the wine quality perception, the students answered some questions arranged to get a complete profile of their personal data. The pilot-study The “pre-test” or pilot study was especially designed in order to verify the reliability of the statistical model underlying the Conjoint Analysis questionnaire for studying the importance of the landscape in the wine quality perception. The “pre-test” also revealed some possible organizing gaps. The questionnaire The questionnaire (reported in the Appendix) created to study the importance of the landscape in the wine quality perception is based on the Choice Based Conjoint Analysis methodology (McFadden, 1986). It is made of a set of 5 tasks (5 tastings in this case) in which every person tastes and evaluates 4 product profiles corresponding, in this case, to 4 different tastings of a particular wine. For each of them, we associate a particular price and a peculiar picture recalling the landscape of the production place. Figure 1 illustrates the first step of the questionnaire concerning the first of the 5 tasks. Figure 1. First of the 5 tasks It is worth noting that each respondent gives 5 evaluations of preference. The selection, for each of the 5 tasks, of the 4 particular combinations of wine (on 3 levels: high, medium and low quality), price (on 3 levels: 3, 5 and 8 Euros) and landscape (on 4 levels: with a disfiguring element, monotonous, well preserved and evocative) was based on the Choice Based procedure in order to get a very efficient (as much as possible) estimate of the parameters corresponding to the attribute effects (wine, price and landscape) and their possible interactions. At the end of all the 5 tasks, in addition to the evaluation of preference about the wines tasted in each task, the respondents had to answer one more question: “Which one of these tasted wine are you going to buy?”. In this way it may be possible to study if the likelihood of purchase is led by the same attribute effects compared to the general preference. Remember that the preference was chosen in this study as an indicator of the importance of the landscape in the wine quality perception. Part-worth estimates of the statistical model We estimated the multinomial logit model for both the evaluations of preference and the answers about the likelihood of purchase. Details on results are reported in Table 1 and 2, while Figure 2 and 3 represents the estimate of the effects (calling preferences or part-worth utilities) for each level of the 3 identified attributes. The vertical thick line corresponding to the estimated effect denotes a possible significance of that effect (at level α=0.05). Table 1. CBCA model for preference Effect Std Err t Ratio Attribute Level 1 -0.0028 0.13777 -0.02035 wine quality low 2 0.33157 0.13228 2.50655 wine quality medium 3 -0.32877 0.15991 -2.056 wine quality high 4 0.36817 0.27929 1.31821 price 3 Euro 5 -0.33046 0.26937 -1.22679 price 5 Euro 6 -0.03771 0.13358 -0.28229 price 8 Euro 7 -0.43455 0.22212 -1.95641 landscape disfiguring element 8 -0.29401 0.19992 -1.47063 landscape monotonous 9 -0.21524 0.18807 -1.14449 landscape well preserved 10 0.9438 0.18018 5.23801 landscape evocative Table 2. CBCA model for likelihood of purchase Effect Std Err t Ratio Attribute Level 1 -0.06806 0.17355 -0.39219 wine quality low 2 0.43908 0.17947 2.44653 wine quality medium 3 -0.37102 0.22258 -1.66693 wine quality high 4 0.64282 0.42589 1.50935 price 3 Euro 5 -0.61868 0.42952 -1.44039 price 5 Euro 6 -0.02413 0.15716 -0.15357 price 8 Euro 7 -1.11874 0.44264 -2.52745 landscape disfiguring element 8 -0.04418 0.55019 -0.08031 landscape monotonous 9 -0.13791 0.36677 -0.37601 landscape well preserved 10 1.30083 0.35932 3.62027 landscape evocative Figure 2. Estimate of the effects for preference" @default.
• W2756156915 created "2017-09-25" @default.
• W2756156915 creator A5002470936 @default.
• W2756156915 creator A5025505127 @default.
• W2756156915 creator A5041520103 @default.
• W2756156915 creator A5042170109 @default.
• W2756156915 creator A5042626544 @default.
