Neurowine insights: exploring the impact of neuroscience on wine cue assessment

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to review the application of neuroscience tools to study consumers’ subconscious responses to product cues, mapping specific cues investigated in consumer neuroscience and their role in evaluating cognitive processes during wine assessment. Design/methodology/approach A review of 22 studies from 2004 to 2023 was conducted, focusing on neuroscience tools applied to consumer behaviour and wine-product cues. Findings Neuroscience tools, such as electroencephalography and eye-tracking, provide insights into how intrinsic cues (taste, aroma and colour) and extrinsic cues (label design, price and country of origin) influence consumer perception, attention and emotions. These tools uncover subconscious responses to wine cues in various contexts, including blind and non-blind tastings, revealing how sensory and external factors shape consumer behaviour and decision-making processes. Research limitations/implications This study enhances knowledge of consumer behaviour, preferences and decision-making, offering a nuanced understanding of subconscious responses to wine cues. Limitations include a focus on English-language publications and the relatively limited scope of existing literature. Practical implications By exploring how consumers respond to wine cues, this research provides actionable insights for companies, marketers and designers. These findings help refine marketing strategies, align products with consumer expectations and enhance customer satisfaction, thereby improving brand loyalty, competitiveness and long-term positioning in the market. Originality/value This study highlights the value of neuroscience tools in studying consumer behaviour, offering guidance for future research and practical applications for industry stakeholders.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 2 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.