• W2756156915 creator A5051379647 @default.
• W2756156915 creator A5086955010 @default.
• W2756156915 date "2008-01-01" @default.
• W2756156915 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W2756156915 title "Importance of landscape for wine quality perception: a pilot study" @default.
• W2756156915 cites W1560301040 @default.
• W2756156915 cites W2096713404 @default.
• W2756156915 cites W2337221776 @default.
• W2756156915 cites W57217362 @default.
• W2756156915 cites W62050424 @default.
• W2756156915 hasPublicationYear "2008" @default.
• W2756156915 type Work @default.
• W2756156915 sameAs 2756156915 @default.
• W2756156915 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2756156915 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2756156915 hasAuthorship W2756156915A5002470936 @default.
• W2756156915 hasAuthorship W2756156915A5025505127 @default.
• W2756156915 hasAuthorship W2756156915A5041520103 @default.
• W2756156915 hasAuthorship W2756156915A5042170109 @default.
• W2756156915 hasAuthorship W2756156915A5042626544 @default.
• W2756156915 hasAuthorship W2756156915A5051379647 @default.
• W2756156915 hasAuthorship W2756156915A5086955010 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConcept C105795698 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConcept C151107107 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConcept C169760540 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConcept C180747234 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConcept C205649164 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConcept C26760741 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConcept C2776035688 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConcept C2779530757 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConcept C2779737534 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConcept C2781249084 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConcept C31903555 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConcept C46312422 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConcept C55952523 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConcept C77805123 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConcept C8868529 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConceptScore W2756156915C105795698 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConceptScore W2756156915C111472728 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConceptScore W2756156915C138885662 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConceptScore W2756156915C151107107 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConceptScore W2756156915C15744967 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConceptScore W2756156915C169760540 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConceptScore W2756156915C180747234 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConceptScore W2756156915C185592680 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConceptScore W2756156915C205649164 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConceptScore W2756156915C26760741 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConceptScore W2756156915C2776035688 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConceptScore W2756156915C2779530757 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConceptScore W2756156915C2779737534 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConceptScore W2756156915C2781249084 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConceptScore W2756156915C31903555 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConceptScore W2756156915C33923547 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConceptScore W2756156915C46312422 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConceptScore W2756156915C55952523 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConceptScore W2756156915C77805123 @default.
• W2756156915 hasConceptScore W2756156915C8868529 @default.
• W2756156915 hasLocation W27561569151 @default.
• W2756156915 hasOpenAccess W2756156915 @default.
• W2756156915 hasPrimaryLocation W27561569151 @default.
• W2756156915 hasRelatedWork W1583188539 @default.
• W2756156915 hasRelatedWork W1969875619 @default.
• W2756156915 hasRelatedWork W1983612160 @default.
• W2756156915 hasRelatedWork W2062394487 @default.
• W2756156915 hasRelatedWork W2070079377 @default.
• W2756156915 hasRelatedWork W2123142516 @default.
• W2756156915 hasRelatedWork W2150722542 @default.
• W2756156915 hasRelatedWork W2165583891 @default.
• W2756156915 hasRelatedWork W2181593308 @default.
• W2756156915 hasRelatedWork W2185889250 @default.
• W2756156915 hasRelatedWork W2265379717 @default.
• W2756156915 hasRelatedWork W2540019310 @default.
• W2756156915 hasRelatedWork W2603514070 @default.
• W2756156915 hasRelatedWork W2613019961 @default.
• W2756156915 hasRelatedWork W2622589455 @default.
• W2756156915 hasRelatedWork W2768509915 @default.
• W2756156915 hasRelatedWork W2998869999 @default.
• W2756156915 hasRelatedWork W3122706173 @default.
• W2756156915 hasRelatedWork W3123369660 @default.
• W2756156915 hasRelatedWork W2465527106 @default.
• W2756156915 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2756156915 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2756156915 magId "2756156915" @default.
• W2756156915 workType "article" @default.